2,000 Greater & Lesser Mysteries/2,000 Greater and Lesser Mysteries.iso/ufo/paranet/mys02375.txt

Text File | 1994-06-10 | 778.9 KB | 19,595 lines

                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 404

                             Friday, May 17th 1991

Today's Topics:

                       Getting Smart About Getting Smarts
                               SANTA FE UFO'S 1980
                               Re: Csicop members
                            Re: Statements of accepta
                              Stranger Than Science
                            Re: Extraordinary claims
                          Re: Statements of acceptance
                                   Re: (NONE)
                            Re: Stranger Than Science
                   Re: Discussion of statements of acceptance
                                   WALTER.SAL
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                              ARTHUR C. CLARK SHOW
                     Re: Getting Smart About Getting Smarts
                                    GB paper
                                Re: Miscellaneous
                            Re: ARTHUR C. CLARK SHOW
                          alien alloys/green fireballs

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Getting Smart About Getting Smarts
Date: 10 May 91 23:04:00 GMT


 > From: Paul Carr <[e-mail]>
 >
 > Could we start a discussion about Zen Faulkes article in the last
 > SE on the subject of extraterrestrial life (Spring 1991)?  I sense
 > that his reasoning is specious, but I've yet to nail down my
 > counterargument.
 > If anyone is interested, I will try to summarize the article for those
 > who don't have access to SE (anyone seriously interested in the
 > Paranormal should pop for the $15/yr, though).  BTW, same issue carries
 > an interview with Dr. Thomas R. McDonough, the astrophysicist who heads
 > up SETI.

By all means.  I would be interested in the article and the discussion.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: SANTA FE UFO'S 1980
Date: 10 May 91 03:49:00 GMT



SANTA FE UFO'S 1980

I am interested in corresponding with anyone who has information on
UFO sightings that may have occurred in the Santa Fe, NM area in
the fall of 1980, particularly during the months of Oct. and Nov.
(I am aware of the Kirtland AFB sightings in Albuquerque, and the
Cimarron abduction-mutilation case of that year. I do not feel that
these reports are relevant to my investigation.)

This information is needed to help corroborate the testimony of a
possible abduction case I have been directly involved with over the
past year. Any help from Paranet(sm) users would be greatly
appreciated. Please respond to this message #, or contact me
directly as per the following:

Sincerely,


Sheldon Wernikoff

9200 Niles Center Road
Skokie, IL 60076-1548
708-677-5154  FAX [phone]
--
Sheldon Wernikoff - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Tender)
Subject: Re: Csicop members
Date: 6 May 91 22:53:01 GMT

>>      Once again, Rick, your claim that I disregarded a fact is without
>> foundation. Although I surmised CSICOP was a committee since CSICOP is
>> an acronym for "Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims
>> of the Paranormal", I did not know that members of CSICOP
>> sub-committees:  1) were not members of CSICOP
>>  2) would have no knowledge of CSICOP viewpoints
>>  3) would not support the majority of such viewpoints even if known
>>  4) would nevertheless use the CSICOP cachet

 RM> P.S.:  Your supposition that unstated but hinted-at members of
 RM> CSICOP subcommittees have no knowledge of CSICOP "viewpoints"
 RM> (what _is_ a "CSICOP viewpoint"?), would not support the

     CSICOP viewpoint: a theory or explanation of events or phenomena
proposed by a CSICOP member (or associate) and unchallenged by any other
CSICOP member (or associate). (from *JT's Big Book of Definitions*, 1991
edition)

 RM> majority of those "viewpoints", and "would nevertheless use the
 RM> CSICOP cachet" (whatever that means) is entirely your own.

     cachet (ka-shay'): 1) a stamp or official seal, as on a document.
2) any sign of official approval, or of quality, prestige, etc. 3) a
design, slogan, advertisement, etc., stamped or printed on mail. (from
*Webster's New World Dictionary*, 1987 pocket edition.)

     I'd say the second definition covers it.

     I didn't mean to imply that *all* (or even a majority, or even a
significant number) of the non-member members, or even the actual
members, fell into this category; I was just surprised (well not just
surprised but utterly astounded) that *any* of them would. You, by your
own admission, do.

 ... from the purlieus of Pittsburgh
--
John Tender - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Tender)
Subject: Re: Statements of accepta
Date: 6 May 91 22:58:09 GMT

>>      I assume that you know this is a public forum, and that persons
>> other than Jim read your posting, and that persons other than Jim can
>> reply.

 RM> You assume right, although rather pointlessly.

     Glad you agree. If you had the capacity to remember your own posts,
the point would have been clear.

>>  RM> I see you are still trying to imply something about my allegedly
>>  RM> deleting download files or listing them classified according to
>>  RM> credibility, something I never said I did, and have in fact
>>  RM> specifically said I don't.
>>
>>      Anyone following the discussion will remember it like this: If
>> such classification is made, it should be made on the basis of
>> explicit criteria.

 RM> Anyone telling sysops how to run their boards should go hang.

     And anyone telling "creation scientists" how to do science should do
likewise, eh? That's very reasonable, Rick.

>>      I'm not a member of CSICOP either, not even a non-member member
>> of a CSICOP sub-committee, so I'm not all too familiar with their
>> current views. Are there any files available that would yield useful
>> information in this area?

 RM> None known to me.  You might ask them.  What am I, by the way,
 RM> your personal research librarian?  Call them up, for heaven's
 RM> sake; they're in the 'phone book for Buffalo.

     Once upon a time, I thought you were someone interested in
providing information and openly discussing that information; I have
since discarded that myth-based assessment. Instead, I find you are only
interested in twisting any comment or question into some sort of
personal attack, and have no interest in providing substantive
information. So be it.

>>      Here's another idea I am, though again roundaboutly, suggesting:
>> Have CSICOP issue a CD-ROM with all back issues of the "Inquirer",
>> plus all books of Klass, Sheaffer, and Oberg (and anyone else who is
>> associated with CSICOP).

 RM> Try suggesting it to CSICOP.  I believe I gave you their
 RM> address.

 RM> Best Regards,
 RM> Rick Moen
 RM> Secretary, Bay Area Skeptics
 RM> Member, Electronic Communications Subcommittee, CSICOP

     Why not add "BTW, I know very little about CSICOP, and am not a
real member" at the end here, in the interest of accuracy.

 ... from the purlieus of Pittsburgh
--
John Tender - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Tender)
Subject: Stranger Than Science
Date: 7 May 91 03:03:58 GMT


 LB> Jim:
 LB>    You could be right about the book.  I don't know where I
 LB>  spotted that info about the farmer, only that it "stayed with
 LB>  me."  I'll let you know if I run across the story again.
 LB>             Linda

     I think the book you're referring to is:

Edwards, Frank T, (1959). Stranger Than Science. Citadel Press (Secaucus,
    N.J.). (0-8065-0850-7)


     The first story is "The Mystery of David Lang" and concerns
the curious disappearance of Mr. Lang.

     This allegedly took place on September 23, 1880, at Lang's 40 acre
farm just outside Gallatin, Tennessee. Lang had just stepped off the
porch and was crossing the front lawn to meet an approaching buggy.
Quoting Edwards:


         "David Lang had not taken more than half a dozen steps
     when he disappeared in full view of all those present. Mrs.
     Lang screamed. The children, too startled to realize what had
     happened, stood mutely. Instinctively, they all ran toward the
     spot where Lang had last been seen a few seconds before....
     There was not a tree, not a bush, not a hole to mar the
     surface. And not a single clue to indicate what had happened
     to David Lang."


     Of course, a search was conducted and the ground was tested for
sinkholes, etc., but Lang never was found. But, in April 1881, seven
months after the disappearance:


          "The children noticed that at the spot where he had last
     been seen, there was a circle of stunted yellow grass some
     fifteen feet in diameter. On that evening as they stood beside
     the circle, eleven-year-old Sarah called to their father; and,
     to their astonishment, the youngsters heard his voice ...
     calling faintly for help ... over and over ... until it faded
     away, forever."


     I've never come across an account of this event anywhere else, and
judging by Edwards other entries in the book, it's prudent to regard
them as good stories.


 ... from the purlieus of Pittsburgh
--
John Tender - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Tender)
Subject: Re: Extraordinary claims
Date: 6 May 91 23:11:55 GMT


 RM> As I said, in the increasingly unlikely event that you are
 RM> interested in a substantive discussion of the philosophy of
 RM> science, I will consider discussing it with you in a more
 RM> appropriate forum, such as one of the science-related echoes or
 RM> newsgroups.

     Just a few weeks ago you accused me of having launched a
two-year-long "smear campaign" against you, beginning in those very
echoes to which you now suggest we move. Why are you now *contradicting*
yourself in offering to discuss this further at all?

     Unless, of course, you made up my long history of distortion and
personal attack as a way to disguise the weakness of your own arguments.

 RM> As you are probably aware, most effective moderating is in fact
 RM> done by individuals deciding that their own postings belong in
 RM> a more appropriate forum, and this is in fact the only way in
 RM> which on-topic discussion can be maintained, realistically.

     It's also a useful technique in weaseling out of a discussion, once
one has found themself in an untenable position.



 ... from the purlieus of Pittsburgh
--
John Tender - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Tender)
Subject: Re: Statements of acceptance
Date: 7 May 91 03:13:40 GMT


 N> In _Report on Communion_ by Ed Conroy, Phil Klass stated
 N> specifically the proof that he wanted. What follows is
 N> reproduced without permission, but it's short.

     [quotation omitted]

 N>         Obviously, Klass is relying on others' scientific
 N>  expertise to make his decision, but as an editor of Aviation
 N>  Week magazine, relying on scientific reports made by mainstream
 N>  organizations is part of his job. So long as there is an
 N>  alternative to claiming that we are being visited by other
 N>  planets, Klass will take it.

     Klass must have criteria for choosing the organizations he puts his
trust in. Does he give any details of that criteria?

     I'm not familiar with the NAS; do they actually release official
statements about the validity of scientific theories or explanations?

     How does Klass' "statement of proof" differ in any respects from,
lets say, someone saying that they will only accept the pronouncement of
the Catholic Church concerning the validity of demon possession?

 ... from the purlieus of Pittsburgh
--
John Tender - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: (NONE)
Date: 11 May 91 03:33:00 GMT

Hi Pete,
Seemsas if something is always being written about
Bentwaters/Rendlesham.  I receive a magazine called UFO UNIVERSE (pit
put, that is, out by Timothy Green Beckley).  The Aug/Sept issue which
I received two days ago has a 7-page article on Bentwaters.  I haven't
had a chance to read it yet.  The jist of it has Jenny Randles from
England giving one point of view and some American military
eyewitnesses giving theirs.  I can't tell you any more than that and
whether or not Randles adds anything to what she wrote in her book
called THE UFO CONSPIRACY.
   I don't even know what to think of most of what I see in this
particular magazine.  It seems to be eclectic in its approach.
   Maybe I can write a brief synopsis of this article in the next week
or so....
   Thanks, Pete.
        Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Stranger Than Science
Date: 11 May 91 03:42:00 GMT

Hi John
       My goodness!  That's the account of the story that I
remember---exactly!  It's amazing how many of us remember that
story.
       Just to throw a "monkey wrench" in here - - - it's interesting
to see that a "large circle, 15 feet in diameter" was left at the spot
where he disappeared.  In the light of the crop circle mysteries that
we are seeing today, I wonder if there's any connection...
       Of course it could just be a good story.  Just recently someone
else posted some information about this story (how one reporter got it
from someone and didn't check out the facts).
       A million thanks for posting your information.  It brings back
memories.
       Take care,
               Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Doug Rogers)
Subject: Re: Discussion of statements of acceptance
Date: 11 May 91 09:53:18 GMT


 > The vitriolic exchanges between Mr. Moen and Mr. Tender
 > are BORING.
 > If these two gentleman don't like each other, that is their
 > problem.

I couldn't agree more.

And I have ALMOST put a stop to it on several occasions.

The reason I have allowed it to continue is a (possibly vain) hope
that between the two of them, they will contribute something in the
way of thoughtful guidelines for evaluation of ideas and "proofs".

I continue to post the guidelines for Paranet monthly.  I assume all
members have access to the document, and READ IT.

I will attempt to monitor this conversation a bit more closely, and
if it grows beyond the current levels will contact the participants
directly.

Thanks for your input.

Doug Rogers
Echo Moderator


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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: WALTER.SAL
Date: 10 May 91 17:40:02 GMT


 > 8)   The Salisberrys say that on March 17, (Photo 36 L & R),
 > that
 > "Frances did not emerge from the bushes at the same time
 > as Mr. Walters and hence had ample time to have hidden
 > away the model and other paraphernalia involved."  THIS IS A
 > FALSE STATEMENT.  THE WITNESSES CONFIRM UNANIMOUSLY
 > THAT FRANCES WAS BEHIND ED WITHIN SECONDS (five or ten
 > seconds at the most).  Eight people, including Frances, stood
 > in front of Ed's truck headlights to watch the film develop.

  Interesting. I have directly from Duane Cook (a witness) that the
Walters' position and the area of the parking lot where Ed's truck was
parked was out of sight of the witnesses for several minutes.
  Also, to directly address the above, Cook told Don Ware who relayed
to me that Frances did *not* come out of the bushes "within seconds."
  Interesting that what was unanimous in February wasn't unanimous
back in July.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 10 May 91 17:42:03 GMT


 >
 > 9)  The Salisberrys say (in ref. to March 17, photos 36 L & R),
 > that "None of the witnesses recorded the numbers!" The
 > Salisberrys attribute this statement to Charles Flannigan.  It
 > is a reference to the numbers on the back of the film.  CHARLES
 > FLANNIGAN SAID "IT IS A COMPLETELY FALSE AND MISLEADING
 > STATEMENT."

  Bruce M. told me in September or so that Ed himself wrote down the
numbers, *not* any of the witnesses.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 10 May 91 17:44:04 GMT


  Interesting how the waters get muddier and muddier.
  Speaking of muddy, Charles Somerby first told investigators that he
object he saw was about two miles away, then later insisted (and still
insists) that he saw an Ed-type object about 200 yards away. That was
after the photos were published.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 10 May 91 17:46:05 GMT


 > I felt it necessary to present this material even though I don't
 > agree. The last line says critics ignore the hundreds of other
 > witnesses who report seeing the UFO. I still wonder why only one
 > person can time after time get photos of the UFO while others
 > get nothing?

  It is rather strange. I mentioned elsewhere (possibly to you) that
Ray G. suggested that we consider the idea of a joke that turns into
reality.
  Note that Ed hasn't taken any more close shots of craft, just red
lights like everyone else.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: ARTHUR C. CLARK SHOW
Date: 10 May 91 18:40:48 GMT

After the last time I mentioned this show a few people said he's a debunker.
This weeks show he reviews (the whole half hour) the Siberian explosion at
Tungusa(sp?) and the people he interviews come down to the conclusion it was
either a comet or nuclear or unknown, but they rulled out a meteor.
Interesting part is the simulation that determined it was an air blast. If
anyone wants me to watch it from the tape, and make accurate notes, I'd be
happy to do so. By the way on the same date in 1908 there were numerous
reports all over the world of daylight like light well into the night, so it
was not localized.

