Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume 1 Number 531
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume I Number 531
Sunday, February 2nd 1992
(C) Copyright 1992 Paranet Information Service. All Rights Reserved.
Today's Topics:
Re: Lucifer, Satan & Prometheus
Aussie crop circle
Dudley & Chorost
Latest Magazines
REply to Keith Basterfield, pulsar planets
Re:Feder & Williams' books
Re: Radiation anomaly searches
Re: Mayra and Utah
Budd Hopkins interview
Re: 11:11, other such 'events'
Alternative 3
Virus infiltration via printer is Computer Legend!
AMAZON QUESTION
Node 320/126
Psychics vs. Frauds
Pub'g Info: Feder, Williams books
11:11 scam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Doug.Rogers@p0.f1.n606.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Doug Rogers)
Subject: Re: Lucifer, Satan & Prometheus
Date: 26 Jan 92 08:29:10 GMT
Could I ask you how this thread relates to UFO's?
--
Doug Rogers - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Doug.Rogers@p0.f1.n606.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jim.Speiser@p666.f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Aussie crop circle
Date: 24 Jan 92 14:34:46 GMT
Keith:
Thanks for that post. But...."Fair dinkum"?
Jim
--
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@p666.f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brent.Wilcox@p5.f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Brent Wilcox)
Subject: Dudley & Chorost
Date: 26 Jan 92 21:34:25 GMT
In a message to Brent Wilcox <25 Jan 92 18:49> Sheldon Wernikoff wrote:
SW> Hello Brent... thanks for posting this information. Was there any
SW> mention as to which "National Lab" did the testing? Mike had always
SW> been evasive about this. No specific names were ever mentioned.
SW> I don't understand this. If D & C paid for this "National Lab" to
SW> run comprehensive tests, what right did the lab have to withhold
SW> data? Are D & C intimating a possible cover-up here?? I don't think
SW> I can handle another *conspiracy*!
I don't think they're advocating a conspiracy, perhaps a slow and
stupid beaurocracy ("Good Enough for Government work" -- a common
phrase -- isn't a euphemism for quality, after all).
SW> What kind of "National Lab" would run analyses of control and test
SW> material utilizing DIFFERENT machines, set at DIFFERENT sensitivity
SW> levels??? This is absolutely preposterous!
Good Enough for Government Work... <g>
SW> But... but... these are for the most part - VERY short-lived
SW> radioisotopes - and the samples are now about 7 months old. I think
SW> it's a bit late for further testing.
They'll need new samples next year, I suppose. If possible.
SW> The lab's original report should have at least described variables
SW> such as equipment calibration and sensitivity levels. This should
SW> have been sufficient reason to be suspect of the computer analysis.
SW> Besides, what about the fact that certain elements, such as Cobalt
SW> 56, which should have showed up in the spectra, were remarkably
SW> absent?
Good questions, all. I can't answer them, nor do I want to be in
the position of translating from one party to another. You ought to
have seen my post of Marshall's messages by now. I uploaded them on
Paranet Alpha -- in Paranet General -- on Saturday, with a BBS # you
can probably reach him at. The messages themselves I reposted on
the Fido UFO, too, in response to your message (but not his BBS #).
Have Fun!
-- Brent
--
Brent Wilcox - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Brent.Wilcox@p5.f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brent.Wilcox@p5.f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Brent Wilcox)
Subject: Latest Magazines
Date: 26 Jan 92 21:58:45 GMT
In a message to All <25 Jan 92 11:22> ncar!doc.imperial.ac.uk!a wrote:
nc> What this needs is a group of skeptic to come forward with a
nc> list of what 'proves' crop circles are hoaxes, Terence Meaden
nc> to supply a list of what proves formations are vortex and
nc> other experts to supply a list of what they class as methods of
nc> determining authenticity. This then requires an independant
nc> source to collate the information and cross reference it, the
nc> end result would be to at least have a process for determining
nc> what is real. Any input !
