Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume 1 Number 437
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume I Number 437
Wednesday, July 10th 1991
Today's Topics:
Roswell Discussion
Re: UFO sighting in New York City
Re: Bilderbergers & UN?
Asteriods?
CFR, Russia and other off-topic "Gee-whiz" excuses....
Re: **** Warning *****
Re: Bilderbergers & UN?
Re: Asteriods?
Re: CFR, Russia and other off-topic "Gee-whiz" excuses....
*more* on Crop circles
Crop Circles in the UK
still *more* on Crop circles :-)
Crop Circles ( screwed the last one up )
Hill Abduction: 1 Of 7
(none)
How I view UFO-related phenomena--as if anyone cared.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Roswell Discussion
Date: 9 Jul 91 17:18:00 GMT
The cross-postings from Alt.Sci.Skep.Shep.Moe.Larry.Curly were quite
interesting. Both sides make good points, but I detected the familiar strains
of "Klass knows all" and "Klass can do no wrong". Its frustrating to see that
attitude still prevalent among some.
I had the good fortune to debate a highly responsible skeptic on the radio on
the Roswell subject. Mike Stackpole is head of the Phoenix Skeptics, and has
a very good head on his shoulders. We squared off on KFYI on the Fourth of
July. The first hour of the program had Don Schmitt, Walter Haut and Jesse
Marcel, Jr. talking about the crash from the pro-perspective. The host did
not want to add too many voices or have too much controversy in that first
hour, since she did not feel the audience, not having read the book, would be
able to keep up with all facts and counter-facts. At 6AM on a holiday, I
think she made the right decision.
The second hour, it was our turn, and we were forced to stick to the more
general question of UFOs, do they exist, what are the possibilities. Mike,
having just read the book, managed to slip in a few of his objections to the
quality of research and the conclusions the authors draw. Prior to the show,
Mike had uploaded to my private file area a brief outline of his objections
so that I would be familiar with them. He has promised to flesh out the text
into a full-blown file that can be posted here to ParaNet in the near future,
but basically his objections were as follows:
1) The entire second crash site scenario is a house of cards. Barney Barnett,
by all previous accounts, had been placed at Magdalena at the time of the
crash. Ruth Barnett's diary is quoted as authoritative at one point, in order
to put Barney in his office, yet later the authors speculate that her diary
entry placing Barney "300 miles[*]" from -their- second crash site may have
been due to Barney lying to his wife under pressure from the military. This is
an inconsistent use of documentary evidence. The authors were stretching in
their speculation, yet they use this speculation later as part of the
foundation of their conclusion that a second crash site, complete with
bodies, existed. It doesn't wash that Barney would lie to his wife, yet tell
the truth to his niece.
2) Mac Brazel, who saw only a debris field, was imprisoned for days and
supposedly debriefed by the military. Barney Barnett, who saw a saucer,
bodies, the whole shootin' match, was merely "shooed away" by the military.
3) A glaring inconsistency in the much-vaunted time-line: The "first flight
from Washington" arrived at Roswell at 12 Noon. Allowing for a two-hour drive
to Corona, that places them at the crash site around 2PM. Yet the CIC man
stated that a "photography crew from Washington" had been on the scene by
11AM. How did they get there?
4) The gases that cause the stench associated with decomposition also cause
profound bloating, which would result in "fat corpses." Yet the corpses were
invariably described as "skinny."
5) On the flight from Roswell to Ft. Worth, armed guards were placed around
the crates containing the wreckage (and possibly the bodies). No one on that
flight was allowed near it. Yet on the flight from Ft. Worth to Dayton, as
attested to by Pappy Henderson, the crew were allowed to handle the debris
(now supposedly ESTABLISHED to be a flying saucer) to their heart's content.
6) The crate used to ship the alleged bodies measured 14' by 5' by 5' (or
thereabouts). This works out to about 300 cubic feet. This much ice would
weigh 18,000 lbs. Allowing for a hollowed-out area to contain the bodies,
let's say anywhere from 10,000-12,000 pounds. Yet one of the crewmen was
quoted as saying that the weight-and-balance man cleared the plane for flight
without doing his calculations, since the load would be so light.