The film footage of the first expidetion in 1928 (yes twenty years after the
event) is very good. The second investigation was in the 50's I believe. Now
they go up there on an annual basis. I'm not so sure this is UFO, or
Paranormal in nature, but it sure is unusual.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Getting Smart About Getting Smarts
Date: 13 May 91 06:09:00 GMT

Paul,
   I hate to be a nitpicker -- but --I believe the magazine you are
referring to (SE) is really SI - The Skeptical Inquirer.  That is their
spelling.  And yep, it certainly is interesting.  Looking forward to
your posting.
       Respectfully,
               Linda B.
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: GB paper
Date: 12 May 91 05:27:00 GMT


  Anyone interested in the Gulf Breeze incidents, be sure and get a
copy of Bruce Maccabee's paper to be presented to the MUFON symposium
in July.
  It's about the "other" incidents, and it'll knock your socks off.
  Bruce's paper should be included in the symposium Proceedings, which
will be available from MUFON.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Date: 12 May 91 18:49:00 GMT

Thanks for that account of the Tucson Congress, Dan. Unfortunately, the
only report I got was of a woman who claimed to be from Venus. Largely
because of her and a few others of her ilk, the Congress got bad press.
The AP story included none of the reports you mentioned. Why can't we
have "New Age"-oriented conventions and science-oriented conventions,
and never the twain shall meet? This doesn't denigrate the more
spiritual aspects, it simply sets up a "separate-but-equal" status.
This may be improper in the racial context, but I certainly see
benefits in the UFO context.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: ARTHUR C. CLARK SHOW
Date: 12 May 91 19:16:00 GMT

Technically its UFO related, since one of the more popular theories was
that it was a nuclear-powered spacecraft that exploded. This was
popularized by one of the Russian investigators, who also was a science
fiction writer.

I do not consider Clarke a debunker. He has made some statements in the
past that show he is not above acknowledging genuine anomalies. For the
most part, however, he is highly skeptical of UFO claims. That, in
itself, does not equate to "debunker."

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



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


From: violet.berkeley.edu!chalmers
Subject: alien alloys/green fireballs
Date: 17 May 91 13:34:34 GMT

From: [e-mail] (John H. Chalmers Jr.)

Pete Porro: Can you expand on magnesium and green meteors or
can you post any references to the spectra of the green fireballs
seen since the 1940's in the S.W. US?
I am not aware that magnesium or its compounds emits green
light when heated. Mg metal burning in air or oxygen gives off a
dazzling white light. In nature Mg is always combined, usually
as the silicate, ocasionally on the earth also as the carbonate
(with calcium in Dolomite), as a chloride (with KCL or in sea
water), or sulfate (Epsom Salts). I don't know the emission
spectra of these compounds, but I would expect MgO and Mg Silicate
vapors (expected in meteor trails) to emit only whitish, continuum
radiation because of the high temperatures involved.

 The brillian colors seen in fireworks are actually rather
special cases and hard to duplicate in nature because at
high temperatures atomic and continuum emissions dominate, so the
light turns whitish. The red and blue colors are due to emission
from excited strontium and copper containing molecules (SrOH, SrCL,
for red and CuCL, blue). These molecules are thermally fragile,
so pyrotechnic flames are relatively cool. Sodium atoms emit
yellow light, but burning lithium at high temperature looks white.
Green fire is usually from barium compounds, but burning metallic
Zinc dust can also produce green light. At low flame temperatures,
boron compounds can too. Copper without chlorine also produces green
colors. Antimony, mercury, and arsenic compounds are sometimes also
used in fireworks, though I don't know if they are still legal.
I'm sorry that I don't know the temperature dependence of the spectra
of these other elements and their compounds. Can anybody help?
--- John

********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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 405

                             Tuesday, May 21st 1991

Today's Topics:

                     Re: Meier, Stevens, Tucson and the Moon
                       Re: TV shows on Paranormal subjects
                            AP report on Stevens' gig
                       Meier, Stevens, Tucson And The Moon
                     Re: Meier, Stevens, Tucson and the Moon
                       Re: TV shows on Paranormal subjects
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                Re: MISCELLANEOUS
                        Re: 'UFO Abductions' show on CBS
                              Re: Internet Mailings
                                     Woo-woo
                                  CROP CIRCLES
                            Re: ARTHUR C. CLARK SHOW
                               Dr. Marina Popovich
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                  Miscellaneous
                              ARTHUR C. CLARK SHOW
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Meier, Stevens, Tucson and the Moon
Date: 14 May 91 00:48:00 GMT

Dan:


> hundreds of high-tech patents and one of the top crystallographers in
> the country. His work was central to the development of magnetic media
> for computers (hard and floppy disks) and liquid crystal display
> devices. In recent years he devoted himself to exploring some of the
> lesser-known properties of crystals, including many that have been
> poo-poohed by 'scientists' without so much as a wisp of an attempt at
> honest research.

I think what Jim is saying is that Vogel represented himself as "Dr.
Vogel" when he does not in fact possess a doctorate degree. Also, what
lesser-known properties of crystals did he discover that have been
pooh-poohed?

> I can't verify this, but the story I heard was that Vogel made the
> mistake of submitting the sample to a certain government agency for
> independent analysis, and that was the last he ever saw of it.

The story as I know it is that he loaned a sample to Bill Moore, who
simply never returned it. Course, Moore could be lying....but then,
so could "Dr." Vogel. Bill actually showed me a small sample of metal
once, which he claims was the Meier sample. He keeps it in one
of those coin purses that opens like a mouth when you press on the
sides. The sample was a dead ringer for a piece of tin covered with lead
solder.

> little patience with contactees claiming benevolent, interdimensional,
> spiritually-oriented or otherwise complex experiences, though the
> latter have always been more tolerant of the former.

A little *evidence*, Dan. That's ALL we ask. Just a little
non-contradictory evidence, like we have in other cases. We have PLENTY
of patience - we've been at this for forty-four years!

> Stevens has had a reputation for honoring the *entire* spectrum of
> reports, which has always irked those of the narrowly
> materialist-reductionist persuation.

Without some filtering process, every single claim becomes valid,
effectively invalidating all of them.

> Others lost faith (i.e., didn't want to be associated with him) after
> he was convicted of child-molestation a few years back -- which
> occurred after he refused to lay off a certain crashed-saucer case
> after repeated warnings.

Several individuals who know Stevens personally have told me that, as
much as they like Wendelle, the charges were valid. They had visited him
and seen scantily-clad adolescent girls hanging around for no apparent
reason.

> neither I nor anyone else has ever been able to find the least fault
> with his mid-1970's photos. Those pictures are probably the most
> extensively and repeatedly analyzed in the entire history of ufology,

Does this include the ones seen in the book, "Contact from the Pleiades,
Vol. 2"? There are photos in that book that are so obviously fakes, Dan,
that I flat-out refuse to countenance any claims for authenticity. Call
me pigheaded, but that shot of the Volvo hubcap with the Christmas
ornaments hanging "over" the VW van (in reality held right in front of
the camera in order to look larger) was a joke. I hope you're not
referring to that.

We've been down this road before, I know, but I couldn't let your
comments go by without answer. You know I still have an open mind (which
to me signifies not that I haven't come to a conclusion, but that my
conclusion is subject to amendment at any time). If you want to continue
a discussion about Meier, I'm all ears, and I've already learned a great
deal from you (I accept your criticisms of KKK, for example). I hope,
though, that you can present something more convincing than that "SOME
of his photos haven't been found to be fakes."

Jim


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: TV shows on Paranormal subjects
Date: 14 May 91 05:34:00 GMT

Thanks for the warning, Mike!

To All: If you see a program listing for something that would be of interest
to ParaNet users, P-L-E-A-S-E post it, even if its just local! What else is
a computer network for??!?

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Burke)
Subject: AP report on Stevens' gig
Date: 14 May 91 07:56:00 GMT


 > Thanks for that account of the Tucson Congress, Dan.
 > Unfortunately, the only report I got was of a woman who
 > claimed to be from Venus. Largely because of her and a few
 > others of her ilk, the Congress got bad press. The AP story
 > included none of the reports you mentioned.
 >                       ...
 > Jim

Jim:
       I read the AP report as well.  I requested permission to
post it here, but they wanted $50 and an indemnification
agreement (for libel suits).

       I think that Wendelle Stevens deserves all of the blame
for why that "Congress" got bad press, assuming that he made the
decisions as to who the speakers would be.  (Since he put up
$61,000 for the conference, I would think this was the case.)
The AP article said that he defended the credibility of *all* the
speakers.  The fact that the guy puts on a Loonie who calls
herself "Omnec Onec" and who claims to be from the planet Venus
is consistent with his recent effort to resurrect the George
Adamski case.  (He has a new book out on the infamous author of
_Saucermen from Venus_.)

       I wonder where that guy gets all the money for spewing so
much trash into the ufological data base.  His new magazine _UFO
Journal of Facts_ is obviously a very expensive thing to publish
with the expensive, glossy, full-color format and many full-page
photos.  It must have cost a fortune to send out so many "free
sample" issues to people like me.  His pension as a retired USAF
Col. must only be about 20k/year and his books usually are
published at a rate of about 2000 per title.  So where does all
this money come from?  The sale of "Beamship Trainee" bumper
stickers and UFO yo-yos?  Maybe we should have some "Space Cadet"
propeller beanies on sale at the MUFON convention this summer :-)

      Anyway, the AP reporter found at least one guy there (Tim
Petro) who considered the event "too far out", in spite of the
fact that he had been to a number of UFO lectures before.  When
Stevens "loads the deck" with Jokers, he not only makes a farce
of the conference but he makes the entire subject of ufology look
utterly inane.  I'm beginning to wonder if that isn't the point.
                                          --  John

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Burke)
Subject: Meier, Stevens, Tucson And The Moon
Date: 14 May 91 08:17:00 GMT


 * Forwarded from "ParaNet UFO"
 * Originally from John Burke
 * Originally dated 05-13-91  0:53

Dan Drasin writes:

 > As a professional photographer I can tell you without a
 > shadow of a
 > doubt that photos presented by Meier after 1980 were
 > contrived. But
 > neither I nor anyone else has ever been able to find the
 > least fault
 > with his mid-1970's photos. Those pictures are probably the
 > most
 > extensively and repeatedly analyzed in the entire history
 > of ufology,
 > and so far nobody has been able to shoot them down, either
 > technically
 > or circumstantially.

You didn't mention the 8mm movie footage, though.  Dr. Bruce Maccabee wrote an
article for the _IUR_ a couple of years ago, entitled "The Pendulum from the
Pleaides".  In this report of his examination of the movie footage of the
saucer circling the tree, he demonstrated that the "UFO" was actually a
pendulum on a string.  He even demonstrated how long the string was.

                                     --  John

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Meier, Stevens, Tucson and the Moon
Date: 14 May 91 06:20:00 GMT

Dan,
   Thanks for taking time to answer my questions; now I'll answer one
of yours.  The address of FOR THE PEOPLE magazine is:
   Peoples Network, Inc.
   Telford Hotel, 3 River Street
   White Springs, FL   32096

The head of this organization (Chuck Harder) also has a radio show
that can be heard across the USA --sorta like Rush Limbaugh --althought
I have not tried to locate it here on Phoenix stations.  Harder doesn't
talk only about UFO's, but consumer issues as well.  It seems to be a
popular show/magazine in Florida (from whence it all originates).
         That is all I know.
      Thanks again,

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: TV shows on Paranormal subjects
Date: 14 May 91 06:29:00 GMT

Jim and Other Folks -
   I hope my posting about the new amusement center at Universal
Studios is still on the board!  It features a "bicycle trip across the
face of the Moon with E.T. who takes us for a trip to his home planet."
   As I said, "If Hollywood can tell us about UFO's and E.T.'s, why
can't Uncle Sam?"
   As usual,
              Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 12 May 91 16:48:18 GMT

Well to answer some of your collection of replys. I wonder how large a batch
of film is at Polaroid? To be more specific, go to the store (which I will
do) and look, are all the packages numbered from the same batch? No great
trick to buy two or six film packs, one is doctored as necessary. Next go out
with the witnesses, show them the sealed pack, note the numbers with their
confirmation. Next when they go out of view, swap the doctored pack, and snap
a picture of a UFO (the one that was prepared in advance of course). And the
batch numbers match!

Second, which I may or may not have mentioned, an overlay on top of the
film, will make an image, just like a contact print. So the photographer has
a positive of a UFO with clear background otherwise, slide it in front of the
film, snap picture, out pops the film and the overlay, put it back in your
pocket and see the nice composite shot. I have seen this at trade shows where
they take my photo, lettering is superimposed, the resulting photo is placed
on a badge. Not too difficult.

One of the questions that stands out in my mind is how can one person, at
will, go out and get a nice clear photo of a UFO, when for years people wait
and try and get nothing or blurs? Terribly suspicious in my opinion.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: MISCELLANEOUS
Date: 12 May 91 16:55:50 GMT

I'll look for the book on Serios, thanks. As for your report on the World
UFO conference... WOW! I hope to see the tapes some day. Maybe someone can
buy a set and rent them to others for say $12 for a week. (includes UPS one
way) I'd even do it myself if there was some way I knew I would not have to
drive to Kalamazoo to retrieve them. (lets see, deposit your first born child
as security deposit? <grin>) When the videos are released please drop a note
on ordering information, I may still attempt this project.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: 'UFO Abductions' show on CBS
Date: 18 May 91 04:25:56 GMT

The program that aired this evening was fairly well done.  The first section of
the segment dealt with the Travis Walton abduction and basically recanted the
same stuff that we have thorough knowledge of.  The second section dealt with
the Alan Godfrey incident.  I found this to be very interesting.  I think it
was Don Ecker that was asking about this one a while back.  I would be
interested in hearing more on this.  The third one deals with a more
contemporary case involving Salter and son.  Has anyone any further knowledge
of this one?

Finally, my VCR puked.  If anyone has a good copy of the segment, I would like
to arrange to get it.

Mike




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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Shaffer)
Subject: Re: Internet Mailings
Date: 14 May 91 07:12:00 GMT

Thanks, Mike.  As it turns out, I sent a message to the administrative
address, and jrblack sent me a message saying that a while ago one of the
mailings to me bounced so he took me off the list.  I haven't figured out
why it bounced though.  He said he got an "unknown user" message.  Not from
*my* system he didn't!

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Moderator's Note: Jim, he didn't, I did and it was from your site for
some reason. I resent it from here by hand and the same again. (pixies?) :-)
-Cyro
--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: ncar!apple.com!well!ddrasin
Subject: Woo-woo
Date: 18 May 91 09:33:08 GMT

From: well![e-mail] (Dan Drasin)

+ From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)

+ Thanks for that account of the Tucson Congress, Dan. Unfortunately, the
+ only report I got was of a woman who claimed to be from Venus.

It is not for me to say whether or not she came from Venus (!) but
for sure the press coverage was just what one might expect.


+ Why can't we have 'New Age'-oriented conventions and
+ science-oriented conventions, and never the twain shall meet? This
+ doesn't denigrate the more spiritual aspects, it simply sets up a
+ 'separate-but-equal' status. This may be improper in the racial
+ context, but I certainly see benefits in the UFO context.

Very good question, Jim. Problem is, different people have very
different ideas about the meaning of 'new age,' "spiritual," etc. To
many mainstreamers, for example, anything remotely ufological falls
right smack dab in the middle of the new-age 'woo-woo' spectrum.

Since everyone's perception is unique, it may not be such a bad
thing for contexts to overlap. I think it's more important for
people to be tolerant of, and to listen to, each other, than it is
to create more compartmentalization and more walls, more judgements
and more 'us-and-them' thinking. IMHO, we have enough of those
already. If we aren't forced to recognize other contexts, we'll
*never* achieve the critical mass of interdisciplinary,
intercontextual communication that's a *minimum* requirement for
solving the multidimensional UFO riddle. Some 'woo-woo' might be the
price we have to pay for this, but the alternative would seem to be
a situation that could set our understanding back many decades...
and that is no doubt precisely what some people would like to have
happen.

Comments?