I agree. It's time to get all these factors on the table. Too many
experts speak indirectly of "features" they recognize as "valid",
but refuse to reveal these features for others to analyise or
comment on.
--
Brent Wilcox - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Brent.Wilcox@p5.f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: violet.berkeley.edu!chalmers
Subject: REply to Keith Basterfield, pulsar planets
Date: 27 Jan 92 13:51:20 GMT
From: chalmers@violet.berkeley.edu (John H. Chalmers Jr.)
Keith Basterfield: My reply to you via FidoNet bounced back
to me. It may have been a problem with the mailer at the
Texas Medical Center through which I get EMail, but in any
case, I' m reposting it here to ParaNet as it is short and
not very personal.
'Happy to be of service. Yes, I would like to get a
list of articles on FPP, in part to pass on to a friend
who is a psychiatric social worker here in Houston, TX
and who sees a lot of patients abused as children and
thus prone to FPP.'
RE Pulsar planets: The latest issue of Science magazine mentions
a new candidate for a planetary system around a pulsar, so I'm
confused as to which are relatively strong cases and exactly what
has been retracted. The theory that planets may condense from
supernova fragments or a destroyed companion star was mentioned
here too. Fascinating stuff!
-- John
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wam.umd.edu!infinity
Subject: Re:Feder & Williams' books
Date: 27 Jan 92 20:47:32 GMT
From: David Elmore Coleman <infinity@wam.umd.edu>
+From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro)
+Subject: Re: FEDER & WILLIAMS' B
+As for common symbols, how many
+ways are there to symbolize a tree or a stream, or a cave? There are bound to
+be duplications. I've been reading about indian petroglyphs lately and found
+the only book where someone has 'broken' the code. Really interesting. So for
+example make a spiral, now make it the other way, you now have two symbols
+that are universally found on planet earth. Is there anything strange about
+that? l = 1 ll = 2 lll = 3 etc.
I think the questions here are:
A) Are the symbols and their source accessible to further scientists?
B) Have they been accessed by indivuals, say, referenced by Feder or Williams?
C) Where on the scale of symbols-similarities does this case fall?
If there are 20,000 symbols catalogued, it is possible that the
similarities are chance, but if say there are only 5,000 or less
symbols total, then it seems a good fit. There *is* a scale, and
there *is* a fuzzy line somewhere where you can say the similarities
are 'phenomenal.' For example, if you found the words "I knw that
art is goodd * a longa _/ _/times agone' etched in rocks on Mars,
it would be more than convincing enough that an English/American
had been before on the moon. This is the question I am most
interested in, where the similarities fit on the scale.
D) How 'identical' are the symbols?
I of course am thoroughly surprised how some people can believe in alleged
similarities between crop circle patterns and Tuareg and native Haitian
symbols. If these are the kinds of similarities Dr. Barry Fell sees between
the Algonquians and the ancient Egyptians, then he has no case. The
similarities are only in general form, and so what? Do these
people also want to tell me that the Barbury Castle formation is likewise?
The design of that formation indicates it is a combination of ideas, so a
single symbol. And what of the Mandelbrot? That's hard math, not a symbol
that 'The Dragon Universe is Understandable,' the kind of messages people
are trying to attribute to the agriglyphs.
+If one looks for strange things, they will without a doubt find something
+strange.
Of course any careless person can find anything he or she believes he or
she will find, but of scientists: one can of course argue oppositely -- if one
always resists new ideas and criticizes open thinking, much of the world &
universe will go undiscovered and be smoothed into a more simple than
reasonable form, history. If no money had been spent on scientific
experiments to study Relativity, even it would be fringe today. Of course,
relativity is more easy to experiment upon than UFOs...
+INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG
More galactic thoughts from:
Amicitia Subjugat Omnia Hweohthte... (Hwe-oath-T)
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
David E. Coleman infinity@wam.umd.edu
8125 48th Ave, Apt. 612
College Park, MD 20740 1-(301)-474-7424
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wam.umd.edu!infinity
Subject: Re: Radiation anomaly searches
Date: 27 Jan 92 22:33:18 GMT
From: David Elmore Coleman <infinity@wam.umd.edu>
+ My personal view is that they are trying too hard to find anything that
+ might not fit. It's a forced issue most of the time. What ever happened to
+ the changes in molecular structure which were supported by some wholistic
+ nutritional lab?
Ah, so just because you haven't been exposed to all the periodicals which
might contain new opinions on the Nutr. lab's experiment, you assume that
the general opinion now is that it is worthless?
Concerning looking for molecular structure experiments, is it not a place to
look? Could you bother to reread Chorost's, Levengood's, etc articles and
look at where they discuss the merits behind the lab searches? Is it not
true that what skeptics desire is proof by way of unusual substance evidence,
especially in the case of UFOs? With the radiation burns in the Cash Landrum
case, is it not unreasonable to look for some similar effect on plants in
crop circles, as UFOs (or related paranormal experiences) are one of three
main crop circle theories (I am being nice to those who like hoax or vortex
theories, here)?
Actually, for that matter, have there been any searches for such effects
in cases like Cash-Landrum in plants at the supposed sites? If so, were the
searches done soon enough after the alleged events?
More galactic thoughts from:
Amicitia Subjugat Omnia Hweohthte... (Hwe-oath-T)
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
David E. Coleman infinity@wam.umd.edu
8125 48th Ave, Apt. 612
College Park, MD 20740 1-(301)-474-7424
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wam.umd.edu!infinity
Subject: Re: Mayra and Utah
Date: 27 Jan 92 23:55:29 GMT
From: David Elmore Coleman <infinity@wam.umd.edu>
Linda Bird wishes to know more of the land of Mayra. Well, there is very
little to say. Cayce only mentioned the name as part of stating things
concerning some other topic, such as Lemuria (which, by the way is Mu,
same thing). Really, Cayce mentioned it a couple of times, but evidently
the people there were nothing spectacular (not spectacular, just like
many things psychics say that go unheralded. it's the big-time topics like
Atlantean technology that are put in focus. a fraud on the other hand
would likely detail all sorts of wars, government and absurd customs for
Mayra.)
I always like to pay attention to names, like Mayra. From Cayce:
Mayra: as stated.
Lemuria/Mu/Muraya: Pacific Ocean continent.
Atlantis: Atlantic-Caribbean land mass.
Sus, Peos, Poseidon: Cities on Atlantis.
Alta: Land on Atlantis, not clear if it was one of the large islands.
Og (1): subcontinent of Lemuria containing western Peru, Ecuador.
Og (2): not to be confused with (1) (popular name), one of the large
islands of Atlantis in its later days.
California, Mount Shasta: subcontinent of Lemuria again.
Yuk: Yucatan, possibly connected by land bridge to Atlantis.
Ophir: just another name or time of history for the region of Persia.
Solomon may have thought it still existed as Ophir, or maybe
he was misled Ophir and Persia were two different places.
Aryaz: part of Lemuria, like Og (1).
More galactic thoughts from:
Amicitia Subjugat Omnia Hweohthte... (Hwe-oath-T)
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
David E. Coleman infinity@wam.umd.edu
8125 48th Ave, Apt. 612
College Park, MD 20740 1-(301)-474-7424
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Unknowingly, he picked up a whirly blue throwstone with strange hieroglyphics
on the opposite side he didn't see, and he tossed it into the sunlit stream;
A note said he had opened a gate to some place indescribable.
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: spot.Colorado.EDU!clarkbr
Subject: Budd Hopkins interview
Date: 28 Jan 92 02:33:06 GMT
From: CLARK BRIAN R <clarkbr@spot.Colorado.EDU>
Mike,
Here's a question for Budd Hopkins.
