United Public Domain Gold 2/United Public Domain Gold 2.iso/utilities/pu638.dms/pu638.adf/PARA446

Text File | 1994-10-19 | 32KB | 795 lines

                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 446

                            Monday, August 5th 1991

Today's Topics:

                           JOHN LEAR'S NEW HYPOTHESIS
                                   The Coverup
                                   The Coverup
                               Tape of KOA program
                                   The Coverup
                                     (none)
                                   Hoax Circles
                    Re: Keelynet File, Lazar, Don't Be Duped
                   Re:  What About The Last 44 Years ?read/new
                   Re: What About The Last 44 Years ?read/new
                   Re: What About The Last 44 Years ?read/new
                                  Miscellaneous
                  Roswell Incident -- So =that's= What It Was!
                                    Re: Media

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Powell)
Subject: JOHN LEAR'S NEW HYPOTHESIS
Date: 30 Jul 91 02:16:21 GMT

In a message to All Paranet Users <19 Jul 91 09:38> Felipe Cantu wrote:

 FC> Does anyone out there know if John Lear's new hypothesis is
 FC> posted on any boards around the U.S. , or know any information
 FC> about it. This is supposed to be some of what he shared at the
 FC> West Coast UFO Conference back in June in Los Angeles.  His
 FC> posisitomn of late has been rumored that things are so far along
 FC> that "the screaming will all be over before anyting can even be
 FC> done".  Now he is supposed to have new information that may shed
 FC> a little different light on this matter.

I haven't heard anything but judging from the Foreword he wrote for the book
Cosmic Top Secret by William F. Hamilton III I got the feeling that he still
feels the same way...

Thanks, take care.
John.


--
John Powell - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (John Powell)
Subject: The Coverup
Date: 30 Jul 91 02:35:23 GMT

In a message to John Burke <26 Jul 91 09:22> Steve Rose wrote:

 > JB> That's the spirit!  Maybe we can just "shame" them out into the open

 SR> Absolutely!  Though that may sound humorous...I find nothing
 SR> funny about having researchers scurrying about like rats after
 SR> the cheese, being nothing more than glorified accident
 SR> investigators.

I got ridiculed some months ago for suggesting that the next time someone sees
a UFO they should aim a rifle at it instead of a camera, and I was being much
more serious than humorous.  How do you respond to that?

 SR> How can we ever hope to win??

Winning might be a good goal, but at this point breaking even is a more
realistic objective.

 SR> ParaNet echos...right?  Well then, Mr. Grey:
 SR> [...] SHOW YOUR SCALEY FACES AND PROVE ONCE AND FOR ALL YOU ARE NOT JUST
 SR> MYTH OR WISHFUL THINKING ON OUR PARTS!

If you had a head that looked more like a butt with eyes, and _no_ butt, would
you be real excited about dancing down Main Street?

 SR> TELL US WHAT YOU WANT AND STOP JERKING OUR CHAIN!

"Jerking our chain" appears to be something that they _want_...  And since we
provide the "chain" we are partly responsible.

 SR> Any takers?  ;-)

I'm not an alien!

Thanks, take care.
John.

--
John Powell - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: The Coverup
Date: 1 Aug 91 08:07:00 GMT

Hello John!

 JP> I got ridiculed some months ago for suggesting that the next time
 JP> someone sees a UFO they should aim a rifle at it instead of a camera,
 JP> and I was being much more serious than humorous.  How do you respond
 JP> to that?

Naw...we are such a loving and giving populous...what ever could one be
thinking when suggesting that we attack our neighbors and challenge our grey
friends?  Besides, shooting a rifle in public can get you a civil citation. In
all likelyhood, you'll just hit a street lamp or weather balloon, anyway. ;-)



--
Steve Rose - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (Peggy Noonan)
Subject: Tape of KOA program
Date: 3 Aug 91 13:57:00 GMT

Hi Bill,
        I've got the tape ready (from your appearance on KOA radio) but
if you sent me an address, I didn't get it or have mislaid it.  Please
send again and I'll mail you the tape -- Unless, of course, you already
have a copy that you taped yourself.
        Interesting piece you had in UFO UNIVERSE's Aug-Sep 91 issue
too.
                                ==Peggy==
--
Peggy Noonan - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (Kurt Lochner)
Subject: The Coverup
Date: 1 Aug 91 20:04:21 GMT