=d=

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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: CROP CIRCLES
Date: 15 May 91 02:46:00 GMT




   THE ARTIFICIAL PRODUCTION OF PLASMA-VORTEX QUINTUPLET CIRCLES

                                 by

                         Sheldon L. Wernikoff


     An important advance in experimental research on the circles
effect has resulted from observations of the motion of vortices in
a gas-filled chamber. The experiments concern the production of
quintuplet circle sets by the impact of plasma vortices upon an
anode.

     The experiments are conducted using Tesla-generated high
voltage, low frequency currents in an inert mixture of neon and
argon gas. At certain frequencies around 150 KHZ, plasma vortices
form. The vortices are rendered luminous by the excitation of the
neon-argon mixture. The anode is spherical in shape, approximately
40mm in diameter, and is fabricated of carbon-steel alloy sheathed
in a ceramic insulating capsule.

     The vortices form spontaneously and glow brightly during their
approach to the anode. Upon striking it each vortex gives rise to
a regular set of five circles, the four satellite circles being
located at equal distances in the four right angle directions from
the primary circle. The experiment has been repeated many times.
The first color photographs taken in October 1990 using ASA 3200
film suggest that the satellite circles are created at the moment
of impact by the ejection of four subsidiary vortices from the
primary one, but the exact sequence will not be known until the
process has been filmed by a high speed video camera. Good
photographs have subsequently been taken in monochrome at F1.2,
1/250, ASA 3200 pushed to ASA 12500.

     This work helps to confirm
tjE@9I1J=9%i2=ICaP!=I%M5R|initiated by Dr. G. Terence
Meaden for crop circle formation by
natural vortex processes in the atmosphere, in combination with the
theory of George Bathurst for quintuplet formation by satellite
vortex ejection. Next, it is hoped to film the life cycle of the
vortices using video film.


     (This article and photographs will be published in June 1991,
in a post-conference book of papers entitled "Circles from the
Sky". I welcome correspondence from interested parties)


 Sheldon L. Wernikoff
 9200 Niles Center Rd #2C
 Skokie, IL 60076-1548 U.S.A.
 TEL: [phone]
 FAX: [phone]



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



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: ARTHUR C. CLARK SHOW
Date: 13 May 91 17:15:18 GMT

I guess I'm overly sensative to criticism and labeling that arrives from
some people in the guise of debate. I admit I am skeptical of many thing in
science and life that don't have good supporting evidence. Some UFO and
Paranormal claims are included. Seems that when I make a statement about why
I believe what I do, the answer from a small portion is "Your another one of
those debunkers aren't you!" Oh, shame, guilt, and whatever else is being
heaped on me. I'd say "The facts, just the facts..."

I have watched the ongoing debate over what is Evidence, what is
extraordinary, what is reliable information. It's interesting, but leads to
nothing. I am making a concious effort to no respond in the future, and
therefore avoid conflicts and wasted space on this echo.

I caught the special Sunday night on Discovery, "Is Anyone Out There?" and
it removed one or two former beliefs from my collection. The Fox Sisters were
one of the first cases of contact with the dead. The lady confessed that she
did the clicking responses by clicking her toe joints. This is one of the
foundation cases for spiritualism from 1947 I think. Some of the other
mystery miracles had confessions with them, like the never dying flowers in
the church.

Biggest laugh for me was Uri Geller bending a spoon, and taking about how
much money he had made. Finally got to see what Randi looks like, and Carl
Sagan made a nice statement about what he believes, but still left it open
for others to choose for themself. I appreciate that kind of acceptance and
ability to let others have freedom of thought even if one disagrees with
those thoughts.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Dr. Marina Popovich
Date: 13 May 91 23:32:00 GMT

While attending Wendelle Stevens World Congress in Tucson,
Az. this past week, I had the privilege of meeting Dr.
Marina Popovich of the U.S.S.R. Dr. Popovich is a retired
Soviet Colonel, she has a Ph.D in Flight Technology from
Leningrad University. She might be the Russian version of
our Chuck Yeager. Popovich set over 100 aviation records,
which 90 still stand. Although divorced now, she was married
to General Paval Popovich, a very famous Russian cosmonaut.

Dr. Marina Popovich attended Stevens Congress, which in
itself is almost unbelieveable. Just a couple of years ago
this would be unheard of. I was able to interview her on
Saturday and Sunday, and I extended an invation to Marina to
attend the L.A. Expo West. She tried to attend, but could
not change her flight plans. I also told her that if she
would be interested, I knew some TV people here that would
like to interview her and she agreed. On Thursday, although
she could not stay, she did have a 5 hour layover in LA. I
had contacted the producer I know at NBC's Hard Copy, and
they ran a crew out to meet her.  A fascinating interview
that will air later this week.  Keep your eyes open, some
very interesting information on the Soviet Mars probes.

Don

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Greenen)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 13 May 91 14:45:00 GMT


 * Replying to a message originally to Pete Porro
 PP> I felt it necessary to present this material even though I
 PP> don't agree. The last line says critics ignore the hundreds
 PP> of other witnesses who report seeing the UFO. I still
 PP> wonder why only one person can time after time get photos
 PP> of the UFO while others get nothing? Did hundreds of others
 PP> reports seeing the same UFO? Oh well in the interest of
 PP> fairness and information (plus I didn't see it posted
 PP> before) I had to send this out.
 PP> --- TBBS v2.1/NM
 PP>  * Origin: ParaNet XI-Alpha=- Radio Free Milw 4143526176HST
 PP> (1:154/414)
Hi Pete, I guess this subject gets a person talking to him or
herself. ---Grin--- You are mostly right on that statement (Billy
Meier, Adamski, Bill Herrmann, etc.) but in the Gulf Breeze case
others have seen the same craft or one that is similar. One can
easily make statements about each of cases that the person in
question has made a model to photograph but have heard nothing about
more then one model. Ed Walters photographed 3 different crafts,
where are these other models if we most let the skeptics have there
way? And yes, Billy Meier, what a great artist he must be to be able
to make 6 different models with only having one arm.
   I try to approach this hole thing on a logical basis and not on
one single issue. As in a court case, one must seek a motive and
what is the motive for Ed. It can't be money because Ed builds 30 to
40 custom homes a year and if you figure he makes just $5,000 per
home? Fame!, not likely, he lost a lot of business and took a lot of
abuse from this. So what is Ed's motive. What about the 40 witnesses
that obsured the craft over the church when Jiles Hamilton was
giving a lecture. Did Ed throw a 20 ft. model (type 2) a couple of
thousand feet into the air and run into the church and notified
everyone in the church that a UFO was over the church and then
photographed it in front of everyone. Nah; not logical.
   What about the other witnesses that have claimed to seen this
same craft that Ed photographed and one must ask why that in a lot
of these cases a military craft was seen chasing the craft away.
   I have no doubt that Gulf Breeze is real and I'm trying to find
out the motive of the persons flying these things and I think Ed can
supply some of the answers. Now, if some of these people will get
off of Ed's back and start searching for the answers, then maybe he
will finish his 2nd book, so some of us can go on with our research.
   The Book! Oh yes, $200,000 (maybe a years wages for EEd. Would I
wright a 350 page book for free!        73's      ---Jim---
--
Jim Greenen - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Miscellaneous
Date: 14 May 91 06:05:02 GMT


 > The Soviet contingent included Dr. Marina Popovich, a cosmonaut

  BTW, Antonio Huneeus is a great..er..local source of info about the
Russian incidents.

 > Jorge Martin, of Puerto Rico, presented some *outstandingly*
 > clear
 > photographs of military pursuit arcraft (swing-wing jets;
 > F-16's??)

  Did Jorge mention the F-14s that vanished into an object?

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: ARTHUR C. CLARK SHOW
Date: 14 May 91 06:08:03 GMT


 > simulation that determined it was an air blast.

  I've read in a couple of places (don't recall where) that the
pattern of downed trees etc. pointed toward an airburst of some kind.
  Also I've read that the sides of the trees that were facing the
center were scorched while the sides of the trees that were facing
away were unburned.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 14 May 91 06:13:04 GMT


 >  but in the Gulf
 > Breeze case others have seen the same craft or one that is
 > similar.

  Bruce just sent me a paper which pretty much leaves no doubt that Ed
and quite a few others saw the same or very similar objects over a
period of a couple of years, plus a report of a sighting of a similar
object at St. Pete several years earlier.
  While there's still no absolute proof that Ed *photographed* those
objects, such proof will probably never exist and in light of the
supporting witnesses, it's no longer reasonable to doubt that Ed did
indeed photograph those objects.
  Interestingly, Rex's investigations form the groundwork for Bruce's
paper.

                                           jbh

--
John Hicks - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 406

                            Saturday, May 25th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                    Nuke 'Em!
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                    The Moon
                           James Randi vs. Uri Geller
                                Re: Miscellaneous
                       Meier, Stevens, Tucson And The Moon
                                    Gb Paper

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Greenen)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 14 May 91 13:27:01 GMT


 JH>  >  but in the Gulf
 JH>  > Breeze case others have seen the same craft or one that is
 JH>  > similar.
 JH>
 JH>   Bruce just sent me a paper which pretty much leaves no
 JH> doubt that Ed and quite a few others saw the same or very
 JH> similar objects over a period of a couple of years, plus a
 JH> report of a sighting of a similar object at St. Pete
 JH> several years earlier.
 JH>   While there's still no absolute proof that Ed
 JH> *photographed* those objects, such proof will probably
 JH> never exist and in light of the supporting witnesses, it's
 JH> no longer reasonable to doubt that Ed did indeed photograph
 JH> those objects.
 JH>   Interestingly, Rex's investigations form the groundwork
 JH> for Bruce's paper.
 JH>
 JH>                                            jbh
 JH>
 JH> --- FD 1.99c
 JH>  * Origin: UFINET//PARANET//MUFONET [phone]
 JH> (1:363/29)
That is good news but Bruce is not the final say in the Gulf Breeze
sightings. The government can still say that photographs can be
faked and that will be enough evidence that 50% of the population
will still think this is a hoax. I told Walter that MUFON can send
Ed's photos to 100 labs to be analyzed but it won't prove anything.
The public will only believe the debunkers because they don't want
this to exist. What a beautiful job that our government has done for
the passed 40+ years, my hats off to them.
           73's        ---Jim---
--
Jim Greenen - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Nuke 'Em!
Date: 15 May 91 04:33:00 GMT


  For those of you who don't get the MUFON Journal, in the latest issue John
Brandenberg has potentially demonstrated how grasses can be made to lay flat
without damaging the grass itself.
  He cooked it in his microwave oven!
  At any rate, he found that in his microwave oven, ordinary grass would lay
down in 20 seconds, while green pine needles (tough) would lay down in about 50
seconds. All this without damaging the stalks or killing the grass.
  He calculated what kind of hardware would be required to generate and project
a microwave beam that would zap a wheatfield, and concluded that it would be
too big and heavy to tote around in a helicopter. Besides, choppers aren't
exactly known for their silence.
  He speculated that the hardware could be carried by a blimp, but pointed out
that a blimp would have a difficult time quickly leaving the area.
  Anyway, Brandenberg has found a way it *could* be done, but certainly doesn't
go so far as to say it *is* done with microwaves.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 15 May 91 07:38:00 GMT


 > Well to answer some of your collection of replys. I wonder how
 > large a batch of film is at Polaroid? To be more specific, go to
 > the store (which I will do) and look, are all the packages
 > numbered from the same batch?

  I went through this line of questions a while back. I went to a
local supermarket and had no trouble buying two packs of Polaroid film
with the same batch numbers. Could have bought eight or ten more.
Also, I could have bought multiple packs of each of several other
numbers.
  Got into this a little with Bruce. He said that in the instance
when batch numbers were noted, there were actually two packs with
different numbers.
  One pack went into the left camera, and the other numbered pack went
into the right camera. Bruce said that he resulting pictures had
numbers on the backs that matched the appropriate side (l-r).
  Thought I might have found the "smoking gun" for a few moments
there. ;-)


 > No great trick to buy two or six
 > film packs, one is doctored as necessary. Next go out with the
 > witnesses, show them the sealed pack, note the numbers with
 > their confirmation. Next when they go out of view, swap the
 > doctored pack, and snap a picture of a UFO (the one that was
 > prepared in advance of course). And the batch numbers match!

  Sure. I worked up a scenario using a third camera strictly to push
pre-exposed film through the rollers and start it to developing in
order to run out of the bushes and show the witnesses the film
"actually developing before their very eyes."
  Went through it with Bruce several times and he agreed that it could
work like a charm. Add in the fact that a witness told me that Frances
came out of the bushes up to a minute later than Ed, and think about
it. Was she stashing away something?
  Of course Bruce and I also agreed that the ability to hoax something
certainly doesn't mean that it *was* hoaxed. Although this incident
seems rather suspicious, complete with several witnesses who didn't
see the ufo, or that the ufo conveniently appears when and where the
other witnesses can't see it, there's no proof of fakery.

 > Second, which I may or may not have mentioned, an overlay on top
 > of the film, will make an image, just like a contact print.

  That sounds like it might be workable. I'll have to think about it.
Offhand, I think density of an overlay pos would block light, thus
making, say, black lettering over a white background in the resulting
pos. How would you make a light object against a black sky with an
overlay?
  I think it would be pretty easy to make prints on Polaroid with an
enlarger, or make contact prints, then stuff the latent prints back
into the pack to be later developed by the "third camera." That way
you could shoot some souvenir photos of the witnesses (Ed did) without
having to worry about giving yourself away.
  Plus, if the witnesses never went away, "oh, well, the ufos didn't
show up tonight."
  Also, anyone could inspect and/or develop your unshot film packs and
not find any evidence.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 15 May 91 07:51:01 GMT


 >  One of the questions that
 > stands out in my mind is how can one person, at will, go out and
 > get a nice clear photo of a UFO, when for years people wait and
 > try and get nothing or blurs? Terribly suspicious in my opinion.

  A good question. This might sound like a cop-out, but it's really
not.
  In Ed's first Polaroid series, he was using a camera which lends
itself to a very stable grip, sorta like holding a football in both
hands.
  In low light, the camera doesn't do any automatic long exposures. It
just holds the shutter open as long as the photographer holds the
button down.
  Ed tends to do the same sort of thing many amateurs do; he doesn't
make a quick stab at the shutter button, he holds that sucker down.
I've watched him shooting  with the Canon A-1 he bought a year or so
ago. He hits the button and usually holds it down for close to one
second. Of course the A-1 sets its own shutter speed.
  BTW, my wife does exactly the same thing. She even mashes the button
so hard her hand shakes.
  Anyway, Ed holds the shutter button down for about a second. The
camera itself affords a steady grip, and in low light the camera holds
the shutter open as long as the button is pressed.
  So, Ed would unconciously make one-second exposures.
  Now he sees a spaceship, and thinks the space aliens are going to
zap him or something, so he gets a little excited. Instead of
one-second exposures, he's making one-half to one-fourth second
exposures.
  The shorter exposures sharpen things up, plus the camera lends
itself to steady handholding. BTW, I think the first few photos were
closer to a proper exposure than later ones. The later photos are much
darker; presumably Ed was pretty excited by then.
  Remember that the Polaroids don't get enlarged (unless a copy slide
is projected) and if you look at them closely, they're far from
tack-sharp. The lack of sharpness tends to get lost in the published
pictures because the dot pattern on the printed page makes them look
sharper than the originals really are.
  So, for the original Polaroid pictures to have been shot exactly as
stated becomes very feasible.

                              continued

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 15 May 91 08:03:02 GMT


 >   One of the questions that
 > stands out in my mind is how can one person, at will, go out and
 > get a nice clear photo of a UFO, when for years people wait and
 > try and get nothing or blurs? Terribly suspicious in my opinion.