I have to say that I acknowledge and agree with the above objections, and
others that Mike raises. These are points that sorely need to be addressed, if
the authors wish to maintain the integrity of their investigation. However, I
part company with Mike on the ultimate conclusion to be drawn from these
discrepancies. I view these as a point of departure for further research,
rather than as a basis for dismissal of the case as a whole. Mike said that
the authors were inconsistent; I replied that it was the evidence that was
inconsistent, and the authors were to be commended for including contradictory
testimony, and labeling it as such.
I do hope these points can be cleared up, or at least forthrightly addressed
by the authors, perhaps here on ParaNet.
Jim
[*]: The actual distance from the authors' second crash site to Magdalena is
150 miles as the crow flies, or 220 miles by road. Mike scores big when he
asks, "Did the authors not even look at a map?"
--
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: vanth!jms
Subject: Re: UFO sighting in New York City
Date: 10 Jul 91 07:40:18 GMT
From: vanth!jms@amix.commodore.com (Jim Shaffer)
To: Bill Vissaggi
+HI, MY NAME IS BILL VISSAGGI I LIVE JUST OUT SIDE N.Y CITY
+A FRIND OF MY HAS JUST HAD A INTERESTING SIGHTING IN NEW YORK.
+HE IS A BUS DRIVER FOR MTA,WHILE WAITING AT HIS BUS STOP HE SAW TWO OBJECTS
+VERY LOW IN THE SKY, AND FARLY CLOSE TO HIM.
+THIS GENTELMAN HAS ALWAYS HAD A VERY NEGITIVE ATTATUDE TOWARD THE UFO
+SUBJECT.
+HE IS VERY INTERESTED IN WHY HE HAS NOT HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THIS SIGHTIHG
+IN THE MEIDA. THER WERE MANY WITTNESS OTHER THEN HIM SELF. WE BOTH LIVE IN
+YONKERS N.Y I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM ANY WHO HAS ANY INFORMATION ON THIS
+SIGHTING.
A lot of times I get the impression that the media couldn't care less.
Just look at how they ignored the fact that a 'fireball' was "flying back
and forth' earlier this year! In the reports (only the earliest ones) that
actually included the 'flying back and forth' part, they never commented on
it, as if it was a perfectly natural thing for meteors to do. Of course,
that part of the story got dropped in later reports.
[soapbox mode off]
Could you give us more details, such as what these objects looked like, and
how close they were, and what the weather was like at the time. I haven't
heard anything about the sighting, and without further information I can't
begin to guess what it might've been. I don't even know, for example, that
it wasn't Venus and Jupiter, based on the little information you wrote.
I don't mean to seem negative here, but there's just no way to evaluate a
report without some basic information.
--
* From the disk of: | jms@vanth.uucp | 'Let's become
Jim Shaffer, Jr. | amix.commodore.com!vanth!jms | alive again.'
37 Brook Street | uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms |
Montgomery, PA 17752 | 72750.2335@compuserve.com | --Yes
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Feilke@f14.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (John Feilke)
Subject: Re: Bilderbergers & UN?
Date: 7 Jul 91 21:04:00 GMT
In a message to John Feilke <07-07-91 00:21> Don Allen wrote:
DA=>I should send you the infamous Opal File, the Gemstone file(s)
DA=>and a few other nice little eyeopeners.
DA=>I betcha Greg Lush knows what they are :-)
Pack the suckers up and give me a magic word and i'll get them, I have the
GEMSTONE FILES......
DA=>Keep digging Greg...you're definately on the right track.
but be carefull Greg....
John
--
John Feilke - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Feilke@f14.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kurt.Lochner@f22.n14766.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Kurt Lochner)
Subject: Asteriods?
Date: 7 Jul 91 21:32:11 GMT
>
> Subject: Object moving towards earth
>
> ? Has anyone heard any news about an object detected
> ? just crossing the orbit of pluto?
> ? Dane Lancaster - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
> I just heard this morning on WMAQ (7/1/91) all-news in
> Chicago about an 'asteroid' that was being studied by some
> "scientists," I believe in California.
>
> The reason given for the study of the object was
> interest in tracking, and in knowing, essentially,
> how to blow them up.
>
> Greg (lush@ecn.purdue.edu)
Nope! There's been some deep-space tracking experiments
going on over the years with the asteriod belt. The
contigencies for dealing with an errant asteriod do
include "blowing it up" which IMHO is an oxymoron.
Remember "up" in freefall is not a valid reference, as
all directions in space (free of gravity wells) are "up."