In response to my obtuse ramblings....
 >
 > The android explanation would also get some support
 > from the reports that Len Stringfield has published
 > about Graylien anatomy:  no digestive system, no sex
 > organs, etc.  It's an interesting idea.  Come to think
 > of it, nobody ever said that they found a toilet seat
 > in the Roswell debris, did they?
 >
 >                                      --  John
I can't recall anything mundane like toilet seats being
reported, much less food utensiles and ice cream scoops.
However, there does seem to be a number of technical
developements (such as the transistor) that were around
the same time frame that give much to ponder about
Greylien technologies.

--
Kurt Lochner - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: ecn.purdue.edu!lush
Subject: (none)
Date: 4 Aug 91 20:13:08 GMT

From: [e-mail] (Gregory B Lush)


Subject:  Hoax Circles

?  From: Steve Gamble x3293 <[e-mail]>
?
?  In reply to your question how to detect hoax circles :
?
?  Seriously, I believe that the way a circle is clasified as a hoax is
?  that :
?   a) often the cereal is damaged rather than being softly laid
?      over
?   b) the circles do not have the sharp cut-off at the edge
?   c) the hoaxes do not have 'smooth' edges, they are saw-toothed
?
?  More controversially Richard dowses circles. The ones which show the
?  above characteristics do not give an dowsable effect, whereas the
?  ones which do not show the effects a to c generally do show some
?  dowsable response. Richard's work is just extra evidence rather than
?  the diagnostic criteria.
?
?
?  STEVE

Thanks Steve.  I was curious.  Does this mean that some have been
found that could not be written off according to the above criteria?
What percentage, would you guess?  Also, there are apparently some
that are more elaborate in design.  (Some crop circles are more
equal than others.)  Is there a correllation between complexity of
the design and the circle's 'ability' to pass the above tests?

I read a book on dowsing by a fellow who used it to find water.
He was also able to use it for any yes/no question.  He found
that he could track his son who was travelling across the
country once by asking how far away he was.  (He would ask himself
questions such as, 'Is he further than 500 miles away?')

What I'm wondering about is what question Richard asks when he
gets a 'dowsable effect'?  The book I read stressed that a
question not carefully worded might yield a misinterpreted answer
simply because the 'dowsing effect' was answering the literal
question asked rather than the one intended by the inquisitor.
In other words, what is he asking to find?

Greg ([e-mail])





--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Keelynet File, Lazar, Don't Be Duped
Date: 4 Aug 91 04:50:00 GMT


 * Forwarded from "Alt.Alien.Visitors"
 * Originally from Student Class Account
 * Originally dated 07-31-91 12:02

From: [e-mail] (Student Class Account)
Date: 30 Jul 91 18:14:23 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors


I am disappointed that more healthy scepticism cannot be found in this
newsgroup.  Seldom found is the article that doesn't swallow government
coverup of dealings with alien beings hook line and sinker.  I would be
more than happy to find that alien beings did exist, and that there has
been contact wih humans, but there has been no information presented here
or anywhere that is not wholly circumstantial. tial.  Also, careful reading of
material presented as fact here (see discussion of Lazar's talk and the free
energy system below) casts considerable doubt on the integrity of their
words.  As for the "Channelers", I will not even dignify them with a
discussion.

First, regarding Lazar:

He claims that he is a physicist whose job was to reverse engineer a gravita-
tional drive system.  It was reported to consist of an element that emits
a weak gravity wave (element 115), a resonance chamber in which standing
gravitational waves are set-up, and a system to amplify those waves.  The
drives basic function is to warp the space-time geometry between the ship's
position and its destination.