 In the case of the Nimslo, the camera simply will not shoot slower
than 1/15. If the light level drops below what would require a 1/15
second shutter speed, it's still going to shoot at 1/15.
  Most of the lower-priced point & shoot AE cameras do the same thing.
  The Nimslo was a pretty expensive 3D camera, but as far as cameras
go, it was a piece of junk. The later Nishika is even worse.
  What appears in the Nimslo photos, who knows, but it wasn't at an
exposure time that would preclude hand-holding the camera.
  As for the Polaroid Sun 600 cameras on the SRS, well, they were
always on a tripod, so camera shake wouldn't be a problem. If the
subject wasn't moving too fast, that wouldn't be a problem either.
  Minimum shutter speed for the Sun 600 is, I think, either 1/8 or
1/15, so there'd be the same situation as with the Nimslo.
  Now, remember that Ed didn't stop there.
  He bought a used Canon A-1 with a Soligor 70-220 f4 zoom lens.
  Know what he's gotten with that camera? Blurry blobs, same as
everyone else.
  The Canon's AE sees all that dark sky and gives about a four or
five-second exposure. Drastically overexposed red lights surrounded by
a blurry blob halo, or red streaks.
  I strongly suggested to Bruce a while back that he tell those people
to set the cameras at 1/15 at f4 with Ektapress 1600, plant 'em on tripods and
shoot away.
Apparently that suggestion didn't get on down the line, because
they're still getting blurry blobs.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 15 May 91 08:06:03 GMT


 >   One of the questions that
 > stands out in my mind is how can one person, at will, go out and
 > get a nice clear photo of a UFO, when for years people wait and
 > try and get nothing or blurs? Terribly suspicious in my opinion.

  It is rather suspicious, but I think what gets most would-be
photographers is that they rely on the autoexposure systems of their
cameras. The camera sees all that darkness in a night shot and
automatically sets a long exposure, which results in blobs and
streaks.
  Best thing to do is just to guess exposure and bracket like mad.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 16 May 91 08:29:00 GMT

Jim:

I can tell your heart is in the right place, but there's a few things you
should know about Gulf Breeze, and Ufology in general....

->model. Ed Walters photographed 3 different crafts, where
->are these other models if we most let the skeptics have
->there way? And yes, Billy Meier, what a great artist he

Good lord, Jim, do we have to find ALL the models before you'll consider
that he might have done it with models? It was only a stroke of luck that we
found one! The others he might have been more careful with.

->there way? And yes, Billy Meier, what a great artist he
->must be to be able to make 6 different models with only
->having one arm.

This is a put-down (unintentional, I'm sure) of handicapped people. I happen
to know quite a few HCPs myself, and many of them are capable of quite
amazing things with limited dexterity. My best friend, in fact, is the
victim of a horrible birth defect similar to the effects of Thalidomide. His
arms and legs are virtually unrecognizable as such, he has three twisted
claws on one hand that serve as fingers, one leg that ends in a foot where
most people have a knee, the other leg is even shorter and ends in a knob;
yet he is an accountant, drives a large car, smokes like a chimney and fires
pistols at the firing range. I'd say Billy can do just fine with one arm.

-> As in a court case, one must seek
->a motive and what is the motive for Ed. It can't be money

Disagree entirely. This is NOT a murder trial, hence motive is not an issue.
It has been pointed out time and time again that hoaxing is its own motive.
Lack of motive cannot be grounds for dismissal of a hoax charge, simply
because it has been shown time and time again that hoaxes have occurred in
the past without any visible motive. And yes, the motive can be money - it
was $400,000 he was paid for the book, and a sequel is in the works. That's
a lot of change to anyone.

I'm not sure what other people are seeing, Jim. I think the non-Ed cases may
have something to them. But you cannot make that grounds for acceptance of
Ed's case, any more than you can make legitimate sightings ANYWHERE grounds
for acceptance of any particular case.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: The Moon
Date: 21 May 91 03:10:58 GMT

I have been reading a NASA briefing paper from the late 60s entitled
'Lunar Anomalies.'  It would seem that there are a great deal of references
contained in the work indicating what appears to be volcanic activity on
the moon.  I am an amateur at science and astronomy, but I always thought
that the moon was 'dead.'  Is it possible that there are volcanoes on the
moon?

Michael Corbin




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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: James Randi vs. Uri Geller
Date: 21 May 91 21:33:46 GMT

From: [e-mail]

+ From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)

[stuff deleted]

+ Biggest laugh for me was Uri Geller bending a spoon, and taking about how
+ much money he had made. Finally got to see what Randi looks like, and Carl
+ Sagan made a nice statement about what he believes, but still left it open
+ for others to choose for themself. I appreciate that kind of acceptance and
+ ability to let others have freedom of thought even if one disagrees with
+ those thoughts.

Don't know if you folks have heard, but a letter from Randi was
recently forwarded to the BITNET SKEPTICS list, wherein he relates
how a series of relentless legal attacks by Geller (concerning
statements he made to the effect that Geller is a fraud), while
without merit, are crushing him financially.  He has also made a
very difficult decision to remove himself as a member of SCISOP
(sp?) in order to prevent further association of that group with the
fracus.  He ended the letter with a plea for financial assistance in
his fight against Geller, as it has already cost him more than
$100,000.  It seems as though there may be a legal fund of some kind
in the making.

If folks are interested, I can probably retrieve a copy of the
letter and forward it on.

Cheers!  - Gregg

Gregg TeHennepe             | Academic Systems Coordinator
[e-mail]       | Connecticut College, New London, CT




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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Date: 16 May 91 16:06:00 GMT


 > Thanks for that account of the Tucson Congress, Dan. Unfortunately, the
 > only report I got was of a woman who claimed to be from Venus. Largely
 > because of her and a few others of her ilk, the Congress got bad press.
 > The AP story included none of the reports you mentioned. Why can't we
 > have "New Age"-oriented conventions and science-oriented conventions,
 > and never the twain shall meet? This doesn't denigrate the more
 > spiritual aspects, it simply sets up a "separate-but-equal" status. This
 > may be improper in the racial context, but I certainly see benefits in
 > the UFO context.

I agree...The AP article was a devastating blow to UFOlogy, once again.  And,
as it has in the past, so it is in the present -- the wild claims of some jerk
makes the news simply to discredit the rest of the attempted serious study.
Someone ought to put a clamp on their mouths!  What I can't believe is how
otherwise serious people who have a rational discipline could pay money and
approve of such unfounded stories as true.  Venus is not supportive of life,
we have satellites there right now surveying the planet and know it is
uninhabitable.  Sheesh!

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Meier, Stevens, Tucson And The Moon
Date: 16 May 91 16:38:00 GMT


 > From: well![e-mail] (Dan Drasin)


 > + In regard to Meiers Metal that was supposedly examained by an IBM
 > + engineer - as I recall the 'engineer' was a lower level technician
 > + with a penchant for overstatment.  I also seem to recall that after
 > + the piece was analyzed it conveniently was lost - the 'engineer' was
 > + carrying it around in his pocket and misplaced it, or some such
 > + nonsense.
 >
 > Jim, I almost hate to tell you this, but that 'lower level technician'
 > you recall was none other than the late Marcel Vogel, holder of
 > hundreds of high-tech patents and one of the top crystallographers in
 > the country. His work was central to the development of magnetic media
 > for computers (hard and floppy disks) and liquid crystal display
 > devices. In recent years he devoted himself to exploring some of the
 > lesser-known properties of crystals, including many that have been
 > poo-poohed by 'scientists' without so much as a wisp of an attempt at
 > honest research.

I agree. From what I saw of the tape with Vogel speaking, he was demonstrating
the properties that the metal had as a result of the electronmicroscopy.  Very
interesting, but inconclusive.  This, in my book, does not make the
possibility of its alleged origin moot.  The same results were demonstrated
with the metal recovered from the Brazil explosion years ago.  It was found to
contain a high purity magnesium, but nothing that couldn't have originated
here.  And, true, the scientific community has demonstrated a lack of interest
in the whole UFO field for years, and probably will continue.  But, have we
ever wondered why?  Aside from various theories that include a concerted
deliberate effort on the part of the government squelchers, I tend to think
from talking with some of them myself, that they are extremely uncomfortable
with the quality of the data that is out there today, and the
pseudo-scientists that abound this field.  Although I believe that what we
perceive to be metaphysical today might very well prove out to be scientific
fact tomorrow, we have another problem going on that causes the scientists to
shy away -- blind faith belief in something to the point that it is accepted
without so much as a question.  This is not science, nor is it good sense.  We
can demonstrate that EVERYTHING has mechanics.  Even psychic abilities, in my
understanding of them, have mechanics.  But, we are not able to measure this
or observe it, yet.  Nonetheless, what is being billed as science by
metaphysicians is nothing more than folly and is recognized as such by those
true scientists.  I do not applaud their out-of-hand rejection of the entire
phenomena, but I can't blame them for wanting to stay away.  How would you
feel if your good name and reputation was billed right next to the jerk that
claims to be a Venusian?  In order to understand the intricacies of this
thing, we must be observers first.

 > I can't verify this, but the story I heard was that Vogel made the
 > mistake of submitting the sample to a certain government agency for
 > independent analysis, and that was the last he ever saw of it.
 > However, the data tapes of the sample, made through his scanning
 > electron
 > microscope, have been preserved. In the end, neither he nor any of his
 > professional colleagues who examined the actual sample could figure
 > out how the Meier (not 'Meiers,' please) sample could have been
 > created with any metallurgical processes known to them.

>From what I understood Vogel to say was that the sample disappeared from his
pocket mysteriously.  No other explanation was offered.

 > The Meier case probably deserves some kind of award for being the most
 > frequently debunked by so many people who have done so little
 > research into its details.

I agree.  But, again, who is researching it that has demonstrated a balanced
non-committed belief approach to it?  I have seen no one.  The verdict was in
before the trial was over.

 > The Tucson conference was absolute dynamite. What the Soviet
 > contingent (three speakers, including Dr. Marina Popovich, cosmonaut
 > and the USSR's most highly-decorated test pilot) had to say (and show)
 > was fairly mind-blowing. The Soviet Acad. of Sciences is years ahead
 > of us in open scientific inquiry into 'forbidden' areas, and
 > the entire spectrum of ufological matters seems to be handled much
 > more responsibly there than here. That's all I'll say right now -- I
 > could go on for hours.

Without taking up the bandwidth of this conference, I would love to discuss
the responsibility factor with you in netmail.  Care to do this?

 > + Why do you think Wendelle Stevens lost credibility/popularity with
 > + the UFO community?  Was it because he backed up Billy Meier at one
 > + time (and Billy has only a few supporters anymore?)  I'm asking
 > + because I do not know; have only graduated to Kindergarten in my
 > + knowledge of UFO subjects and people.
 >
 > Well, Stevens only lost credibility with certain *factions* of the UFO
 > community, one of them being the faction represented here on ParaNet.
 > In general, 'the nuts-and-bolts' and "abduction" ufologists have had
 > little patience with contactees claiming benevolent, interdimensional,
 > spiritually-oriented or otherwise complex experiences, though the
 > latter have always been more tolerant of the former. Stevens has had a
 > reputation for honoring the *entire* spectrum of reports, which has
 > always irked those of the narrowly materialist-reductionist
 > persuation.

Please do not heap ParaNet into this.  ParaNet does not take a position at
this point.  The sentiments concerning Stevens are the opinions of some of the
members here only.  Also, Stevens seems to me to be interested in this only
from a profit motive.  Is this balanced scientific/research objectivity?

 > Others lost faith (i.e., didn't want to be associated with him) after
 > he was convicted of child-molestation a few years back -- which
 > occurred after he refused to lay off a certain crashed-saucer case
 > after repeated warnings.

That he was convicted is not necessarily relevant here, and it poses some
interesting questions regarding his involvement, but the problem is why
haven't some of the other researchers investigating equally sensitive areas
been convicted of like crimes?  Could it be that this is a convenient excuse
to maintain your credibility while running a brothel in Las Vegas?  I don't
think so.

 > As for the Meier case, Stevens, while he has generally supported
 > Meier, has never been a 'true believer' in Meier's entire story. He
 > and others have observed that a radical change came over Meier about
 > 1980. He feels that the pre-1980 material is probably largely
 > legitimate, but that later the whole picture shifted quite a bit, and
 > that Meier is now rather a 'broken' man.

This may be a very valid point.  Betty Hill has demonstrated a similar pattern
of behavior following her encounter.  But, as anything else dealing with this,
qualified people should be dealing with it rather than a bunch of believers.

 > As a professional photographer I can tell you without a shadow of a
 > doubt that photos presented by Meier after 1980 were contrived. But
 > neither I nor anyone else has ever been able to find the least fault
 > with his mid-1970's photos. Those pictures are probably the most
 > extensively and repeatedly analyzed in the entire history of ufology,
 > and so far nobody has been able to shoot them down, either technically
 > or circumstantially.

There is one shot of the saucer hovering in front of the movie camera.  The
branch is moving.  Then Meier claims the saucer suddenly disappeared.  The
branch ceases moving.  What causes this?

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Gb Paper
Date: 16 May 91 23:46:00 GMT


 >   Anyone interested in the Gulf Breeze incidents, be sure and get a copy
 > of Bruce Maccabee's paper to be presented to the MUFON symposium in
 > July.
 >   It's about the "other" incidents, and it'll knock your socks off.
 >   Bruce's paper should be included in the symposium Proceedings, which
 > will be available from MUFON.

Could you elaborate on what it is that could "knock your socks off?"

Thanks,

Mike

--
Michael Corbin - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 407

                             Sunday, May 26th 1991

Today's Topics:

                             *** Virus ** Alert ***
                   Trojan version of VIRUSCAN version 78 (PC)
                                    Re: OOPS
                             Re: Arthur C. Clark Bar
                        Re: 'ufo Abductions' Show On Cbs
                                  Gerry Zeitlin
                       Meier, Stevens, Tucson and the Moon
                               Re: Csicop members
                            Re: Extraordinary claims
                                 green fireballs
                     Re: Meier, Stevens, Tucson And The Moon
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                  Re: NUKE 'EM!
                               Dan Quayle on Mars

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: *** Virus ** Alert ***
Date: 17 May 91 00:28:00 GMT


 * Forwarded from "FidoSysop"
 * Originally from Steve Shapiro
 * Originally dated 16 May 91  13:37:02

Folks,  I copied this over from the SHAREWARE ECHO.  I just know that you will
be interested in it.

Tom Johannsen



Howdy All !

I have just received notice about a possible virus/trojan program which I
thought the rest of you might want to know about.

Regards, Steve.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

TROJAN VERSION OF VIRUSCAN VERSION 78

We have received a trojan horse version of VIRUSCAN.  The hacked SCAN
has apparently been uploaded to BBSes in Michigan, USA under the
filename SCANV78.ZIP.  Running PKZIP -V on the file reveals:

 .PKUNZIP (R)    FAST!    Extract Utility    Version 1.1    03-15-90
 .Copr. 1989-1990 PKWARE Inc. All Rights Reserved. PKUNZIP/h for help
 .PKUNZIP Reg. U.S. Pat. and Tm. Off.
 .
 .Searching ZIP: SCANV78.ZIP - Fantasia BBS (313)/788-0882
 .
 . Length  Method   Size  Ratio   Date    Time   CRC-32  Attr  Name
 . ------  ------   ----- -----   ----    ----   ------  ----  ----
 .  12816  Implode   5255  59%  04-08-91  14:28  08a87ed8 --w  AGENTS.TXT
 .   9406  Stored    9406   0%  02-03-91  17:04  42cf9931 --w  REGISTER.DOC
 .  23008  Implode  12550  46%  05-06-91  18:15  f9735dd5 --w  SCAN.EXE
 .   6495  Implode   1895  71%  10-31-89  16:16  0449b09d --w  VALIDATE.COM
 .   3626  Implode   1802  51%  11-29-90  01:59  ab76470f --w  README.1ST
 .  21257  Implode   5767  73%  05-06-91  19:35  a0728a17 --w  VIRLIST.TXT
 .   2844  Implode   1406  51%  02-14-91  14:25  aa330b57 --w  VALIDATE.DOC
 .  24515  Implode   9188  63%  05-06-91  19:34  172a967f --w  SCAN78.DOC
 . ------          ------  ---                                 -------
 . 103967           47269  55%                                       8

The number listed for the Fantasia BBS is NOT a BBS number and has no
connection with the trojan horse.  I have called the phone number and
asked the party at the other end to contact me.