So blowing it up is not a term that I would want to see
in usage to describe what might be done to prevent such
a cataclysm. Nope, more likely and feasible would be to
use various instrument probes (and atomic devices) to
try and deflect the trajectory of an asteroid.
The REAL news from all this radar examination of the
asteriods is that one was recently found that had a
large concentration of metallic ores that reflected
a large amount of radar waves, something like 40% more
than usual for asteriods of similar size. This is rather
uncommon for asteroids, contrary to sci-fi scenarios
of mining the asteroid belt for profit.
= Beam me up Ensign Lush, no profitable minerals to exploit here =
--
Kurt Lochner - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Kurt.Lochner@f22.n14766.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kurt.Lochner@f22.n14766.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Kurt Lochner)
Subject: CFR, Russia and other off-topic "Gee-whiz" excuses....
Date: 7 Jul 91 22:03:03 GMT
>
> From: lush@ecn.purdue.edu (Gregory B Lush)
> Subject: Russians and Current Events and Marina Popovich
>
> It seems that I have offended some people by not
> embracing our new-found brothers in the Soviet Union.
> ........(abridged for clarity)
> I simply recognize that the Communists still
> control Russia, she ( Popovich)has a family think of,
> and that no one would be allowed to leave the country
> and/or say anything that did not
> reflect exactly what was intended for you to hear.
Indeed, but the scientific establishment in post-Soviet
culture is an unintimidatable force to be reckoned with
in their society nowadays. This I find admirable in the
new Russian society when compared to the Know-nuthin',
Mutant Ninja Turtle, immediate gratification mind-set
of American culture.
>
> I was also accused of being ignorant of what has been
> happening over the last few years, and of needing to
> check under my bed to see if the Bolsheviks had left.
> Well, actually I HAVE been paying attention to events.
Yes, but you've set out to defend your "opinions" by
arguements alone, which weakens your case as you continue.
> I'd like to share a few things I've seen which,
> evidently, people see with different eyes than I.
> I just watch the actions, and pay less attention to
> the words.
So what has this to do with Paranormal events/discussions?
> The Berlin wall came down.
> The German economy is under tremendous strain because...
> Has the KGB been dismantled yet? Will it ever be?
> What about our 'allies' during the Persian Gulf War?
> I saw a great number of diplomatic exchanges
> between Iraq and the Soviet Union during the war.
> Russian black berets invaded the Baltics, killing people.
> We are debating signing a conventional weapons treaty....
> Did you notice that Bo Gritz keeps trying to tell....
> How many of you heard that Yeltsin demanded and....
> Russia still has 20,000+ warheads and multi-millions...
> Did anyone notice that Gorby's meeting with Kaifu....
..........yawn......
> So, I'm certainly not ignorant, as you would prefer to
> envision me.
No, I don't envision anything of you like that. I've
enjoyed the materials that you've shared with Paranet.
If you can't take constructive criticism, save us the
bandwidth and HD-sectoring by not replying.
> Reading them (the Pheonix Journals) prompted me
> to search for other materials which support
> their statements. I have found an endless
> supply at my college library.
Now here's an example of a sweeping generalization.
NO college library is endless, it just seems that way
when you're pressed for time and can't find useful
texts to finish the reports due in four days.../&^)
> Take a look at how busy these people are publishing
> books about how our world should operate.
Yup, it's been going on for centuries as I've heard it.
This is not news to me, nor is it Para-Normal, but....
> You are NOT being told all that is going on.
>
...and you're an authority on this?
Give it a rest Greg, and dig out some more of those
off-beat and interseting articles like you've posted.
= and that's the last I'll rash you on this =
--
Kurt Lochner - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Kurt.Lochner@f22.n14766.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: James.Nugent@f14.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (James Nugent)
Subject: Re: **** Warning *****
Date: 9 Jul 91 02:10:00 GMT
Michael,
I can not wait to see the results.(if there are any for us to see...)
As long as I can remember I have suffered from spuratic and unusual migrane
headaches. I do sometimes feel like I am being watched and have always
believed in extra-terrestrial life. I can not even begin to see a
connection here.
Strange questions to ask a patient. As far as I know migrane headaches are
a genetic trait. Took genetics in college but I wouldn't swear I am right.
If extra-terrestrial lifeforms have altered us genetically or are studying
us in a genetic context I could see a possible correlation. But to have a
trained physician ask totally off the wall questions like that... Something
is up.
Best,
James.