In review, let me say that gravity waves have been postulated to exist, but
have never been observed.  (A recent LandSat Photo of the Kuwait Oil fires
is claimed to contain ripples showing gravity waves, but they do not fit any
picture of gravity waves as proposed so far).  In any case, the waves may
or may not exist; let us suppose that they do, and that they have wavelengths
between that shown in the LandSat photos and that proposed by several popular
theories: between a Kilometer or so and lengths of the order of planetary
distances.  A resonance chamber for such waves would have to enclose distances
of half the wavelength.  The ship described by Lazar does not contain a device
of this size.  Also, if the ship is able to warp space-time over large
distances, if it like every other warper ever observed in nature, it would
create a potential well large enough to suck he earth and its entire atmo-
sphere into it.  Very unlikely!  If you couple this with the fact that Lazar
was unable to recall the frequency of the gravity wave which is THE basis for
the entire drive system and all its components, his story appears very
unlikely.  He wasn't able to recall whether the frequency was large or small.

Second, look at the paper presented for the "public good".  The entire basis
for his generator is based on a situation which is completely UNTRUE.  In fact,
it violates one of Maxwell's equations, and does not work experimentally. The
fact that it does not work experimentally puzzled physicists from the early
1800's until around 1880.  It was easily explained after Faraday's Law was
discovered.  The basic idea is that a disk is placed in a magnetic field,
oriented so that the field lines are perpendicular to the surface of the
conducting disk.  It is then claimed that if the disk is spun, a potential
will develop between the center of the disk and the outside edge.  This is
just plain WRONG.  While it is true that if a potential is placed across
the distance from the center to the outer edge, a current will flow, and
the disk will spin, the converse is not true.  Only in the case of a varying
magnetic field can a potential develop.  (Faraday's Law: Curl of E = -dB/dt).
This is high school physics!  (Well, maybe first year college level).
It is claimed that the potential that develops is the same as when the disk
is attached to the magnet and spun.  I will give him that, but only in that
they are both identically ZERO.

Well, I'm sure that I have put enough flammable material in his posting.
In short, I would love there to be aliens around, but give me concrete proof!
Thanks for your time and please DON'T BE DUPED.

Rusty

PS:  mail at [e-mail] or [e-mail]

--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re:  What About The Last 44 Years ?read/new
Date: 4 Aug 91 04:52:00 GMT


 * Forwarded from "Alt.Alien.Visitors"
 * Originally from Joe Mastroianni
 * Originally dated 07-30-91 18:01

From: [e-mail] (Joe Mastroianni)
Date: 30 Jul 91 16:43:24 GMT
Organization: Cadence Design Systems, Inc.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors


 I disagree, Don. UFOs are of this world. You're of this world. I'm of
this world. Everyone who has ever seen a UFO is someone of this world.
Whatever is happening to people is of this world. Unfortunately, nobody
in our world community of humans seems to have the slightest idea what
exactly is happening.
 We have no explanation for these weird lights in the sky. We have no
explanation for people who have chunks of skin removed from their legs
in the middle of the night. We people haven't the faintest idea how to
reconcile stories of midnight abductions and needles put into the brain
with our normal lives. One day we're shopping for toilet-paper and Oreo
cookies, the next night we're spirited onto glowing spheres to be operated
on by grey midgets with big almond eyes. What the hell is this stuff?
 What can you say to someone who tells you he was stopped by a UFO on the
way home from the 7-Eleven? You can start by saying he's nuts. But then,
what do you say to the hundreds of thousands of people all over the world
who suddenly get brave enough to tell you their bizzare stories. Is everyone
nuts? If everyone is nuts, then nuts is normal, by the definition of "normal".

   Anyway, if you start trying to describe these events in terms easily
understandable by occult hobbiests, then you are selling the whole thing
short. Nobody knows if these events are caused by beings from the Crab
Nebula or renegade accountants from Burma. The truth is simply: Nobody knows.

   At this late point in our history as a civilization, I think we all can
admit the possiblity of the existence of information and events we have
yet to discover. Whatever this phenomenon is, it isnt something we have
explained yet. Most importantly, we may not be able to explain it in terms
common to our existing pool of scientific knowlege and experience as humans.
If this is true, giving this thing a name simply detracts from its true
nature.