Running PKUNZIP on the file reveals the following:

 .PKUNZIP (R)    FAST!    Extract Utility    Version 1.1    03-15-90
 .Copr. 1989-1990 PKWARE Inc. All Rights Reserved. PKUNZIP/h for help
 .PKUNZIP Reg. U.S. Pat. and Tm. Off.
 .
 .Searching ZIP: SCANV78.ZIP - Fantasia BBS (313)/788-0882
 .  Exploding: AGENTS.TXT    -AV
 . Extracting: REGISTER.DOC  -AV
 .  Exploding: SCAN.EXE      -AV
 .  Exploding: VALIDATE.COM  -AV
 .  Exploding: README.1ST    -AV
 .  Exploding: VIRLIST.TXT   -AV
 .  Exploding: VALIDATE.DOC  -AV
 .  Exploding: SCAN78.DOC    -AV
 .
 . Authentic files Verified!   # TJB859   Zip Source: McAFEE ASSOCIATES

While the Authentic Files Verified Message appears, the Serial Number is
NOT correct.  McAfee Associate's Serial Number is NWM405.

Examination of the AGENTS.TXT, README.1ST, VALIDATE.*, and VIRLIST.TXT
files revealed that these are straight from VIRUSCAN Version 77--the
version number in the VIRLIST.TXT file was still V77.

The SCAN78.DOC file had been modified so that all occurrences of V77
were switched to V78.  Additionally, the following text was added for
the validation data:

 .     The validation results for Version 77 should be:
 .
  .              FILE NAME: SCAN.EXE
 .                   SIZE: 23,008
 .                   DATE: 05-06-1991
 .    FILE AUTHENTICATION
 .         Check Method 1: 2C21
 .         Check Method 2: 022E
 .

For the What's New section, the following text was added:

 . WHAT'S NEW
 .         Version 78 of SCAN removes a few small bugs and continues
 . to optimize the procedures SCAN uses to find viruses, as in Version 77,
 . as well as adding a few more to the list of known viruses. SCAN is now much
 . more compressed than was previously thought possible, so please enjoy the
 . shortened file size, it should still work just fine.
 .    Refer to the enclosed VIRLIST.TXT file for a schematic
 . description of the new viruses.  For a complete description, please
 . refer to Patricia Hoffman's VSUM document.
 .

Examination of the SCAN.EXE file has show that it contains the help
message that VIRUSCAN displays as well as the program information
message.  However, the program does not contain any of the other
messages that VIRUSCAN has in it.

The REGISTER.DOC file distributed with the trojan version of VIRUSCAN is
not a text file, but rather another .ZIP file containing a file named
TB1.COM:

 . PKUNZIP (R)    FAST!    Extract Utility    Version 1.1    03-15-90
 . Copr. 1989-1990 PKWARE Inc. All Rights Reserved. PKUNZIP/h for help
 . PKUNZIP Reg. U.S. Pat. and Tm. Off.
 .
 . Searching ZIP: REGISTER.DOC
 .  Extracting: TB1.COM       -AV
 .
 . Authentic files Verified!   # TJB859   Zip Source: McAFEE ASSOCIATES
 .

When unZIPped, the REGISTER.DOC file displays the same Authentic Files
Verified Message as the SCANV78.ZIP file did.  Examination of the of the
TB1.COM file revealed that it contains the Whale virus.

This is all I currently know about the SCANV78.ZIP trojan.  If you see
any copies of this file, please ask the system administrator or sysop to
remove it and ask them to contact the uploader to warn them that it
contains a virus.

Aryeh Goretsky
McAfee Associates Technical Support
- - - -
[e-mail]


++++++++++++++++++++++ The full NEWS header follows
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
News Article 1437
>Path: hollie.rdg.dec.com!pa.dec.com!decwrl!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!
>swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!
>vax1.cc.lehigh.edu!cert.sei.cmu.edu!krvw
>From: [e-mail] (Aryeh Goretsky)
>Newsgroups: comp.virus
>Subject: Trojan version of VIRUSCAN version 78 (PC)
>Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>Date: 13 May 91 21:50:16 GMT
>Sender: Virus Discussion List <VIRUS-L@LEHIIBM1>
>Lines: 113
>Approved: [e-mail]


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: OOPS
Date: 15 May 91 18:05:42 GMT

Does the article say when this happened (the actual date of the occurance?)
to the ten missing people? If you are familar with the tabloids they run
stories about "Priest Bursts into flames on pulpit" just as if it happened
yesterday, somewhere in books I found that this happened in the 1800's and
they just run the story every few years. The report you have sure sounded
current considering the ride for charity etc.

I wonder if someone in France has the original and any follow-up report on
the 10 young riders. Maybe they rode over a cliff, in which case it's 5 + 10
in recent months? Just wondering if there are any more specifics. Interesting
story.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Arthur C. Clark Bar
Date: 23 May 91 00:37:00 GMT


 > Me not post messages or express views? I can't help running off at the
 > fingers sometimes. I was commenting to Jim because if any of you still
 > take the time to read UFO on Fidonet, you'll see a couple of AKA posters
 > who are starting the Reptiles are comming trand again. If someone asks
 > them for evidence they get a response like, "Oh you closed minded people
 > will never understand why you are so stupid." Which as usual has nothing
 > to do with hard or even soft facts about what's going on. Last week I
 > saved a message from someone who says they have built a UFO but we are
 > not ready for the technology yet so it's secret. The week before it was
 > the Greys and the agreements we made, including the world wide
 > underground tunnel systems.

To what do you attribute such postings, Pete?

 > There is an endless cycle of incredible storys, which do more to confuse
 > issues than any disinformation campaign ever could. The Govt. doesn't
 > have to throw a monkey wrench into things, it's being covered by others
 > already. As usual a gold star goes to Paranet because of open minded
 > skepticism. Seldome do I see people blasting away with personal flames,
 > and even unusual theorys are received with an inquiring interest,
 > questioned and evaluated from a reasonable perspective.

That is the exact theme of the article that I wrote for this past issue of UFO
Magazine:  We don't need disinformation agents of the government, we are doing
a fine job of disinforming ourselves.  But, I feel that the problem with those
over in Fido UFO are something else.  What strikes me funny is that there
seems to be a very tight clique of folks who subscribe to a certain belief
system, and they are attempting to persuade others of it.  If you don't fit
the mold, then it's ADIOS CHARLIE!  I personally know what it is that they
belong to and the beliefs they subscribe to, which is akin to a
pseudo-religious movement with space brothers as their saviors.  This is all
well and good, but the problem is that they are not capable of operating in
the open because most people would shy away if they knew.  This is also why


 > sisters and many others from (corrected) the 1800's it was parlor tricks
 > and fun. Sometimes it was so well done that the hoax took on realistic
 > acceptance. People like the amazing Randi serve a needed purpose, that
 > which makes us reflect upon events, or evaluate before just accepting
 > out of blind following. It seperates some of the frauds so time can be
 > invested in more efficient research instead of wasted chasing tall
 > tales. The "debunkers" cannot refute everything, therefore the smaller
 > percentage of reports or events can be examined more closely.  I guess
 > what I am saying is, take it all in, file away the obvious erroneous
 > reports, shelf the questionable events, and concentrate on the most
 > likely to produce verifiable research materials. (note: I didn't say
 > throw anything away, just put it on the back burner)  And don't forget
 > Spam is 100 years old now!

There is something very interesting going on.  There seems to be a lot of
noise drowning the signal.  It is not that there are not strange, almost
metaphysical things going on, but there are too many people willing to accept
it and everything else on blind faith.  I believe your method is the most
effective..."take it all in, file away the obvious erroneous reports, shelf
the questionable events, and concentrate on the most likely to produce
verifiable research materials..."  The only thing I would add to your
statement is that everyone should test everything first to arrive at the
method you propose.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: 'ufo Abductions' Show On Cbs
Date: 23 May 91 00:40:00 GMT


 >   Geez, Mike, you're the third person who's mentioned that his VCR
 > either died or ate the tape of that show.
 >   I have a tape, which I've just loaned to my brother-in-law. I suppose
 > his VCR will proceed to eat my tape.
 >   Anyway, if I get it back, I can make you a copy.

Thanks.  I had the VCR and television out the other day for a demo.  I
apparently didn't hook something up right when I returned it to the stand, and
voilla!!  Gray screen!

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Gerry Zeitlin
Date: 17 May 91 17:17:00 GMT

Dan:

Do you know the present whereabouts of Gerald Zeitlin? I need to
get in touch with him on a matter of extreme importance. If you can
provide a current phone number, or ask him to call me, t'would be
greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
       Jim


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Clark Matthews)
Subject: Meier, Stevens, Tucson and the Moon
Date: 15 May 91 01:15:00 GMT

To: well![e-mail] (Dan Drasin)

THANK YOU, Dan, for this:
 >
 > + In regard to Meiers Metal that was supposedly examained
 > by an IBM
 > + engineer - as I recall the 'engineer' was a lower level
 > technician
 > + with a penchant for overstatment.  I also seem to recall
 > that after
 > + the piece was analyzed it conveniently was lost - the
 > 'engineer' was
 > + carrying it around in his pocket and misplaced it, or
 > some such
 > + nonsense.
 >
 > Jim, I almost hate to tell you this, but that 'lower level
 > technician'
 > you recall was none other than the late Marcel Vogel,
 > holder of
 > hundreds of high-tech patents and one of the top
 > crystallographers in
 > the country. His work was central to the development of
 > magnetic media
 > for computers (hard and floppy disks) and liquid crystal
 > display
 > devices. In recent years he devoted himself to exploring
 > some of the
 > lesser-known properties of crystals, including many that
 > have been
 > poo-poohed by 'scientists' without so much as a wisp of an
 > attempt at
 > honest research.
 >
 > I can't verify this, but the story I heard was that Vogel
 > made the
 > mistake of submitting the sample to a certain government
 > agency for
 > independent analysis, and that was the last he ever saw of
 > it.
 > However, the data tapes of the sample, made through his
 > scanning electron
 > microscope, have been preserved. In the end, neither he nor
 > any of his
 > professional colleagues who examined the actual sample
 > could figure
 > out how the Meier (not 'Meiers,' please) sample could have
 > been
 > created with any metallurgical processes known to them.
 >

Dan, I think your comments re: the lingering questions about the
Meier case are well taken.

I, too, became highly dismissive of Meier, the photos, the
books, and all of the related evidence in the case.  But open
questions remain.  The sandbag job done on Vogel was one of
the things that stuck in my craw.  Vogel remained absolutely
silent on what actually happened for the rest of his life,
though.

Perhaps his pension was jeopardized, or other pressure was
brought to bear on him personally, professionally, or through
IBM.  I have no way of knowing.  But he was certainly well
qualified and well equipped to study the Meier metal sample, and
the sample's disappearance was especially puzzling.  Dr. Vogel
was virtually *blamed* for the disappearance of the sample, and
never spoke out about what actually happened to it.

Could you tell me -- either here or privately (my BBS number is:
201-451-3063 24 hrs.) -- what the source of your info on Dr.
Vogel is?  Also, do you know what became of the scanning
electron microscopy tapes (or copies) of the sample?  And
finally, do you know what the microscopy showed?  Some kind of
unique crystal lattice, perhaps?

 > + Why do you think Wendelle Stevens lost
 > credibility/popularity with
 > + the UFO community?  Was it because he backed up Billy
 > Meier at one
 > + time (and Billy has only a few supporters anymore?)
 ....
 > Well, Stevens only lost credibility with certain *factions*
 > of the UFO
 > community, one of them being the faction represented here
 > on ParaNet.
 > In general, 'the nuts-and-bolts' and "abduction" ufologists
 > have had
 > little patience with contactees claiming benevolent,
 > interdimensional,
 > spiritually-oriented or otherwise complex experiences,
 > though the
 > latter have always been more tolerant of the former.
 > Stevens has had a
 > reputation for honoring the *entire* spectrum of reports,
 > which has
 > always irked those of the narrowly materialist-
 > reductionistpersuation.
 >
 > Others lost faith (i.e., didn't want to be associated with
 > him) after
 > he was convicted of child-molestation a few years back --
 > which
 > occurred after he refused to lay off a certain crashed-
 > saucer case
 > after repeated warnings.
 >

Dan, the child-molestation conviction did it for me.  I know
that is probably illogical -- Stevens' casework & research are
completely separate from his sexual proclivities, and should
stand on their own merits.  And great statesmen like Garry Hart
and John, Robert, and Ted Kennedy have function effectively
despite numerous alleged kinks.  But there it is...

Can you tell us which crashed saucer case?  And, if you can,
what new info about it?

Thanks!

Best,
  Clark


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Rick Moen)
Subject: Re: Csicop members
Date: 15 May 91 19:08:58 GMT

John -

In the entirely unlikely event that you are seriously interested in
CSICOP's "viewpoints" (if any), you should contact CSICOP.  I don't know
how I could possibly make this clearer.  Good day.

Regards,
Rick M.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Rick Moen)
Subject: Re: Extraordinary claims
Date: 15 May 91 19:18:11 GMT

John --

I have repeated about four times in this forum my statement that I will
consider having a substantive discussion of the philosophy of science,
in the event that you are in fact interested in such a discussion, in a
more {_appropriate echo or newsgroup.  If you are not in fact interested
in such a discussion, I must insist on dropping the topic.  I will not
be badgered into long, off-topic discussions on this echo, especially
with someone I suspect has little interest in substantive discussion in
the first place.

Best Regards,
Rick M.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Gresser)
Subject: green fireballs
Date: 17 May 91 19:57:00 GMT

You want to know about green fireballs?  Lemme tell ya, I saw a sucker that I
just didn't believe, at about 1:30am local time, last friday, about 100 miles
west of Albequerque.  This was the damndest bolide I have ever seen.  It
started out green, and from its speed I thought "Geez, fireworks or a flare",
but then I realized that I didn't see it going up.  About then (now from, say,
85 deg. above the horizon to 75 deg.) whatever it was began to tumble, and
turned not only from green to white, but from small to HUGE.  I thought that a
plane might have been crashing (or exploding, more like!).  It was throwing
off red tracers as well, really huge tail on this thing.  Lasted to within
about 20 degrees of the horizon.  I think it was about 7-10 seconds, and I'd
say that it was bearing about 130 degrees magnetic (we were Eastbound at the
time), on the assumption that we were headed about 90 magnetic and it was
about 40 degrees right of our heading.  Helluva sight, too.  I didn't realize
what it was until it was almost over.  Cast a big shadow.  Huge.  Anyway, what
kinds of compounds (or elements?) would have to be present to produce such a
show?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Meier, Stevens, Tucson And The Moon
Date: 18 May 91 05:32:00 GMT

Hi Mike,
   Two things:  Could you comment more on Betty Hill and how you said
she experienced some "decline" or became "a broken" person as did Billy
Meiers?  I'm referring to the message to which I am replying.

   Could you tell me if you received my book review and were you able
to forward it on to Clark Matthews?  For some odd reason, I am unable
to dial up his BBS directly.