In the book 'Intruders', Hopkins states in a footnote that he is
suppressing (for corroborative purposes) reports from abductees of
symbols or writing seen inside the alien craft. Question: is there
enough variety among the symbols to suggest possibly more than one
script (hence, possibly more than one race), or do the reports suggest
just one type of writing?
Thanks - Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wam.umd.edu!infinity
Subject: Re: 11:11, other such 'events'
Date: 28 Jan 92 04:38:01 GMT
From: David Elmore Coleman <infinity@wam.umd.edu>
Steve Rose write,
+ Can you *believe* the promoters are now crying that this is just a
+ START date and the whole so-called 'event' is to take up twenty
+ years time??
Actually, I heard before Jan 11 it was supposed to be part of a *series*
of dates. I was also found that there were not literally supposed to be
overnight changes. Media try to squeeze events in idiotic stereotypes,
and people skeptic of such events love the stereotypes because it means
they do not have to think. (I am against 11:11 just as much as you.) During
the Harmonic Convergence, the night before or the night of, or some such
relation, the media asked a follower if she expected changes overnight.
The follower said 'Why not, it could happen.' Media take words like these
to imply that a movement is saying there *will* be overnight changes.
The Media *is more sensationalistic(NBC/ABC/CBS in this example) than the
movements they cover with the mild skepticism they use!
+ New age...ha. Let's get back to...
Remember, anyone can call themselves New Age, or anyone can call someone's
movement New Age, but to dismiss Mainstream New Age (i.e E. Cayce, R.
Montgomery, A. Besant, the (new) group Seth) as part of the category
'New age' you refer to above, would be ridiculous. Unfortunately, I know
no one who would not read your above statement and not think you are
referring to *everything* New Age, even Mainstream New Age. I really
object to this. The lame pursuits of hype groups, Pheonix Institute,
Unarians, etc have no bearing on Mainstream New Age which always gets the
bad wrap through statements like yours above.
Pete Porro writes,
+ ... I'm sure an update will come out with new figures for 2011 or something
+ so we can all wait for nothing to happen again. The major flaw is that time
+ and dates are a human creation, unrelated to any cosmic synchronicity with
+ numerology.
On the last part: AGREED. But a few notes: The Harmonic Convergence. I am not
convinced of this on any basis, really. But, never confuse that one in
particular with numerology or significance in dates. If Arguelles calculated
the conversions to present Julian time incorrectly, or if the Mayans forgot
about corrections to 365.24 days/year (I forget the accuracy they had), that
only effects whether or not the H.C was in August, 1987, or say, June. It does
not comment upon the relevance of the date. I really feel that neither
Arguelles nor conventional Maya archaeologists, like Dr. John Carlson of
the Center for Archaeoastronomy in this building, can truly comment on the
veracity of Arguelles' claims. Maya archaeologists are used to one line of
thought, just as are skeptics of ufology, and Arguelles is the line of thought
similar to that of normal ufologists. Now, in agreeing/disagreeing with this,
one must understand that there are *two* separate issues here. It is ridiculous
to call the August, 1987 prediction by *Mayans* a priori nonexistent. It is
not however ridiculous to say that the Mayans could have been wrong. They
could have dreamed up the event.
Now, as for the passing of these dates, 11:11 and H.C both, none
were *ever* billed as sudden changes of the planet. People make the idiotic
mistake of wishfully grouping them together with the World Ends Tomorrow
predicters (one of them in Washington DC a couple years ago, I remember.)
There is neither a way to tell, nor was there ever expected to be a way
to tell, whether or not 11:11 or H.C produced the desired effects. Neither
skeptics can prove there was no effect, nor can those believers prove anything
positively to skeptics. Most psychic channelers in the mainstream thought
little of the H.C, but more importantly entities channeled seemed to either
ignore the subject or assume that since their followers believed it, their
followers must know more than them, so although they never brought up the
subject of H.C themselves, they did sometimes refer to it off hand. So,
really, I am Undecided on HC although I give it a 20% chance of having been
something, and I am zero percent on 11:11, which seems to be purely
numerology.