  Joe

>
>The crashed disk was just that..an extraterrestrial craft...not a "secret"
>plane or "weather balloon"...it was real and it did happen. The usual debunker
>explanations are pretty lame and pathetic. In my opinion, "skeptics" and their
>kissin' cousins, the rabid debunkers are LOSING the "UFO's are NOT of this
>world", and "nothing happenned at Roswell to suggest a UFO had crashed"
>arguments.
>
>Don
>
>



--
Joe Mastroianni          AKA: AA6YD  AA6YD @ N6LDL.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA
Cadence Design Systems
Santa Clara Ca.          "Up the airy mountain;down the rushy glen; we
[e-mail]           daren't go a hunting; for fear of little men "

--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: What About The Last 44 Years ?read/new
Date: 4 Aug 91 04:54:00 GMT


 * Forwarded from "Alt.Alien.Visitors"
 * Originally from Steve Gamble X3293
 * Originally dated 07-31-91 17:55

From: [e-mail] (Steve Gamble x3293)
Date: 31 Jul 91 15:47:45 GMT
Organization: MRC Human Genome Mapping Project Resource Centre, Harrow, U.K.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Joe
Mastroianni) writes:

[stuff deleted]
>
>  What can you say to someone who tells you he was stopped by a UFO on the
> way home from the 7-Eleven? You can start by saying he's nuts. But then,
> what do you say to the hundreds of thousands of people all over the world
> who suddenly get brave enough to tell you their bizzare stories. Is everyone
> nuts? If everyone is nuts, then nuts is normal, by the definition of
"normal".
>
[more stuff deleted]

Allen Hynek did an analysis of a largish number of cases and found that
only about 1% fell into his Close Encounter of the Third Kind group. This
would include all the abductions and contactees. An unkind person (not me)
might point out that 1% of the general population suffers from schizophrenia.
The arguement could go something like, if 1% of the general population
have major psychosis then it is this psychotic 1% of witnessess that say
they have been abducted.

I have spoken to a large number of abductees/contactees and very few of
them appear to be 'nuts' (I was recently at Leo Sprinkle's Rocky Mountain
UFO Conference - 135 delegates of which about 100 were abductees/contactees).
When I say they did not appear to be nuts, I should point out that I am
not a psychiatrist.

Amongst the abductees and contactees there were peoplelike doctors,
teachers, and other trades people. I would not have any concern about
using the services of any of these people. They just appeared to be ordinary
people with a very extraordinary story to tell.

But where do we go from here?




--
(Disclaimer: These are not my employer's opinions, they may not even be mine!)

Steve Gamble, Computing Services,
Clinical Research Centre, Watford Road, Harrow, Middlesex, HA1 3UJ, UK.
Phone: [phone]  JANET: [e-mail] INTERNET: [e-mail]

--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: What About The Last 44 Years ?read/new
Date: 4 Aug 91 04:57:00 GMT


 * Forwarded from "Alt.Alien.Visitors"
 * Originally from Joe Mastroianni
 * Originally dated 08-02-91 12:05

From: [e-mail] (Joe Mastroianni)
Date: 1 Aug 91 15:46:57 GMT
Organization: Cadence Design Systems, Inc.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Gamble x3293)
writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Joe
Mastroianni) writes:
>
>[stuff deleted]
>>
>>  What can you say to someone who tells you he was stopped by a UFO on the
>> way home from the 7-Eleven? You can start by saying he's nuts. But then,
>> what do you say to the hundreds of thousands of people all over the world
>> who suddenly get brave enough to tell you their bizzare stories. Is everyone
>> nuts? If everyone is nuts, then nuts is normal, by the definition of
"normal".
>>
>[more stuff deleted]
>
>Allen Hynek did an analysis of a largish number of cases and found that
>only about 1% fell into his Close Encounter of the Third Kind group. This
>would include all the abductions and contactees. An unkind person (not me)
>might point out that 1% of the general population suffers from schizophrenia.
>The arguement could go

[Stuff deleted by me]

>Amongst the abductees and contactees there were peoplelike doctors,
>teachers, and other trades people. I would not have any concern about
>using the services of any of these people. They just appeared to be ordinary
>people with a very extraordinary story to tell.
>
>But where do we go from here?
>
>

 Exactly the point.