     Thanks!
             Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 16 May 91 17:05:23 GMT

There is an example of you answering your own question, why would Ed
possible do this, followed at the end of the message $200,000 income for the
first book, and possibly a follow up book. No matter how much it is estimated
he makes a year, another 200 grand would impress anyone.

Fatal flaw in logic in your message to John Hicks about the photos and the
testing of them. You say that if they are said to be fakes, then it's a
cover-up and the public will believe the debunkers because they don't want to
believe this exists. So the only alternative you leave is believe or it's a
cover-up? What's happeneing here is discrediting the source before the
findings are out, which is the same sort of problem UFO research faces from
others.

I say let each case and each bit of evidence speak for itself, then judge.
If there is reasonable evidence that the photos are real, then lets say they
are reasonably believed to be authentic. If there is a preponderance of
evidence that says they are hoaxed, lets say most of the results say they are
fakes. The all or none principle doesn't work here. By using this method
(which many do) if one photo is proven a fraud, does that mean all the others
are also. (NO! not for believers, YES! for skeptics) I tend to see a greater
middle ground which allows for questions and answers on both sides.

The attitude that anything which contradicts is automatically a cover-up or
debunkers bias, is not reasonable investigation. Just as the attitude that
some have that all UFO's can't possibly exist, therefore they just don't...
neither of the above is valid.

My personal opinion is that Ed's photos and book are getting far too much
undeserved attention. If I am correct, you feel quite the opposite. No
problem from me, in many ways I'd like to find out, through reasonable
evidence, that I am wrong. I still don't know why the Hudson Valley events,
or the Belgium UFO's are not getting as much press coverage? I have an
answer, not as much controversy connected, not as many flaws, not as much
continuing media hype comming on a regular basis from the people profiting
from Gulf Breeze events.

What do you think?
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 16 May 91 17:08:13 GMT

One thing you mentioned, I also keep in mind... Just because there was an
ability to hoax a photo, does not mean it was a hoax.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: NUKE 'EM!
Date: 16 May 91 17:22:25 GMT

Oh I guess it would be a bit dangerous to be toting a giant microwave under
a helicopter anyway. I sure would not go up without a box of "top shelf" on
the seat next to me, so I could eat after I fried my fanny. 8*)
So if this is a reasonable method, I wonder where the radiation is comming
from, and I don't think a blimp is the answer either. Remember the people who
said way in the begining it was SDS testing from space? Maybe they had
something? How about errant bursts of radiation from our Sun?

I don't have the time (or probably the knowledge either) to go out in my
backyard and start trying CO2 exposure, assorted diluted weed killers, or
various chemical methods for producing the results to match crop circles. I
have a feeling that a possible explination would be to does the crop, and
have something which is time released so that days, months, weeks (who knows)
later, the circle will form without residual evidence or footprints. (oops
that's "dose" the crops) And it's only an idea.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: Dan Quayle on Mars
Date: 16 May 91 16:55:56 GMT

In a message to All <13 May 91 11:48> [e-mail]. wrote:

 nc> Consequently, while it is tempting to believe that Danny has been
 nc> briefed on Alternative Three, it is much more likely that he picked up
 nc> his information from a late-night viewing of 'Robinson Crusoe on
 nc> Mars'.

One only has to look at Dan and listen to him give a speech, to become
thoroughly convinced that life flurishes on that planet even today.


--
Steve Rose - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 408

                             Monday, May 27th 1991

Today's Topics:

                          Uncle Sam's Moon Mountain...
                                 Uncle Sammites
                               ARTHUR C. CLARK BAR
                                    Nuke 'Em!
                                    Flight 19
                                    Gb Paper
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                Flight 19 found!
                     Re: Meier, Stevens, Tucson and the Moon
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                WHERE'S WHITLEY?
                        Re: Uncle Sam's Moon Mountain...
                        Re: 'UFO Abductions' show on CBS
                                     Woo-woo
                                     Letter
                            Letter (Pt 2) Conclusion
                                     Woo-woo

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: Uncle Sam's Moon Mountain...
Date: 16 May 91 17:05:12 GMT

In a message to Jim Speiser <13 May 91 23:29> Linda Bird wrote:

 LB>   As I said, "If Hollywood can tell us about UFO's and E.T.'s,
 LB> why can't Uncle Sam?"

Because despite anyone's claim to the contrary, Uncle Sam is not in the Space
Fantasy and Amusement Park business.  Although they *could* be keeping
Hollywood in their back pocket for just such a purpose.   ;-)




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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: Uncle Sammites
Date: 16 May 91 17:08:56 GMT

In a message to John Hicks <14 May 91 06:27> Jim Greenen wrote:

 JG> won't prove anything. The public will only believe the debunkers
 JG> because they don't want this to exist. What a beautiful job that
 JG> our government has done for the passed 40+ years, my hats off to them.


And here I thought we just sit and push papers around the office for 8 hours
each day.  Tell me...what mystical powers should we be ascribed with that
allows us to keep every valid sighting and contact down in the septic tank?  Is
one admitting that we are smarter that all those friendly 'Greys' could ever
hope to be?  Haven't they learned anything about field tactics in all those
years...or are they too naive to even try a direct approach?   :-\

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: ARTHUR C. CLARK BAR
Date: 16 May 91 17:21:52 GMT

In a message to Jim Speiser <13 May 91 10:15> Pete Porro wrote:

 PP> Seems that when I make a statement about why I believe what I do,
 PP> the answer from a small portion is "Your another one of those
 PP> debunkers aren't you!" Oh, shame, guilt, and whatever else is
 PP> being heaped on me. I'd say "The facts, just the facts..."

Amen!

 PP> but leads to nothing. I am making a concious effort to no respond
 PP> in the future, and therefore avoid
 PP> conflicts and wasted space on this echo.

There are good informative posts and wasted space posts as well.  Don't be put
off from joining in!

 PP> The Fox Sisters were one of the first cases of
 PP> contact with the dead. The lady confessed that she did the
 PP> clicking responses by clicking her toe joints. This is one of the
 PP> foundation cases for spiritualism from 1947 I think.

More like *1847* so I do not think you saw any live confession from her.
But yes...their history has been parially debunked, never the less.

 PP> other mystery miracles had confessions with them, like the never
 PP> dying flowers in the church.

You mean someone admitted they watered them?  :)

 PP> Biggest laugh for me was Uri Geller bending a spoon, and taking
 PP> about how much money he had made.

Yet, his self-exposure and public downfall will long be forgotten, after the
next generation of magicians have taken those same tricks and popularized them
all over again as valid and genuine phenomenon.  Some things never change...
including people.  :-)


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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Nuke 'Em!
Date: 17 May 91 17:07:00 GMT


 > Hmmm, that might work.  Lemmee grab some and give it
 > a couple of kWatts.  Nope, must not be the right
 > kind of grass.../&^).

  Brandenburg claims to have demonstrated the effect several times.
BTW, the kind you're talking about is most likely too dry. ;-)

 > I'd think that the grass would have to be wet with
 > dew for this to work well in a field.

  I don't think that's a factor.
  I was speculating about moist heat a while back. Picture a stalk of
brocolli; it's pretty stiff. Now steam it and it becomes limp, but
isn't damaged.
  A microwave oven would do pretty much the same thing, with the plant
itself supplying the moisture internally.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Flight 19
Date: 17 May 91 17:09:01 GMT


  CNN just aired a story in which treasure hunters found five TBM
Avengers in 750 feet of water off Ft. Lauderdale. The story said the
treasure hunters will be sending submersible RPV's down to look for
serial numbers.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Gb Paper
Date: 18 May 91 07:25:00 GMT


 MC> Could you elaborate on what it is that could "knock your
 MC> socks off?"

  I'll be abstracting and extracting from the report soon's I can. Per
Bruce's suggestion, too. ;-)

                                        jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 18 May 91 07:42:00 GMT


  I've heard it said that Ed was involved in hoax ufo photos while he
lived in Costa Rica. However, I've never heard anything more than
mentions, and I've never seen any evidence.
  Know anything?

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Flight 19 found!
Date: 18 May 91 07:47:01 GMT


  An AP story in todays Orlando Sentinel indicates that the
aforementioned TBM Avengers are indeed the aircraft of Flight 19.
  According to the story, the designators FT were visible on the a/c,
and the numbers 28 were also visible on one a/c. The leader's a/c
carried the designation FT 28.
  Pretty conclusive proof.
  The article said that the a/c were in good shape except for the
leader's, which had some damage, and that all were found within a
5000' radius.
  Bill English said tonight on UFINET that he's gotten confirmation
from the USAF that the a/c are indeed the lost a/c of Flight 19.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Meier, Stevens, Tucson and the Moon
Date: 18 May 91 08:17:00 GMT

->great statesmen like Garry Hart and John, Robert, and Ted
->Kennedy have function effectively despite numerous alleged

Great statesmen???? Gary Hart??? TED KENNEDY??????

Is this 201-451-3063....?

<grin>

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 18 May 91 08:45:00 GMT

In a message to Jim Speiser <05-18-91 00:42> John Hicks wrote:

->  I've heard it said that Ed was involved in hoax ufo
->photos while he lived in Costa Rica. However, I've never
->heard anything more than mentions, and I've never seen any
->evidence.
->  Know anything?

Nope, not a word. I know he lived there, but didn't know anything about
that. I spose it could be checked out, though not easily...

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: WHERE'S WHITLEY?
Date: 19 May 91 02:54:00 GMT

{{     Has anyone on this conference heard anything from or about
Whitely Strieber recently? He seems to have vanished from the face
of this planet! I used to correspond with him periodically, but he
has not responded to my last four letters concerning events that
have occurred in the Chicago area Communion group. The same goes
for Dora Ruffner, editor of the Communion Letter. This breakdown of
communication is very disturbing, and leaves me with a rather
uneasy feeling about the whole Strieber scenario.

     The last I heard of Whitley was on 9/21/90 on a CNN interview
with Larry King and Howard Blum, where he stated that he's only
told about "10%" of his story. Does that mean we can look forward
to another 27 or so books? Can someone please enlighten me?

     For those interested, the following is a copy of my last
correspondence, to which I have received no response:


February 28, 1991


Mr. Whitley Strieber
496 LaGuardia Place
New York, NY 10012


Dear Whitley,

     This is my fourth and final letter to you in regards to the
rather nebulous structure and lack of adept leadership of the
Chicago area "Communion" group. I really do not understand why you
have not responded to my questions.

     To reiterate my grievance, half of the group was "voted" out
at a clandestine meeting, by members that had never even met me or
my fellow excommunicates. The group has become a small, secretive,
cult-like coterie, which has no intention or aspiration of
unraveling the mystery of the visitors.

     There is virtually no organized interaction between groups,
and the Communion network (through which I have made many important
contacts) seems to be disintegrating. I have been trying to locate
a hypnotherapist for a witness living in a remote area of Oregon,
but have had no success. I thought this is what the "Communion"
groups were supposed to be all about. People helping people.
Perhaps I am wrong.

     In any case, I would greatly appreciate your input in this
matter if for nothing more than to reaffirm my belief in your
earnestness and consideration. You stated in an interview with
Larry King that you have only told about ten percent of your story.
Don't you think it's time to get on with it? Individually, we are
ineffectual, but as a group, we can work miracles.


Best wishes,

Sheldon Wernikoff

9200 Niles Center Road
Skokie, IL 60076-1548

cc: Whitley Strieber
    Dora Ruffner
--
Sheldon Wernikoff - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Uncle Sam's Moon Mountain...
Date: 19 May 91 03:24:00 GMT

Hi Steve,
   Good point!  I think Hollywood is going to break the UFO story to us
first.  What if?  Wouldn't that be IRONIC?
   (What's life like in Washington. D.C.?  As I sit out here in this
desert, I wonder...)
    Thanks, and take care,
           Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: 'UFO Abductions' show on CBS
Date: 20 May 91 06:37:00 GMT

In a message to All <05-18-91 11:50> Michael Corbin wrote:
->Walton abduction and basically recanted the
->same stuff that we have thorough knowledge of.  The second

They glossed over a couple of important factors in that one. First of all,
Walton's mother was conspicuously NOT upset by the abduction - was quite
calm, in fact, and almost seemed to have expected it. Second, Walton did NOT
pass his FIRST polygraph exam, a fact that was intentionally hidden until
Phil Klass discovered it (giving the devil his due here). The reasons given
were that Walton was still traumatized at the time of the first exam, and
that the examiner conducted himself in a thoroughly unprofessional manner. I
have read the transcript of the first exam and I can accept that
explanation, but still, I believe it is incumbent upon TV shows, even on the
entertainment side, not to be evasive on such issues. It was produced to
inform, it should do so correctly.

The other two cases I have not heard of, they are quite interesting. I'd
like to see some more discussion of them.

By the way, I thought the alien's costumes were the best I've ever seen.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Woo-woo
Date: 20 May 91 23:26:00 GMT


 > From: well![e-mail] (Dan Drasin)


 > Since everyone's perception is unique, it may not be such a bad
 > thing for contexts to overlap. I think it's more important for
 > people to be tolerant of, and to listen to, each other, than it is
 > to create more compartmentalization and more walls, more judgements
 > and more 'us-and-them' thinking. IMHO, we have enough of those
 > already. If we aren't forced to recognize other contexts, we'll
 > *never* achieve the critical mass of interdisciplinary,
 > intercontextual communication that's a *minimum* requirement for
 > solving the multidimensional UFO riddle. Some 'woo-woo' might be the
 > price we have to pay for this, but the alternative would seem to be
 > a situation that could set our understanding back many decades...
 > and that is no doubt precisely what some people would like to have
 > happen.

I get really nervous when someone starts talking of mixing science with
metaphysics.  Why?  Because, I do not feel that there is any relationship.
Science is concerned with demonstrable, mechanical things whereas metaphysics
are concerned with the esoteric and undemonstrable.  For example, when Illya
channels "Ramtha," there is no way to measure, quantify or demonstrate the
process that is occurring.  There is absolutely no proof that anything unusual
is going on except to say that it appears that Illya is in contact with an
agency.  This is not solid proof of its authenticity.  The discipline of
science is this:  If A can demonstrate something occurs, he places the
procedures in his notes.  A sends his work to B across the country and B is
able to duplicate the process using the procedures that A has outlined and the
phenomenon repeats itself.  Back to the channeler.  This person can repeat the
procedures but it cannot be examined by A or B.  It is totally up to the word
of the channeler that someone is talking through them.  Further, if the
channeler could produce information that could be demonstrated to have been
channeled that could be tied to a future event, and this could be done
consistently, then there would be something for a scientific person to begin
hypothesizing and formulating some models to begin work.  Again, channelers
don't even produce this kind of information.  So, where do we go from here?

Finally, personal feelings do not make a scientific fact.  There can be no
working relationship between a metaphysician and a scientist simply because
there is no common ground.  However, it is a requirement by all to have an
open mind and to attempt to find a middle ground on the road to discovery.

On another note, the lady that claims to be from Venus is totally outrageous.
There is no scientific evidence that Venus is habitable by anyone.  Until
something more concrete breaks, if it even does, that supports the possibility
that someone of human nature could live on Venus, I would say that there
should be no room for a person with any ability to think critically to arrive
at the conclusion that this woman is talking out of her glutius maximus.
Sadly, though, the press is not intelligent enough to deduce that for
themselves either and they print such trash to discredit the serious work that
is being done.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Mike Keithly)
Subject: Letter
Date: 20 May 91 20:30:00 GMT

I just recieved this in the mail today, from who i dont know but here it is
in it's entirety.