--
James Nugent - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: James.Nugent@f14.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Hrusovszky@f300.n238.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hrusovszky)
Subject: Re: Bilderbergers & UN?
Date: 10 Jul 91 06:03:21 GMT
JF> Pack the suckers up and give me a magic word and i'll get them, I have
JF> GEMSTONE FILES......
Can you let me in on what these "Gemstone Files" are basically about?
And can I FREQ them at high speed from you? If so, what magicname?
Thanks in advance.
--
John Hrusovszky - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hrusovszky@f300.n238.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Hrusovszky@f300.n238.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hrusovszky)
Subject: Re: Asteriods?
Date: 10 Jul 91 06:07:46 GMT
> Subject: Object moving towards earth
>
> ? Has anyone heard any news about an object detected
> ? just crossing the orbit of pluto?
> ? Dane Lancaster - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
I heard quite a bit about this on another echo. Seems someone had a
wild concoction that there was this "Planetoid" (whatever that is) that
was sighted just outside the orbit of Pluto. It seemed to have made 2
or 3 "course changes" and was headed for the earth. This malicious
prankster reported that the "planetoid" was actually a "MotherShip"
full of "Reptoids" that were coming to invade the earth and "consume"
humans. <Attempting to Control Hysterical Laughter>
I know it sounds like I am experimenting with quite a variety of
psychadelic drugs, but that is what the messaging was about.
--
John Hrusovszky - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hrusovszky@f300.n238.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Hrusovszky@f300.n238.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hrusovszky)
Subject: Re: CFR, Russia and other off-topic "Gee-whiz" excuses....
Date: 10 Jul 91 06:11:24 GMT
> From: lush@ecn.purdue.edu (Gregory B Lush)
Can someone please inform me as to what the gibberish in line number
one above is? I mean, on my computer, it says:
From: lush@ecn.purdue.edu
Now, I can understand what the word lush is (although I believe it is
misspelled) and Purdue is obviously familiar, but what is the @ecn.?
Is this an interpretation of some high-bit ascii characters, or what?
Thanks in advance.
--
John Hrusovszky - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hrusovszky@f300.n238.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Don.Allen@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Don Allen)
Subject: *more* on Crop circles
Date: 9 Jul 91 07:26:00 GMT
Spotted this on Usenet tonight:
--+-------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 762 of alt.alien.visitors:
From: rob@aixssc.ibm.co.uk (Robert Trevelyan)
Subject: Crop Circles in the UK
Dick,
I have been interested/involved in crop circles for about
two years and was very fortunate last year to find the first
pictogram in a field in Chilcomb , Winchester . This was the
first crop circle not be of the normal circle/ring form as it
had boxes and paths . Through this and my interest in the
phenomenon I have made aquaintances with the leading circle
investigators and even got a mention in a few books on the subject.
I am also a member of CPR ( Circles Phenomnon Research - Pat Delgado
and Colin Andrews ) and CCCS ( Centre for Crop Circle Studies ) .
I live in an area that is about 15 minutes from Winchester and
about 45 minutes from Silbury Hill in Wiltshire , these are the
most popular areas for crop circles and I have been in about
50 or so or them over the last year or two .
The team that witnessed the crop circle I previously mentioned
on Morgans Hill , Wiltshire was run by ex BBC Producer and now
Director of Circle Vision , circles PR company ? ,and a team
of cameramen . They are the same team that assisted Delgado and
Andrews on Operation Blackbird in 1990 , remmember the hoax.
Anyway currently in that area at the moment are three independant
watches arranged by Dr. Meaden ( The vortex man ) called Operation
Blue Hill , CCCS called Operation Sirius and a CPR watch called
Operation Nightingale .
I found out about this as I have a friend that is the Director of
field research for CCCS and he also works for the same company as I do.
As he lives in a different part of the UK than I do it allows us
to keep in touch of all areas of southern England . I also receive
information from visiting sites that are known circle areas and
in addition to that receive details via a circle network via the
mail . If you are interested in joining this let me know and I will
send you the address to write to .
This years formations seem to be based on a new formation which has
been termed "insectograms" as they have paths and circles that look
like antennae . I believe there has been about 100+ circles this
year to date but there has also been a great many hoaxes . A hoax
can be perpetrated as it is not dousable and is very often rough
at its edges . This is very much dependant on the crop it is
created in as barly created a rougher looking formation but if it
douses as well it point toward non-hoax. Hoaxed circles look and
feel like hoaxes as they are very rough , the crop is always broken
not layed down and happens when there are tramlines to the field,
the lines the tractors wheels create .