 Whatever these people are normal. They are normal and of this world.
Something is happening to them that we seem to have a problem explaining
using our language. Consequently, we have to fit their stories into
interpretations we do understand. Some of these interpretations are:

   - They have been abducted by beings from other planets

   - They have been abducted by beings from this planet

   - They have been abducted by beings from somewhere, but who are
     in cahoots with the U.S. government

   - They have been contacted by ghosts of dead people

   - They have been contacted by beings from another dimension


  Our problem as people is that we are beginning to accept that these
normal people are telling the truth. These people did indeed have
needles stuck into their pineal glands. These people did indeed have
chunks of flesh removed from their extremeties. And once we accept these
things, its scares the sh*t out of us. So we have to go back to either
denying it happened, or accepting it happened and putting a label onto it
that inaccurately describes in our limited terms what they experienced.

  There is a severe sense of helplessness that comes from an understanding
that you can be removed, at any time, from the security of your home and
confort of your electric blanket, to have BBs pushed into your cerebral
cortex. This is not a happy thought. In the past, we called people who
thought these things happened, lunatics and schitzophrenics. This is why
people who think they have experienced such things often shut up. Im
not a psychiatrist either, but this reaction seems similar to what is
exhibited by victims of violent personal crimes.

  ANyway, my point, however obtuse, is that we shouldn't go around
ASSUMING anything about these encounters. When Colombus discovered the
western route to India he was dead wrong. He had no idea where he was
or what he had discovered. The Pacific Ocean and other major planetary
features were FICTION to Europeans of his time.  We have no idea what
is going on. And if there is any truth to our belief that we can be
controlled and manipulated like inanimate objects as these "encounter"
stories suggest, why should be believe we carry from those experiences
any real data?  If these are encounters with superior elements of the
universe and its nature, why do we believe we would know any more than
they would want us to know?

  We are in the freaking dark and we are scared out of our minds.


  Joe
--
Joe Mastroianni          AKA: AA6YD  AA6YD @ N6LDL.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA
Cadence Design Systems
Santa Clara Ca.          "Up the airy mountain;down the rushy glen; we
[e-mail]           daren't go a hunting; for fear of little men "

--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Miscellaneous
Date: 4 Aug 91 19:10:00 GMT


 > From: vanth![e-mail] (Jim Shaffer)


 > Michael Corbin:  Please post any further Usenet discussion of the alleged
 > signals detected in Australia.  I hadn't heard anything in the media, and I
 > don't get sci.astro (right now my feed is having trouble and I'm not
 > getting anything as a matter of fact.)

I have requested further information via Internet.  I will post here as soon
as I hear more.

Mike

--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Roswell Incident -- So =that's= What It Was!
Date: 4 Aug 91 22:22:00 GMT


 * Forwarded from "Misc.Headlines"
 * Originally from Charles Packer
 * Originally dated 08-04-91 11:56

From: [e-mail] (Charles Packer)
Date: 4 Aug 91 11:11:17 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Independence
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,soc.history,misc.headlines

The Roswell incident was the high water mark of the famous
flying saucer (more typically, flying disk) craze of 1947 that
began the UFO age. The first sighting, as everyone knows, was
when a Boise businessman-pilot saw nine disks over the Cascade
Mountains in Washington on June 24. Sightings spread, and by
July 6 it was front-page news for the New York Times, with 43
states reporting them. Sightings were starting to be reported in
other countries also. The Roswell "weather balloon" incident
first made news on July 7.

It turns out that there were precursor incidents, however. In
1946 and early 1947, the testing of V-2s at White Sands was
covered fairly well by the Times. One rocket went astray and
exploded in Mexico. There were other mishaps. Also, reports came
from Sweden during that time that rockets were seen flying over
Stockholm. The implication was, in the little that I read of
those stories, that people suspected that the Soviets were
testing rockets at Peenemunde.

Anyway, as I browsed the July, 1947 issues of the Times and the
Albuquerque Journal, I was intrigued by one item in particular
that "points up," as journalists say, the way the press first
teased the public before laughing at them. On July 6, the NY
Times included in a longer story an item to the effect that

   An unidentified "scientist in nuclear physics" at
   the California Institute of Technology was quoted
   today as suggesting the flying saucers might be the
   result of "transmutation of atomic energy" experiments.
   But Dr. C.C. Lauritsen, head of Caltech's nuclear
   physics department denied the source was a member
   of his staff.