On numerology: lucky numbers, birth numbers, etc. Mainstream psychics
say that if you believe it will work for you, you will create the reality
for yourself, or at least exert a force in this direction. This of course
gives no power to numerology, only a vote for the common You Create Your
Own Reality theme of New Age mainstream. You may make your chances of winning
the lottery greater, but not because the numbers you chose are magical.
The numbers 7 and 12 are a different numerology and could more properly be
called part of a sacred geometry, not a numerology. Even the Bible subscribes
to the 7, 12 numbers.
More galactic thoughts from:
Amicitia Subjugat Omnia Hweohthte... (Hwe-oath-T)
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
David E. Coleman infinity@wam.umd.edu
8125 48th Ave, Apt. 612
College Park, MD 20740 1-(301)-474-7424
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ecn.purdue.edu!lush
Subject: Alternative 3
Date: 29 Jan 92 18:13:55 GMT
From: lush@ecn.purdue.edu (Gregory B Lush)
Someone probably has already discussed this but I
was wondering if anyone has an outlet for obtaining
the book, 'Alternative 3.' Thanks.
Greg (lush@ecn.purdue.edu)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: panix.com!upaya!tbetz
Subject: Virus infiltration via printer is Computer Legend!
Date: 30 Jan 92 07:52:22 GMT
From: Tom Betz <upaya.Panix.Com!tbetz@panix.com>
From: swarren@neptune.convex.com (Steve Warren)
+
++From: Don.Ecker@p0.f3.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Don Ecker)
+
++PER HAMILTON, BRIAN, WHO RUNS UPI, ALLEGEDLY MARKETED PROMIS TO INTEL AGENCIES
++OF ISRAEL, JORDAN, IRAQ, CANADA, SOUTH KOREA, LIBYA, ENGLAND, GERMANY, FRANCE,
+ ^^^^
++AUSTRALIA, THAILAND, JAPAN, CHILE, GUATEMALA, AND BRAZIL. PER INSLAW, ONCE
++SOFTWARE USED BY FOREIGN INTEL SERVICES, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY (NSA) ABLE
++INFILTRATE COMPUTERIZED INTEL FILES THOSE COUNTRIES. MODIFICATIONS TO PROMIS
++ALLEGEDLY DONE BY WACKENHUT CORP. OF CORAL GABLES, FL. HOUSE JUDICIARY
++COMMITTEE
+ [...]
+I find this very interesting, as I just read an article a few days ago in
+which some US armed services officials were bragging that one of the factors
+in the victory over Iraq was that we were able to slip a virus into the
+software that controls their radar systems.
Actually, this Urban Legend derives from an April Fool article in
Infoworld from last year, according to the following Newsbytes
report:
(NEWS)(GOVT)(WAS)(00018)
****Did Hussein's Computer Catch A Virus? April Fools! 01/23/92
WASHINGTON, DC, U.S.A., 1992 JAN 23 (NB) -- U.S. News & World
Report, Ted Koppel's Nightline, other news magazines, and a soon-
to-be-published book are all building on each other's stories of
a supposed virus attack perpetrated by the U.S. military on
Iraq's air defense computer during Operation Desert Storm.
However, everything Newsbytes has learned points to this story
deriving from an Infoworld April Fools column.
Whether or not the U.S. intelligence services were able to infect
the Iraqi air-defense computers has become a major question in
the non-computer media during the past few weeks, a question
which is unlikely by its very nature to be confirmed or denied by
military intelligence.
Newsbytes sources confirm that such a virus attack could possibly
have taken place, although probably not the way it has been
reported in the mainstream news media, but we have been unable
to obtain any confirmation whatsoever that the attack actually took
place at all.
As reported by some members of the press, the U.S. supposedly
placed a virus-laden ROM or read only memory chip into a printer
which was about to be smuggled into Iraq in violation of the U.N.
embargo.