I visited the lecture given by Terence Meaden on Plasma Vortex
last year and totally agree with you that the guy is slightly
off the track where it comes to most crop circles. I do believe
that simple circles can be created by his plasma vortex theory
if there is a hill nearby and if the weather is correct for this but
as for this being the answer I think he is crazy . How can a
spiraling vortex of charged air/dust particles create boxes ,
paths or even rings , let alone triangles that were seen last year.
Anyway I have just received a note about a new crop circle
in the field where last years eighth of a mile pictogram appeared
at Alton Barnes, Wiltshire . I will post details of this to the
news as soon as I have read it .
Be in touch , Robert
>
>Thanks for the great info. Can you say who the team is and how you
>know about this? How many crop circles have there been previously
>this season? Any new shapes?
>
>Plasma vortex, my arse. This looks like something much more interesting.
>Please post any and all new info you can.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Dick Shoup
>shoup@netcom.com
>
>
--
Robert Trevelyan UKnet: rob@aixssc.ibm.co.uk
AIX Communications VNET: TREVELR at BASVM2
--+-------End of Article --------------------------------------------------
Don
--
Don Allen - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Don.Allen@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Don.Allen@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Don Allen)
Subject: still *more* on Crop circles :-)
Date: 9 Jul 91 07:32:01 GMT
I spotted this one too :-) Off ABUSEnet (inside joke :-))
--+-----------------------------------------------------------------
Article 764 of alt.alien.visitors:
From: rob@aixssc.ibm.co.uk (Robert Trevelyan)
Subject: Crop Circles ( screwed the last one up )
On Tuesday July 2 the main attraction of the Circle season
occurred just where it was expected at Alton Barnes, Wiltshire.
Within 200 yards of the position of last year's giant double
dumb-bell pictogram . This is of similar size to the huge pictogram
of 1990 .
This new formation lies in a great expanse of green wheat .
The formation is about 120 yards long and consists of a large ringed
circle with long narrow passages running to a plain circle at one end
and a smaller ring, with a spur beyond, at the other. Two 15 ft circles,
like eyes, lie to one side of the central avenue level with the
midpoints of the connecting passages and equi- distant from them.
Already dozens of visitors were converging on the site to marvel at the
new wonder where so many people had caught circles fever in 1990.
Farmer Tim Carson is charging $1 entry and will probably exceed his
last year's take of an estimated $8000 (pounds sterling).
Farmhand Malcolm Enery described how he had been woken by a loud
roaring noise at 1.30 a.m. that night. He thought at first that a
C-130 Hercules from RAF Lyneham was flying over at rooftop level,
but could see nothing through his window. Other residents of Alton Barnes
were woken by a similar roar. Only when mist over East Field had cleared
at 7 a.m. could the new pictogram be seen. It lies barely 800 yards
from the tiny village.
Today (Friday 5-7-91 ) a further formation, a smaller dumb-bell
accompanied by several additional circles, has appeared in the same
field just within a few hundred yards. Again these circles were initially
shrouded by unseasonal mist. Something quite extraordinary appears to be
happening at Alton Barnes and this is quite possibly not unconnected with
the worldwide interest that was shown in the magnificent circles which
appeared there last year.
Last Sunday a large new pictogram appeared at Newton St Loe just
two miles west of Bath. This greatly resembled the Alton Barnes
pictogram of 1990, and once more its appearance was accompanied by
strange lights seen in the sky and a roaring noise according to many
people in the outskirts of the city. I hope to try to talk to some of
these people and to piece together events surrounding this visitation.
Before this year only one small crop circle had ever been reported in
this area between Bristol and Bath.
The Bath pictogram has a large asymmetric "key" and also the ringed
"signature circle" in exactly the same relative position as the Wiltshire
pictograms of last year. These distinctive features, and the fact that
"keys" or "claws" have been seen in two other smaller formations in Avon
and Somerset seems to show that the 1990 Wiltshire "circlemakers" have
moved west. Equally the large symmetrical pictograms now appearing in
Wiltshire closely resemble the style of those that appeared near
Winchester in Hampshire last year, only they are somewhat larger, and
only one has got "boxes". Again it looks as if the Hampshire circlemakers
moved west. As for Hampshire, the 1991 pictograms so far are all
"insectograms", immensely elaborate asymmetric formations with twin
"antennae" and a peculiar ladder-like feature with a variable number of
rungs at the opposite end. It has already been optimistically suggested
that the "rungs" might represent the protein molecules in the double
helix of DNA. Such is the articulateness of the new formations that
this kind of speculation is no longer viewed with ridicule.