             THIS INFORMATION COULD SAVE YOUR LIFE AND FREEDOM
         THE COMING "OFFICIAL" ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE ALIEN PRESENCE ON EARTH
    WHY "STAR WARS", THE HUBBLE SPACE TELSCOPE,THE SUDDEN FALL OF COMMUNISM?
______________________________________________________________________________

What is going on?  Something very sinister is going on.  Polls reveal that
over 90% of the americans people believe in UFO's and 95% of these people
believe the government is keeping this knowledge from the public.  But Why?
Are they afraid the people  will panic if an "Official" announcement were
made? Hardly. Such an announcement would create interest and excitement and
many questions, particularly by the churches, but do not panic.  Why then the
continued cover- up?

There is overwhelming evidence in the past several years from "Whistle
Blowers" retired military officers who have finally said, "Enough is enough!
It's time the government told the people the truth!" These officers, such as
Navy Intelligence officer, William Cooper, Major John Lear (whose father
founded the Lear Jet Corp.) and Air Force officer William English, to name
but a few, have all discovered the truth, and at the risk of their very
lives, are trying to alert YOU to the secrets behind the UFO's and the Alien
Presence on this earth. These people worked on the secret projects, had
access to 'classified' Top Secret documents , had seen with there own eyes
'captured' aliens, or extreterrestrial entities, UFO's and the incredible
technology they brought with them.

Sightings of UFO's have been reported throughout history, and biblical and
historic references to "Flaming Chariots" huge flying 'birds' and odd looking
beings predate our history by thousands of years.  In the 1940's several
alien spacecraft were recovered by the U.S. and other countries, along with a
few dead aliens and one live one they named EBE (a name suggested by
Dr.Vannever Bush and was short for Extraterrestrail Biolgical Entity).

In 1953 astronomers discoverd large objects in space which were moving toward
earth.  At first they believed they were asteroids, but later evidence proved
the objects could only be spaceships.  Project Sigma and Project Plato
intercepted alien radio communication and using the computer binary language,
was able to arrange a landing that resulted in face-to-face contact with
alien beings from another planet.  Meanwhile, a race of human-looking aliens
contacted the U.S. Government, warning us that the aliens orbiting the
equator were hostile beings from Orion.  These human-type aliens demanded we
dismantle and destroy our nuclear weapons, that we were on a path of
self-destruction and we must stop killing each other, stop polluting the
earth, stop raping the earths natural resources and learn to live in harmony
with one another. President Eisenhower rejected these demands.


Later in 1954 the race of aliens, known as Greys, from Zeta Reticuli area in
space, who had been orbiting the equator, landed at Holloman Air Force base.
they stated their planet was dying and needed quarters on earth to conduct
genetic experiments theat might allow their race to survive; this in exchange
for certain technology.  President Eisenhower  met with the aliens and a
formal treaty was signed.  The treaty stated the aliens would not interfere
in our affairs and we would not interfere in theirs.  We would keep their
presence on earth secret; they would furnish us with advanced technology.
They could abduct humans on a limited basis for the purpose of medical
examination and monitoring, with the stipulation that the humans would not be
harmed, would be returned to their point of abduction, that the humans have
no memory of the event.  It was also agreed the alien bases would be
constructed underground, beneath Indian reservations in the 4 corners area of
Utah, New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado.  Another was to be constructed in
Nevada in the area known as S-4, about 7 miles south of area 51, known as
'Dreamland'.  A multi-billion dollar secret fund was organized and kept by
the Military Office of the White House, supposedly to build secret
underground sites for the President and the staff in case of military
attacks.

                         Cont Next Message

                         Mike Keithly



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



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


From: [e-mail] (Mike Keithly)
Subject: Letter (Pt 2) Conclusion
Date: 20 May 91 23:49:00 GMT

(Cont from previous message)


By secret Executive Memorandum, NSC5410, Eisenhower established a permanent
committee known as "Majority Twelve" (MJ12) to oversee and conduct all covert
activities with the aliens.  This included FBI director J. Edgar Hoover and
six leaders of the 'Council on Foreign Relations, known as the 'Wise Men' and
later others from the Trilateral Commision.  George Bush, Gordon Dean, and
Brzezinski were among them.

A major finding of the commision was the aliens were using humans and animals
for a source on glandular secretions, enzymes, hormonal secretions, blood and
in horrible genetic experiments.  The aliens explained these actions as
necessary for their survival, that if their genetic structure were not
improved, their race would cease to exist.

The ruling powers decided that one means of funding the alien project was to
corner the illegal drug market.  A young ambitious member of the Council on
Foreign Relations was approached.  His name is George Bush who at the time
was preident and CEO of Zapata Oil Co. based in Texas.  Zapata Oil was
experimenting with offshore oil drilling and it was arranged that the drugs
could be shipped from South America to the offshore platforms by fishing
boats, then transferred to the U.S. shore by normal transportation, thus
avoiding search by customs agents.  The plan worked better than anyone
expected, and today the CIA controls all the world's illegal drug markets.
One should remember, it was George Bush who first started selling drugs to
our children. The drug money was used to finance the deep underground alien
bases.

Conclusions: the Bilderburgers, the Council on Foreign Relations and the
Trilateral Commision are the SECRET GOVERNMENT and rule this nation through
MJ-12 and the study group known as the Jason Society.

Throughout history the aliens have manipulated and/or ruled the human race
through various secret societies, religion and the occult.  The CFR and the
Trilateral Commision are in complete control of the alien technology and the
nation's economy.  Eisenhower was the last president to know  the entire
overview  of the alien problem.  Succeeding presidents were told only what
MJ-12 wanted them to know, and it was NOT the truth.  MJ-12 presented each
new president with a picture of a lost alien culture seeking to renew itself,
build a home on this planet and shower us with gifts of technology.  Each
president has bought the story hook, line, and sinker.  Meanwhile, innocent
people continue to suffer unspeakable horrors at the handsof alien and human
scientists who are engaged in barbarous research  that would make the Nazis
pale in comparison.  As if that is not enough, many people end up as food for
the insatiable alien appetite for biological enzymes, hormonal secretions and
blood.  At least 1 in every 40 Americans have been implanted with alien
devices that are used to control them if necessity calls.

By 1989 over 3 million 'Greys' are occupying these deep multi-level
underground complexes.  Level 7 at Dulce is called "Nightmare Hall". They
have welched on their agreement on abducting humans; today over 25 million
citizens have been abducted and implanted, a literal army awaiting oreders to
march! (Whitley Strieber has written bestselling on his personal expierience
as have many others).  For this reason other nations were informed.  Within 5
months the communist monolith Russia was dismantled to unite with the U.S.
and it's technology to fight the invasion.  The Hubble Space Telescope was
created to keep a watchful eye on the invasion fleet; Star Wars technology
has been developed to hopefully stop them in outer space before they can get
to the earth.

Today, the government is on the horns of a dilemma.  Too may sources are
releasing alien information.  The public could get angry at continued
secrecy. So MJ-12 plans soon to make an "Official" announcement, under
controlled conditions, probably Area 51.  Network TV will be called to meet
the staged 'landing' of the aliens, these being the Greys.  They will come
bearing gifts, technology that supposedly will heal Cancer and AIDS, retard
aging, etc.  They will tell us they are 'saviors of humanity' who have come
to defend the earth against an invasion of man-eating aliens called Reptoids.
This story is a LIE, they already work for the Reptoids!  Their plan is to
unify the world into a One-world Government, a 'New World Order' with the
argument that only this can defeat the invasion by Reptoids.  This is a trap
to enslave the world's population.  Control will be accomplished through the
money system, a universal currency controlled by certain international
bankers, who for years have been lackeys of the aliens, who seized upon their
greed and lust for wealth and power as a means to bring about their evil plan
to control the earth.  (This also being the scenario predicted in the Bible's
'Book of Revelation' wherein only those who accept the Mark of the Beast (the
aliens being the 'Beast' and the 'Mark' being some sort of laser tattoo or
Credit Card they will use, which will allow people to buy and sell goods).
Those who do not accept this 'Mark' must live outside the money system and
survive somehow on their own, through barter etc.

SO BE AWARE! ONLY YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF THIS FAKE INVASION AND FAKE RAPTURE CAN
PREVENT IT FROM HAPPENING. DEMAND THE TRUTH FROM YOUR GOVERNMENT. TELL THEM
YOU KNOW ABOUT THE ALIENS AND THAT THERE ARE GOOD ALIENS AND BAD ALIENSAND
THAT MJ-12 IS PROMOTING THE BAD ALIENS AND THE ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT THEY HOPE
TO CONTROL.

                              Mike Keithly

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Burke)
Subject: Woo-woo
Date: 20 May 91 07:16:00 GMT

Mike Corbin writes:

 >
 > On another note, the lady that claims to be from Venus is
 > totally outrageous. There is no scientific evidence that
 > Venus is habitable by anyone.  Until something more
 > concrete breaks, if it even does, that supports the
 > possibility that someone of human nature could live on
 > Venus, I would say that there should be no room for a
 > person with any ability to think critically to arrive at
 > the conclusion that this woman is talking out of her
 > glutius maximus.

As a matter of fact, during the very week that this conference
was going on, U.S. News did a *cover story* entitled "What We
Know About Venus" based on the latest info beamed to earth by
good-ol' human-made technology.  We now know that the surface of
Venus is hot enough to melt lead and that it is a fair model of
the way many people imagine hell to be like.  Of course, back
when George Adamski was trotting around the world on his
"diplomatic immunity" passport, no one had a clue about what
Venus was really like.  Now that Wendelle has a new book out on
Adamski, it is very important for him to get someone like "Omnec
Onec" to tell the believers about the wonderful climate on Venus,
to provide "support" for Adamski's idiotic tales.
                                                  --  John

--
John Burke - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 409

                            Wednesday, May 29th 1991

Today's Topics:

                          Re: Letter (Pt 2) Conclusion
                             Re: ARTHUR C. CLARK BAR
                                  Re: FLIGHT 19
                             Re: ALIEN ALLOYS/GREEN
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                  Re: NUKE 'EM!
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                        Re: 'UFO Abductions' show on CBS
                                     GB film
                     Meier, Stevens, Tucson and Camelotosis
                     Re: Meier, Stevens, Tucson And The Moon

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

From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Letter (Pt 2) Conclusion
Date: 21 May 91 05:21:00 GMT

Mike,
    Thanks for printing this woo-woo stuff.  That letter HAD to be from
Bill Cooper, betcha.  This sounds like what he talked about 2-3 weeks
ago over a Phoenix radio station.  It also looks suspiciously like
something I saw in one of Tim Beckley Green's magazines...
    Let's not hold our breath!   :-)
                 Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: ARTHUR C. CLARK BAR
Date: 18 May 91 16:46:49 GMT

Me not post messages or express views? I can't help running off at the
fingers sometimes. I was commenting to Jim because if any of you still take
the time to read UFO on Fidonet, you'll see a couple of AKA posters who are
starting the Reptiles are comming trand again. If someone asks them for
evidence they get a response like, "Oh you closed minded people will never
understand why you are so stupid." Which as usual has nothing to do with hard
or even soft facts about what's going on. Last week I saved a message from
someone who says they have built a UFO but we are not ready for the
technology yet so it's secret. The week before it was the Greys and the
agreements we made, including the world wide underground tunnel systems.
There is an endless cycle of incredible storys, which do more to confuse
issues than any disinformation campaign ever could. The Govt. doesn't have to
throw a monkey wrench into things, it's being covered by others already. As
usual a gold star goes to Paranet because of open minded skepticism. Seldome
do I see people blasting away with personal flames, and even unusual theorys
are received with an inquiring interest, questioned and evaluated from a
reasonable perspective.

As for the Fox sisters and many others from (corrected) the 1800's it was
parlor tricks and fun. Sometimes it was so well done that the hoax took on
realistic acceptance. People like the amazing Randi serve a needed purpose,
that which makes us reflect upon events, or evaluate before just accepting
out of blind following. It seperates some of the frauds so time can be
invested in more efficient research instead of wasted chasing tall tales. The
"debunkers" cannot refute everything, therefore the smaller percentage of
reports or events can be examined more closely.

I guess what I am saying is, take it all in, file away the obvious erroneous
reports, shelf the questionable events, and concentrate on the most likely to
produce verifiable research materials. (note: I didn't say throw anything
away, just put it on the back burner)

And don't forget Spam is 100 years old now!
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: FLIGHT 19
Date: 18 May 91 17:01:48 GMT

Sure thing John and if they find them to be the right ones, the initial
story that started the Bermuda Triangle will have died. Considering numerous
other cases that have been solved or corrected into the real incidents, I
will be even more certian that there is absolutly nothing going on except
great imagination.

The Bermuda Triangle (Devil's Triangle) will live on forever just like
Altantis, Lemur, and MU in the hearts and minds of readers, if not ever in
reality. One of the interesting points is that more planes are lost over the
continental US, with no trace, than in the seas SE of Florida. There is an
interesting book I read years ago about the Great Lakes Triangle (or whatever
it was labeled) which shows that many mysterious ship disasters occured on
the Great Lakes for unexplained reasons. The author had more events and
evidence than Bermuda Triangle writers. I guess the bandwagon wasn't as big
for inland lakes?

On the other hand I can bet you my hard drive that if these are confirmed,
via hard evidence (serial numbers on planes, engines, markings etc.) someone
will appear and say "They were planted there as a cover-up" to hide the truth.
And if it's not the right planes, we still have a mystery to solve.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: ALIEN ALLOYS/GREEN
Date: 18 May 91 17:14:09 GMT

Well you sure have done your homework... Now I have to print your message
and do mine. I will try to reply within the week about the sources of Bright
Green meteors. It is unusual, not the normal color expected, and it was
attributed to some slower falling horizontal occurances. I remember that it
said usually there is no debris from this type of meteor. As for the
pyrotechnic colors, I recognize some from 25 years ago, but I'm happy typing
with all my fingers and both eyes so I don't fool with that stuff anymore. My
brother on the other hand is a specialist in that field, and should be able
to give me some answers. We just had a fireworks factory explode near here,
and the family that runs it says, this shows that even experts who are
extremely careful are in danger. WHen I almost got my head blown off in 84 I
gave it up myself, my hearing is perminantly defective.

May take more than a week now that I think about it, busy week ahead my
office manager is on vacation, but I will try to remember to find some
sources and confirmation of my posting.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 18 May 91 17:28:07 GMT

I saw one Thurs. May 2nd at about 6pm CDT while driving on a country road
heading East. It was not dark out yet and still the bright green flare showed
up well in the Eastern sky. It burnt out after awhile. Probably over Lake
Michigan or even farther away from me. Not as spectacular as yours, but they
are pretty sights. Eta Aquarids seems to coincide somewhat. I'm looking
forward to Aug. as usual. I try to get into the woods at about 3am and watch
the peak showers just before sunrise.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 19 May 91 07:57:00 GMT


 > $200,000 income for the first book, and possibly a follow up
 > book. No matter how much it is estimated he makes a year,
 > another 200 grand would impress anyone.

  Dunno. By all accounts Ed's a very successful businessman; I suspect
the IRS bit off an outrageous chunk. He probably got to keep around
$70,000, which still isn't bad at all. More to come, of course.
  Whether that's substatial compared to his usual yearly income, no
one knows. Could be he's netting a million or more a year, so $200,000
might not be all that incredibly significant.
  On the other hand, could be his personal finances and/or business
was in deep trouble and some extra cash came in mighty handy.

 > My personal opinion is that Ed's photos and book are getting far
 > too much undeserved attention. If I am correct, you feel quite
 > the opposite. No problem from me, in many ways I'd like to find
 > out, through reasonable evidence, that I am wrong. I still don't
 > know why the Hudson Valley events, or the Belgium UFO's are not
 > getting as much press coverage?