This is essentially the same story which ran in Infoworld Volume
13, Number 13, April 1, 1991, on page 39, where the story was
obviously a joke and would have been recognized as such by
any computer professional who normally reads Infoworld.
Taking as a talking point the question of whether such attacks
could actually take place, computer experts on BIX, the BYTE
Information Exchange, seem to agree that the story as reported is
unlikely in the extreme. They do not say that something related
could not have happened, just that the printer story is farfetched.
For a personal computer, only a PostScript printer is normally
able to return data to a computer from the printer, and even if a
virus were contained in such a printer it would not be likely to
contain executable code that could be moved back to the
computer and activated.
Another observer pointed out that the computer in question was
a mainframe and that mainframe printers often have controller
cards which communicate with the computer, making such a
virus-infection route more possible.
A recent Internet story from the netnews.sci.military conference
follows the thread of the story from its genesis in the April 1
issue of Infoworld where a very tongue-in-cheek story was
obviously written as a thinly-, or, more accurately, a
transparently-, veiled jibe at Microsoft Windows.
The source of the Internet posting is apparently a specialist at
Carnegie Mellon University, also the site of CERT or the
Computer Emergency Response Team.
This Newsbytes Bureau feels that this April Fool's joke column
is a highly likely explanation of the Iraqi virus story but
would like to point out that if the attack had taken place we should
expect to be fed misleading statements from some government
sources and that an open-minded individual would remember
that, as well as the fact that this wouldn't be the first time that a
joke turned out to contain a grain of truth.
In any case, the consensus of opinion in the computer community,
as sampled by Newsbytes, has decided that the story, as reported,
i.e., that a printer was used as an infection vector, might either be a
misleading story planted by the intelligence community or the result
of a non-technical reporter's misunderstanding of the technology
involved, but that the most likely explanation is a misunderstanding
of the Infoworld April Fools' joke.
Two former intelligence community employees each told
Newsbytes that, in any case,it was very unlikely that any
government source would have disclosed any 'true' information
about any actual virus attack if it did take place, simply because
intelligence agencies would likely want to use the same method of
infection again.
The use of a virus by the military is not farfetched in itself.
Newsbytes pointed out several months ago that a college
professor had presented a paper to an NIST (National Institute of
Standards and Technology) computer security seminar which
described the use of a virus as a weapon.
(John McCormick/19920123)
---
-------------- 'Hels' og industri, de gaar haand i haand.'
Tom Betz | -----------------------------------------------------------------
914-375-1510 | tbetz@upaya.panix.com | betz@marob.uucp%phri.nyu.edu
GBS | {att,philabs,rutgers,cmcl2}!phri!marob!upaya!tbetz
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks)
Subject: AMAZON QUESTION
Date: 28 Jan 92 17:03:00 GMT
> Can you sumarize the questions in the Amazon?
If memory serves, Tristan's assertion was that those people were probably
descended from Welshmen who'd sailed to the western hemisphere long before
Columbus. He's rather nationalistic. ;-)
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pat.Trainor@f700.n320.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pat Trainor)
Subject: Node 320/126
Date: 11 Jan 92 21:38:00 GMT
Well, good & bad news.. The bad news is that /126 has been damaged (by me
due to not being careful), and with the attention /700 needs, I won't be
bringing it up again in the near future..
The good news is that /700 is up, and I am very pleased with the IBM
software I am running (As I was told I would be!)... Thanks a million to all
who helped me make the switch..
There might be a slight delay getting the echoes that I got from 142/1
into here, but that's only going to be a slight delay, and will not result in
a loss of mail..
Again thanks to all who helped and are still helping.. I have no plans to
run a BBS on /700 at this time.
Pat Trainor
--
Pat Trainor - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Pat.Trainor@f700.n320.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wam.umd.edu!infinity
Subject: Psychics vs. Frauds
Date: 30 Jan 92 20:37:41 GMT
From: David Elmore Coleman <infinity@wam.umd.edu>
[As to the relevance of this article to this newsgroup, one must
understand that if channeling is not fraud, then in and of itself
it is an example of paranormal abilities. Thus, I would be careful saying
that anything New Age is not paranormal.]