I hope to visit this new one at Alton Barnes this week so will be in
touch about this and any more in the area .
--+----------End of Article -----------------------------------------------
Don
--
Don Allen - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Don.Allen@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Don.Allen@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Don Allen)
Subject: Hill Abduction: 1 Of 7
Date: 9 Jul 91 08:00:02 GMT
* Replying to a message originally to John Powell
SR> Hello John!
SR>
SR> JP> I've just recently read a couple of month's worth of messages (from
SR> JP> the Abyss BBS in Washington, DC) in this and other Paranet Echos and
SR> JP> there are many very good messages, _and_ messengers, that are not
SR> JP> available in the Fidonet UFO Echo. There was very little duplication,
SR> JP> except obviously at the topic level. Is this a Sysop's-choice type of
SR> JP> thing, the selection of Fidonet or Paranet, or is it BBS
SR> JP> software-related? Or telecommunications-related, or whatever else?
SR>
SR> Maybe Mike can help you with that HILL dupe situation...but
SR> as for your other question... it is an easy choice to make.
SR> If you want fluff...ya go with Fido's UFO. We decided not
SR> to. If you want thought provoking questions asked and
SR> answers given...ya stick with the best ... Paranet! :)
SR>
SR> AD MODE OFF
I realize you are probably trying to be helpful, but it's really not
in the best interest of all to make comments like this. This is
what starts useless pointless "echo" flame wars. Many people that
visit here _also_ visit other UFO echoes. Believe me, I do know what
happens when we allow "snobbery" and "elitism" to creep in..I've
_certainly_ been guilty of allowing my Irish temper to get the better
of me and made remarks that I wished that I could have just resisted
the temptation and hit the "N" key.
If I've learned _anything_ in the last few years regarding UFO's..it's
been because of the *people* involved and not just because of some
blinded notion that we should foster an attitude of "We're better
than _them_" . That's a very subtle and deadly trap.
Don't make the mistake of falling for that. You can learn something
new and different from every UFO echo. Besides, it IS a small world
and you tend to run into the same people in many other areas :-)
(gak!..I better stop before I start quoting Deserada :-)
Don
--
Don Allen - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Don.Allen@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ncar!ecn.purdue.edu!lush
Subject: (none)
Date: 10 Jul 91 14:39:22 GMT
From: lush@ecn.purdue.edu (Gregory B Lush)
Subject: How I view UFO-related phenomena--as if anyone cared.
From: Greg Lush (lush@ecn.purdue.edu)
To Michael Corbin and anyone else who is interested.
You and I said a lot of things so it will take a while to respond.
(Mike's comments are preceded by ?s)
--
Regarding Gulf Breeze...
? IMO, the issue is not Ed's credibility or ability to hoax the
? photos, but instead the lack of proper scientific study to arrive
? at the conclusions that the photos were hoaxed and how.
Mike, you keep lamenting that the 'scientific method' is failing
over and over again, and yet you don't see *THAT* as being a *CLUE*.
You say that main-stream media treats UFOlogy like a joke,
and you don't see *THAT* as being a *CLUE*.
It is easily proven and has been proven that for *ALL* major
media--newspapers, networks (including CNN), publishing houses--the
controlling interest is owned by people who are members of the
Council on Foreign Relations. The CFR has been linked with UFOs by
the MJ-12 documents, although I haven't been able to discern what
people think about the validity of those documents. As I said in a
previous post, it is very likely, in my opinion, that the CFR would
create just such a panel to study 'the alien question.' It is
consistent with the CFR's track record. The conclusions of that panel
would then become the conclusions of our governing bodies.
--
Regarding the Woman from Venus--and her all-etheric band...
? Secondly, there has been a growing concern over the fraudulent
? aspects of people who make such ludicrous claims and bilk people
? out of their money.