The Associated Press dispatch as published in the Journal
handled the denial by Cal Tech this way:

   Cal Tech later issued a denial that one of its
   scientists had suggested the saucers might be
   experiments in "transmutation of atomic energy."
   Dr. C.C. Lauritsen, head of the school's nuclear
   physics department, said he believed the discs
   "have nothing to do with nuclear physics."

There is a subtle difference here. The AP material --
and most of the world saw it, not the Times -- seems to say
that yes, a Cal Tech scientist did say the saucers were about
=something,= if not about "transmutation." Lauritsen's remark
seems to be a response to the unnamed scientist.

The Journal's use of the AP dispatch was not subtle at all.
Their front-page headline heralding the latest developments that
day said

   Atomic Energy Experiments
   Explain 'Flying Saucer',
   Says Scientist; More In Sky

Later in the story, which contained several saucer-related
items, they had the same scientist asserting that the saucers
"are twenty feet in width at the center and are partially
rocket-propelled on the take-off...Such flying disks actually
are in experimental existence."

Experimental existence? Interesting phrase. Maybe it's a
clue to the ultimate nature of the flying saucer scare.
Their "existence" was an experiment. They existed, all right.
In minds -- of the people who planted the stories and of
the journalists who went along with the game. Something we
would call a "hidden agenda" today. It was a time of mass
hysteria and of concern about the effects of "propaganda."
A few years later there would be mass illnesses in factories,
attributed to "mass hypnosis." Would it be out of order
to suggest that some of these frenzies were experimentally
produced?

--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: [e-mail] (Kay Schaney)
Subject: Re: Media
Date: 5 Aug 91 04:42:00 GMT



Well I wrote to Jack Rickard at boardwatch magazine for permission to
quote from the article about Soviet BBS's. He gave me permission as
long as this full reference was attached.
Boardwatch Magazine
5970 South Vivian St.
Littleton, CO 80127
1-800-933-6038
Subscription Rate $36.00 per year
I'm not quoting the entire article as most of it isn't relevant to
this echo. I do recommend the magazine to anyone interested in
Electronic BBS's and Online Information Services. So here is the
information on how to call a Soviet BBS from the May 1991 issue of
Boardwatch:
During our last visit, we noted that there was no means to direct dial
a bulletin board system within the Soviet Union. You had to dial an
international operator and let them place the call for you, switching
over to data by entering ATX1 D on your terminal once you actually
heard a modem tone. Moscow is direct dial but anything outside of
Moscow, ..., is a dialing adventure.
Most long distance carriers can't make really make this connection so
you must use AT&T eventually. To avoid the ususal runaround, just dial
102880 to get the AT&T operator from the beginning. And the call
requires a bit of setup.
Plug a normal telephone handset into the telephone RJ-11 jack on your
modem. Setup your terminal for *N1 and the baud rate desired. Type in
ATX1 D on the terminal program but don't press ENTER yet. Dial 102880
to get the operator. Give the operator the number you are trying to
reach. You might mention that you are dialing a data number and she
should expect a modem tone. When you hear the tone, press the enter
key on your system and the link should make within a few seconds.
Carefully hangup the handset - although most modems will disconnect
the handset anyway.
The least expensive time to call is between 0200 and 0700 AM MST.
There are only half a dozen trunks to the Soviet Union so it is quite
common to be notified that all lines are busy and to try your call
later.
--
Kay Schaney - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



********To have your comments in the next issue, send electronic mail to********
                      'infopara' at the following address:

UUCP  {ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara
DOMAIN  [e-mail]

 For administrative requests (subscriptions, back issues) send to:

UUCP            {ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara-request
DOMAIN          [e-mail]
 To obtain back issues by anonymous ftp, connect to:

DOMAIN          ftp.uiowa.edu (directory /archives/paranet)

******************The**End**of**Info-ParaNet**Newsletter************************