The following article section is relevant to skeptics of mediums,
intuitive psychics, etc, as skeptics are unaware of the mainstream
psychic view of psychics themselves. Most skeptics, using the little
education on psychic practices that they have, do not realize that
their *own* methods of detecting or suspecting a psychic is a fraud are
similar to the same methods psychics use to weed one another out. So,
skeptics may not characterize the best of psychics as being part of the
'masses' of psychics, who are stereotyped as falling into the categories
of frauds found below in the article.
Boxed subarticle 'How to Detect a Fraud', part of a larger article by
Paul Zuromski, a psychic himself and editor of _Body, Mind & Spirit_
magazine (formerly _Psychic Guide_): (B, M & S, May/June 1989, p. 64)
(reprinted for reading, not permission-based)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOW TO DETECT A FRAUD
The following warning signs are good indicators that you may be in the
presence of a fraud or a less-than-reputable psychic:
* Anyone who tells you that someone has put a curse on you and who
offers to remove the curse for money.
* Any psychic who instructs you not to tell anyone else about your
reading -- that it will affect the outcome in some way.
* Any psychic who fills a reading with gross generalizations.
* A psychic who asks you more questions that _you_ ask during the
course of a reading.
* Anyone who says the fee is different from the one you were quoted
when setting your appointment.
* Any psychic who acts in a particularly mysterious way -- as though
you couldn't possibly understand what is going on -- or tries
to impress you with a lot of psychic mumbo-jumbo, such as foreign
words or cryptic messages.
* Anyone who mentions the devil, or Satan, or anything about evil spirits.
* Anyone who seems to be trying to convince you of something that doesn't
make sense to you.
* Anyone who tries to persuade you to do something that you normally would
not do or that does not make sense to you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further information on seeking legitimate psychics and channelers is found
in _Channeling: the intuitive connection, by William H. Kautz (Sc.D) and
Melanie Brown, Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1987. This is recommendable for
skeptics who want to be able to say they have a background, in front of which
they can legitimately debate channeling.
More galactic thoughts from:
Amicitia Subjugat Omnia Hweohthte... (Hwe-oath-T)
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
David E. Coleman infinity@wam.umd.edu
8125 48th Ave, Apt. 612
College Park, MD 20740 1-(301)-474-7424
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Unknowingly, he picked up a whirly blue throwstone with strange hieroglyphics
on the opposite side he didn't see, and he tossed it into the sunlit stream;
A note said he had opened a gate to some place indescribable.
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wam.umd.edu!infinity
Subject: Pub'g Info: Feder, Williams books
Date: 30 Jan 92 22:12:33 GMT
From: David Elmore Coleman <infinity@wam.umd.edu>
For those concerned, the two books by Feder and Williams I referred to are
as follows:
Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology
by Kenneth L. Feder, Mayfield Publishing Company, 1990, Mountain View, CA.
Fantastic Archaeology: The Wild Side of Noth American Prehistory,
by Stephen Williams, Philadelphia, Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 1991.
More galactic thoughts from:
Amicitia Subjugat Omnia Hweohthte... (Hwe-oath-T)
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
David E. Coleman infinity@wam.umd.edu
8125 48th Ave, Apt. 612
College Park, MD 20740 1-(301)-474-7424
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wam.umd.edu!infinity
Subject: 11:11 scam
Date: 31 Jan 92 02:37:07 GMT
From: David Elmore Coleman <infinity@wam.umd.edu>
Ooooo, I recently found the pile of 11:11 sickness that I saved off the
Case Western Reserve Univ./ Cleveland Freenet.
The source of this garbage is one 'Solara Antara Amaa-Ra,' a "messenger
to humanity from the Golden, Solar Angels of the Great Central Sun.'