Keeping one's self from being 'bilked' is not anybody's responsibility
except the one threatened with 'bilkage.' If people were angry about
seeing a 'Woman from Venus' at that conference, then they won't go to
the next one. The press focused on her rather than all the scientific
study presented at the conference. Does that make sense? Isn't there
a reporter for any of the 'mainstream' press that finds this subject
worthy of serious investigation? If there is (there must be!), then
why is his/her voice not heard?
? It would seem to me that with all of these perils, most people would
? insist on testing those who make such claims to validate them.
I'm sure most people would. It's called abdicating responsibility.
How would you 'test' the claim? Would you have the government test the
validity? You seem pretty convinced that our government lied about
the Roswell incident. How can you entrust one body with such a
responsibility (validity of claims) without fear of corruption?
There are no major research labs which are not intimately controlled
by the government either directly or through dependence on funding.
--
Regarding what would prove existence of alien presence...
? Proof would have to come in several forms, including involvement
? with an intelligence in the form of communication using the known
? five senses. Until we have a handle on the alleged 'sixth' sense,
? we can not accept that as a valid method of proof of interaction
? with an intelligence.
But we *HAVE* countless numbers of accounts by witnesses/contactees
who have seen/smelled/touched/heard/talked to intelligent alien beings.
The evidence is so huge you can...taste it! But how does such a
person prove to *YOU* that he/she experienced something real and
is not lying? It doesn't seem possible to do that.
Additionally, many people have a *GREAT* handle on the 'sixth' sense.
You probably have been exposed to the worst of it, or you don't believe
it is real so you haven't sought any of it out.
Have you ever read any books based on Edgar Cayce? Read
'There is a River: The Edgar Cayce Story,' by Thomas Sugrue.
Cayce was, well, unbelievable! He could diagnose ailments in people
he never met--all he needed was the name and address to diagnose and
prescribe. He had no medical training, but his 'prescriptions'
*ALWAYS* worked when carried out properly. While conscious, he couldn't
understand the things he said while under trance. He could see
places he had never been--including (dare I say in this Newsletter?)
Atlantis. There were stories about his feats in newspapers across the
country. There was too much evidence left behind by this simple man for
it to be disregarded.
See if you can find the book 'Breakthrough to Creativity' by
Shafica Karagulla, M.D. (Devorss & Co., Inc. Marina Del Rey, CA 90291.)
Her research on 'sensitives' who could use the third eye and other
talents was quite scientific.
--
Regarding the scientific method...
? We cannot assume anything. We can theorize, but assume is not what
? science is all about. We theorize first, then we set out to build
? models that will prove or disprove the theory. It is reasonable to
? theorize that there are other civilizations out there. This theory
? is based upon known knowledge that we have about the makeup of the
? universe and life as it is on Earth. As far as photographs are
? concerned, the only thing that can be ascribed to photos is that they
? represent a TRUFO (True UFO -- an anomalous image on the film which
? cannot be identified) or a photograph that fails all of the scientific
? methods available to us to determine whether the image is real or if it
? is the product of tampering or a defect on the film. Again, the
? photograph does not validate the phenomenon, other than to support
? theories about what the image represents. In the Gulf Breeze case,
? there are things which I feel have been left out of the scientific
? analysis which could affect the outcome of the
? investigation into the case. It seems faulty to me to go from step one --
? that the image on the film represents a TRUFO - to step four - claiming
? that Gulf Breeze and Ed Walters is experiencing visits from
? extraterrestrials. We have missed step two and three, and that is
? proving out the identity of the image on the photograph to who 'they' are.
Wrong about science. Science is often about making assumptions in order
to either get the models to fit data or to simplify the equations.
The problem here is that the data is 'scattered,' as you have said.
It's too hard to tell a good data point from a fudged one.
Therefore the data must be sorted--by that I mean that you have to
look back to your lab notebook and see what was different about each
data point. Some you will have to throw out. You have thrown out (and
trashed and burned and...) Bill Cooper's data points. Some of them might
have been valid. The problem is separating data from opinion and outright
lies.
So you make some fundamental assumptions and see if these fit some of the
UFO data. Anything that does not follow the 'curve' that you have
constructed, you investigate and decide if that 'data' can be explained
away somehow. Anything new must be incorporated. I don't see any easy
answers that are going to be made available because it seems as though
some powerful people are interested in making this very hard.
--
Regarding whether or not anything in this field can be 'proven'...
? I strongly disagree. I feel that we can prove something provided
? that enough people with the intelligence and discipline would take
? the bull by the horns and get into the in-depth study of the
? phenomenon. I see that a lot of the product of what we see today
? represents the failure of the scientific community in the past to
? take a serious look at this. All of this wild speculation is the
? product of those people who may have had a close brush with the
? phenomenon who are so frustrated and disheartened by the scientific
? community's lack of response, that they have resolved to attempt to
? fit this into their personal reality to be able to deal with it
? effectively. But, we know that this can't be done in this fashion.
? Ignorance breeds fear. A clear understanding will bring about
? responsible decision and an effective plan to deal with whatever this
? is only if we can get those who can truly explain what it is,
? to cooperate in the study.
I think your are quite eloquent here, and I agree completely--which
sounds funny given the first sentence of your paragraph. The problem is
I don't believe that that which you wished for in the second sentence
will happen because that is not what is desired. (See above about
government lying--incidentally, why is it acceptable to any American that
our government constantly lies? It's become a big joke!) 'Ignorance breeds
fear,' someone once said, and ignorance and fear are the best combination
for control of people. There seem to be plenty of clues which suggest
that ignorance, fear, and control are the ends being sought. UFOs and
aliens are simply one of many means toward that end.
? Your statement of 'what are you going to do with the information if
? it is proven to you, personally, that aliens are here?' is very
? interesting. First, what do you mean when you say 'personally?' The
? proof of existence would not lie with personal revelation unless it
? could be demonstrated and repeated by others.
My belief is that the scientific method as you described it above will
never be allowed to work. Therefore the only proof is personal--you
sort through *ALL* of the information and make your decision. You have
to choose some 'model' to fit the information that you have received.
Everyone's model will be different because of different experiences and
different exposures to information. The reason I asked what people would
do with it is related to the official government position of non-existence.
If you believe we are being visited by aliens, then you *MUST* believe
that the government, visible and invisible, has a
*VERY STRONG REASON FOR COVERING IT UP ALL THESE YEARS*.
--
Regarding how I decide which contacts/photos/information is valid...
? I am very curious why you feel that the Meier's case is so convincing?
? I am curious to know what it is that occurs in your and other's thinking
? processes that validates a particular scenario without you actually
? having seen tangible proof that the claimant is honest and is truly
? experiencing what they say they are. I am asking this in a facetious
? manner. I have a true interest in understanding this.
Generally, when something is true and it is desired to
discredit (debunk) the information, the speaker is attacked.
This means people will say things such as:
1) 'Ed Walters is an ex-con.'
2) 'So-and-So is mentally imbalanced (crazy).'
3) 'Billie Meier has surrounded himself with a cult-following.'
4) Wendelle Stevens is arrested/convicted for child-molestation.
When the character is the only thing that can be attacked, I treat this as
a clue, not proof, but a clue that there is something credible and valuable
to the claim/work. If you believe that all major publishing houses are
controlled by members of CFR, then the ease of getting the information
published is a clue as well. If the information is true, but the
conclusions are false, then it might be quickly published, especially if
it might create fear and/or confusion among its readers.
----------
Mike, I truly believe that you and most of the others in this group would
be approaching this the right way if it were not such an unusual
circumstance. I maintain that there is no way to prove anything, because
of the interference by those who wish to keep this quiet. Therefore,
because the scientific method and the major-media will not come through
for us, a different approach is needed. It means absorbing everything at
your disposal, no matter how poorly or how well packaged. This means
including ancient myths and legends. Mostly it means accepting some claims
as believable without what one would call concrete proof, and
filling in the spaces with your own discernment.
The matter that concerns me is the question of why the cover-up?
I don't believe there is a 'kindler and gentler' reason for it.
It is obvious that most people, judging from the reaction of the Walters
and many abductees, are horribly frightened by the prospect of extra-
terrestrials visiting us. Fear of the unknown, people have told me.
I don't understand that. I do see that this fear can be used to
control people, and that is what I believe the cover-up is all about.
That is why I wish the discussion would take up the question of 'Why'
they are here rather than 'Whether' they are here. All in good time.
Greg (lush@ecn.purdue.edu)
********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
For administrative requests (subscriptions, back issues) send to:
UUCP {ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara-request
DOMAIN infopara-request@scicom.alphacdc.com
To obtain back issues by anonymous ftp, connect to:
DOMAIN ftp.uiowa.edu (directory /archives/paranet)
******************The**End**of**Info-ParaNet**Newsletter************************