Oh, zheesh, I know of no psychic who would not laugh at 'Golden Solar
Angels of the Great Central Sun.' New Age may use a few lofty terms like
'Space Brothers' and the "Christ Consciousness," but the above is far
beyond, and 11:11 has discussions of moving onto a new 'spiral' of
consciousness, and of a double helix vortex above the Giza pyramid, and a
Master Grid (A Grid) and a B Grid, and High Hold Days, and Octave 11 of the
universe, and Stargates, Birdstar (and Starbird too!) and 'Beyond the Beyond'
(as a station) and The Beyond as a different station, and 'new spiral
patterning of the Great Central Sun System,' and 'our Unified Presence takes
the form of a vast white bird ... composed of myriad small white birds flying
in formation as One.'
The above is a severely lame attempted fraud, completely transparent, and
it is such in comparison to mainstream channeling. I ACTUALLY think it
could be another trick by James Randi, such as when he ghost-wrote a
fraud book about a thirteenth astrological sign. Anyone who knows anything
about astrology or New Age could not possibly fall for a thirteenth sign,
or the 11:11 door, but then there are those people who know almost nothing
and buy the book anyway, Ekh... If you can't tell a difference between
mainstream New Age and 11:11 garbage, then you have alot of reading to
do before you can think of ever being able to comment on the New Age movement.
'Solara' writes, "This cycle of major planetary activations was begun
on December 31, 1985 wuth the World Peace Meditation called forth by
John Randolph Price. Next was the Harmonic Convergence of August 16-17, 1987
activated by Jose Arguelles. Then came Earth Link in February, 1988
centered over Uluru in Australia, brought forth by Vincent Selleck.
The last big one was Earth Day, celebrated on April 20, 1990'
Oh come on, even Earth Day???!!! How about the day they signed the INF
treaty or the START treaty!
They also mention the Time Warp of 11-1989. What
was that all about anyway? I heard from different places something about
a time warp, but what was it supposed to be?
'We hereby announce the next major planetary activation to take place on
January 11, 1992.'
'This date can also be written as 1.11.1992. Notice that it contains an
11:11 within the 1111992. Together the numbers add up to 33 which
is the master vibration number of Universal Service.'
Eckkkk.... I hate that business of adding digits up over and over until
you get one of the desired number of digits (i.e 324 = 9, 72987 = 31 = 4).
1111992, numerological arbitrariness, eckh.. Anyone know the history of
this awful technique, or is it the product of quasi-astrology groups
everywhere, like the Sabaeans my grandmother part of? I am trying to
think of what a graph of f(number) vs. number would look like...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
ON A DIFFERENT SUBJECT,
By the way, a spirit guide of my friend channeler Elizabeth Todd, who used to
write for _Psychic Guide_, says that the thirty foot thingoid that passed the
Earth was indeed a rocket booster, not a piece of rock or a dead, deserted UFO.
Gee, now wouldn't a skeptic have expected the guide to believe the object to
be something like the dead, deserted UFO, or a divinely placed solar-system-
monitoring satellite?
More galactic thoughts from:
Amicitia Subjugat Omnia Hweohthte... (Hwe-oath-T)
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
David E. Coleman infinity@wam.umd.edu
8125 48th Ave, Apt. 612
College Park, MD 20740 1-(301)-474-7424
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
********************************************************************************
For permission to reproduce or redistribute this digest, contact:
DOMAIN Michael.Corbin@paranet.org
UUCP scicom!paranet.org!Michael.Corbin
********To have your comments in the next issue, send electronic mail to********
'infopara' at the following address:
UUCP {ncar,isis,csn}!scicom!infopara
DOMAIN infopara@scicom.alphacdc.com
For administrative requests (subscriptions, back issues) send to:
UUCP {ncar,isis,csn}!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)
Mail to private Paranet/Fidonet addresses from the newsletters:
DOMAIN firstname.lastname@paranet.org
UUCP scicom!paranet.org!firstname.lastname
******************The**End**of**Info-ParaNet**Newsletter************************