  I think the main difference is that the Gulf Breeze incidents have
had a focus, and that's been Ed Walters from the start. Hudson Valley,
Belgium and Fyffe haven't had one person or group as a focus of
attention.
  I mentioned somewhere along the way that Ed could sell sand to
Arabs, and he's been keeping the ball rolling.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 19 May 91 08:01:01 GMT


 > One thing you mentioned, I also keep in mind... Just because
 > there was an ability to hoax a photo, does not mean it was a
 > hoax.

  Yep, that's for sure.
  Speaking of hoaxed photos (or not), I noted a while back in a couple
of books of ufo photos published by Wendelle Stevens that the same
object that appears in the Adamski photos was also photographed by
quite a few other people at other places. Have to get back to that
sometime.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: NUKE 'EM!
Date: 19 May 91 08:10:02 GMT


 > Oh I guess it would be a bit dangerous to be toting a giant
 > microwave under a helicopter anyway. I sure would not go up
 > without a box of "top shelf" on the seat next to me, so I could
 > eat after I fried my fanny. 8*)

  I'm a little partial to Orville Redenbacher myself. Even met the guy
once. ;-)

 > So if this is a reasonable method, I wonder where the radiation
 > is comming from, and I don't think a blimp is the answer either.
 > Remember the people who said way in the begining it was SDS
 > testing from space? Maybe they had something? How about errant
 > bursts of radiation from our Sun?

  OK, so let's consider a satellite.
  It could be fairly large, nuclear-powered, so we could have a pretty
strong microwave transmitter (beam, I guess?). Don't see much problem
there.
  Could we control this thing precisely enough to make the designs
that appeared last summer?  Dunno. Maybe.
  Something Brandenberg (Brandenburg?) noted was that if the grass was
microwaved too long, no only would it flatten, it would shortly die.
He said that he could precisely time the exposure so that the grass
would flatten but wouldn't die.
  So we'd have to control the energy output and exposure time so that
whatever we were nuking would flatten but not die. I suppose we could
do that with a fire-control spotter on the ground to make sure we were
hitting the type of plant we were trying to flatten, but I don't think
I'd like to be that spotter.
  Now, the big question.
  Is it even remotely reasonable that someone's testing an SDI
microwave weapon by zapping wheatfields in southern England, the
American midwest and Manitoba?
  Somehow that doesn't play too well.

 > possible explination would be to does the crop, and have
 > something which is time released so that days, months, weeks
 > (who knows) later, the circle will form without residual
 > evidence or footprints. (oops that's "dose" the crops) And it's
 > only an idea.

  Now that's a great idea that I haven't heard anyone at all mention.
I'm sure there's something that would work that way, but I haven't the
foggiest what it might be.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Greenen)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 19 May 91 15:44:00 GMT

You just set back Ufology 20 years!
73's    ---Jm---
--
Jim Greenen - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: 'UFO Abductions' show on CBS
Date: 21 May 91 05:23:00 GMT


 > Finally, my VCR puked.  If anyone has a good copy of the
 > segment, I would like to arrange to get it.

  Geez, Mike, you're the third person who's mentioned that his VCR
either died or ate the tape of that show.
  I have a tape, which I've just loaned to my brother-in-law. I
suppose his VCR will proceed to eat my tape.
  Anyway, if I get it back, I can make you a copy.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: GB film
Date: 21 May 91 06:14:00 GMT


  From the Gulf Breeze Sentinel, May 16, 1991........

  On May 10, 1991, I, Jun-ichi Yaoi and my Japanese film crew arrived
in Gulf Breeze in the hope of documenting the local UFO sightings.
NIPON television network, the largest/oldest commercial broadcasting
company of Japan, sponsors our investigative documentary to be aired
as part of the two-hour special nationwide in Japan.
  Bob Oechsler, a former NASA systems specialist, from WAshington,
D.C., accompanied us as a consultant to advise and analyse any
evidence that we might be able to capture on film.
  At approximately 11:30 p.m. Bob Oechsler told us that a "red UFO"
had been sighted to the northwest of the Holiday Inn where we were
staying. We were preparing for bed but we quickly got our cameras and
set up a "sky watch" near the hotel swimming pool overlooking the
Pensacola Bay.
  Fifteen or twenty minutes passed. Then, out over the water, a bright
red object suddenly appeared. The sky was clear over Gulf Breeze and
the Bay, with most of the rain clouds still visible over Pensacola.
What we saw and filmed was amazing! It was brilliant and I must say,
beautiful. As recorded on our 36 to one zoom lens, the UFO moved to
the nrotheast for one minute and twenty seconds before suddenly
winking out and the returning for a few seconds as a small white ball
of light which then also winked out.
  Our film of the UFO clearly shows a circular ring of red "energy"
with a center glowing orange core. It will be further analyzed to
identify any structure. We have interviewed dozens of local witnesses
who have taken video and photos of the UFO but we are particularly
impressed with the similarity with photographs taken by Ed Walters in
1988.
                                    Jun-ichi Yaoi, director
                                    5-7, Kojimachi, Chiyoda-ku
                                    Tokyo, Japan

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Clark Matthews)
Subject: Meier, Stevens, Tucson and Camelotosis
Date: 20 May 91 09:20:00 GMT


 > ->great statesmen like Garry Hart and John, Robert, and
 > Ted->Kennedy have function effectively despite numerous
 > alleged
 >
 > Great statesmen???? Gary Hart??? TED KENNEDY??????
 >
 > Is this 201-451-3063....?
 >

Why, Jim, let us be open-minded here!

How shameful to dismiss these and other national figures simply
because they are physically challenged by handicaps like
pedophilia, satyriasis, nymphomania, necrophilia, priapism,
dipsomania, sociopathic lucre disorder (SLD, or Camelotosis), et
al!  These terrible handicaps are no reason to dismiss them as
human beings or deprive them of the opportunities and
considerations we all enjoy as free Americans, equal under the
law.

Just because someone drinks to excess, Deep-Sixes the office
help, engages in multiple daily trysts, subborns Civil Servants
into the role of procurers and compels the Secret Service and
FBI to clean up the messes is no reason to demean their
accomplishments in statecraft.  Why should worn-out, clinging
starlets like Marilyn Monroe, dime-a-dozen clerical staff like
Mary Jo Kopechne, parvenus like the raped Palm Beach heiress,
and boring old Harvard academics (like the ones who *insisted*
that Ted Kennedy couldn't *pay* a clever little bourgeois to
take Kennedy's exams, can you believe it) stand between
luminaries like the men above (and their lawyers ... and their
buddies who publish The New York Times ... and their hangers on
who run NBC) and the rightful destiny of America's Best &
Brightest?

Consider the National Interest!  And then arrange a quiet
charter to get the perps out of town.  Have the Secret Service
handle it -- you can always give the guy a job as gardener on
one of the estates, right?

BTW, have you been following the Palm Beach Story?  The "family
retainer" who lied to the Palm Beach flatfeet about
Kennedy/Smith's whereabouts was Robert Kennedy's Secret Service
bodyguard. I wonder if he was with Bobby when Bobby wasn't in
L.A., the night Marilyn Monroe died.  I heard something about a
fast, quiet charter flight that time, too.

Anyway, I'm sure you'll now agree that just because someone is a
slave to their appetites -- like Wendelle and nubile young
things or JFK and any three females under 60 at the same time --
that's no reason to doubt their veracity or assume that they're
(*shudder*) greedy, amoral, or exposed to blackmail.  Why, the
two are totally separate issues.  Right?

Oh, my friend at the National Desk wants to know if your kids
really read those books on the second-floor bookshelf.  And then
there are those old parking tickets?  From Connecticut?

God Bless America!

    Clark

PS -- hehehehehe.
PPS -- I like the article!


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Clark Matthews)
Subject: Re: Meier, Stevens, Tucson And The Moon
Date: 20 May 91 09:35:00 GMT


 >                Could you tell me if you received my book
 > review and were you able to forward it on to Clark
 > Matthews?  For some odd reason, I am unable to dial up his
 > BBS directly.
 >

Linda, what book review?  Haven't got it.

Your phone troubles are mighty strange -- have you tried using
the access code as we did before?

E.g.:  ATDT10288,12014513063  (AT&T)
       ATDT10666,12014513063  (Sprint)


I've located some of the private books of moon photos and am
arranging for scanning.  Stay tuned.

Best,
  Clark


--
Clark Matthews - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 410

                            Wednesday, May 29th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                  Miscellaneous
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                  Re: The Moon
                         Re: James Randi vs. Uri Geller
                                Dr. Robert Nathan
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
         Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info-Paranet Newsletters . . .
                                     (none)
                        Bicyclists and Bush lost in a fog
                                  Miscellaneous
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                                   Dr. Nathan
                                     (none)
          Meier, pictures and plagiarism...and crop circles (that's all)
                                     Letter

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Miscellaneous
Date: 26 May 91 03:35:45 GMT

From: [e-mail] (UFOlogy SIG)


The world of UFOlogy seems to have grown into the same cate-
gory as the Pentagon and the Department of Health and Human
Services (i.e., the Pentagon wants peace so it makes more
bombs and artillery and the Department of Health and Human
Services hires more people so that they can attempt to give
more people money, but just end up hiring more people).  The
people in the field promote the field not in an attempt to find
out an answer, just to add to the bizarre, the areas that
can't be checked, and to expouse theories of secrecy by the
government.  All points that could be true, but which cannot
be checked.

I've opened up many new publications only to find great
articles of both scientific and amateur written articles written
on the subject of UFOlogy, only to find in the back of the
publications ways in which you can find out your secret lottery
number schedule, how to tune in the aliens so when they fly
over your house you can awaken, and which crystal to wear depen-
ding on the mood of the day or the mood that you want to be
in.  All this limits the credibility to what those in
UFOlogy truly want to accomplish, and that is to find
out the truth in a nuts and bolts fashion without having
those with bizarre claims and remedies going along for the
ride in this gullible market.  And indeed, the market is full
of it.

If you go to a book store in an attempt to find a book on UFOs,
you'll proabably end up in the cult section of the store looking
at not only books about UFOs, but also about spirits of old
talking to today's people, the collective works of Nostradamus,
and some person wearing magenta and looking like Judy Tenuta
wearing an accordian chanting some ancesteral chime that will
enlighten the world on a new course.

The best books on the subject of UFOs seem to be those that just
bring forth data that was acquired, but not added to.  I
cite works in which historical events have been brought for-
ward without comment.  I tend to disregard those in which the
author has brought upon themselves a coveted degree in
hypnosis or a feeling that they know more than anyone else.
Those that deal with the subject as clearly a reporter without
trying to get into a contest of whits with those with scientific
credentials seem to hold more water and are less embarrasing
in the end, especially when we are faced with many new books
and claims that are going to quite probably blow up in the
face of those who expouse them.

Whenever I post sometthing on the Cleveland Free-Net, I tend to
post it from the author and make no comment in support of it.
I do sometimes make a remark about something that is quite
remarkable (i.e., Russian UFOnauts with small heads and
three eyes or brain wave masturbation techniques intened
on bringing your closer to thee).

People in fringe groups or even with fringe beliefs tend to
gravitate towards the UFOlogist community.  Don't let those who
are fringe elements harm us.  Don't let us harm ourselves
by adhering or even listening to or adoping their views.  Let us
stay a nuts and bolts group who only report what people say,
investigate what we can, and keep our remarks only to the
facts concerning the case without offering our sometimes
embarrassing theories.




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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 21 May 91 21:24:00 GMT


 > You just set back Ufology 20 years!

I did? Oops. Oh, well, back to the drawing board, gang.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: The Moon
Date: 22 May 91 06:02:00 GMT

g#Mm
Hi Mike,
        I'm not sure about active volcanoes on the moon, but I do know
scientists left earthquake detectors up there and occasionally
earthquakes are registered.
        However, where there's smoke, there's fire, so there could be
active volcanoes, although I dunno....
        I'll try to check.
           Linda



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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: James Randi vs. Uri Geller
Date: 22 May 91 06:49:00 GMT

I had heard this, but was told to keep it to myself until it was official.
Guess its official. Its a sorry state of affairs.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Dr. Robert Nathan
Date: 23 May 91 03:30:00 GMT

On Wednesday, May 29, I shall be speaking with Dr. Robert Nathan
at the California Institute of Technology's Jet Propulsion
Laboratory re: Gulf Breeze photos.

As most of you know, Dr. Nathan's view of Ed Walter's films
differs significantly from Dr. Bruce Maccabee's opinion.
I find it quite puzzling that these two respectable scientists
should have such opposing convictions.

If any of you have any questions or comments for Dr. Nathan, please
reply to this message, and I shall post his response at the end of
next week.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Gresser)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 22 May 91 22:43:00 GMT

I hope to get out to some of the higher (darker) elevations in August to see
some of the more spectacular showers.  Also, Arizona is gonna get a 70%
eclipse in July.  Can't wait for that either.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 23 May 91 04:57:00 GMT

Steve:
     That eclipse should be awesome for us Zonies (that's AriZonies for
you uninitiated folks).  Isn't it occurring on the 17 of July?  Do you
have an approx. time?
     Thanks,

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



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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info-Paranet Newsletters . . .
Date: 27 May 91 01:35:27 GMT

From: [e-mail]

Mr. T. Scott Crain, Jr., published author and MUFON State Director for
Pennsylvania, has asked me to submit this note for Info-Paranet Newsletter
readers concerning his new book that was published by MUFON. (I understand
that this is also the *first* book proper to be published by MUFON.) This
article is *slightly* edited (punctuation, spelling, etc.) for increased
readability, but otherwise it is a faithful rendering of the materials with
which I was provided for transmission.

'This article originally appeared in the April 1991 issue of the *MUFON
UFO Journal*, No. 276, (c) Copyright 1991 by the Mutual UFO Network, 103
Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, Texas 78155-4099.'

It appears here by permission of MUFON for circulation in Info-Paranet
Newsletters. (The author is T. Scott Crain, Jr.)

-------------<<<Article begins here>>>-------------

The Book on MJ-12

     Nothing in the past few years has caused more controversy in the UFO
field than the release of the Operation Majestic-12 Briefing Document in
1987. The document, dated September 18, 1952, states that on September
24, 1947, President Harry S Truman established a secret panel of twelve
distinguished scientists, military [officials], and intelligence
officials to oversee and study crashed UFOs and their occupants.
Majestic's first case [had] occurred two months earlier, when the team
allegedly recovered a crashed disc on July 7 near Roswell, New Mexico.
Although the Roswell crash is well-documented in UFO literature, is what
is described in the MJ-12 document itself an accurate portrayal of the
recovery?

For four years UFO researchers have been debating whether the MJ-12
document is authentic and whether or not the content of the document
represents reality.

Shortly after the MJ-12 document was released, Manitoba UFO
researcher Grant Cameron and I began looking for former scientists who
may have had knowledge of the MJ-12 committee. We worked under the
assumption that the document was accurate in its description of a
special group to handle UFO recoveries for the government. If MJ-12 was
real, someone working in the upper levels of the government would surely
remember a committee by that name that was active in the late 1940s and
early 1950s.

Confirming MJ-12 has been difficult. All the original, designated
MJ-12 members are dead. Although various alleged government documents
have been uncovered alluding to the MJ-12 committee, the U.S. Government
has not publicly acknowledged that these documents or, for that matter,
the MJ-12 documents, are genuine.

An interesting development occurred in November 1983, when UFO
researcher William Steinman received a letter back from American
physicist Dr. Robert I. Sarbacher regarding UFO recoveries. In the early
1950s, Sarbacher was working as a consultant for the military's Research
and Development Board, the same Board that allegedly controlled
Operation Majestic-12, according to the MJ-12 documents. In his letter
to Steinman, Sarbacher reported that secret meetings about UFO
recoveries were held but [that] he did not personally attend them.
Gordon Creighton wrote in the October 1985 issue of the *Flying Saucer
Review*, published in England, that Dr. Sarbacher stated [that] these
meetings were held at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio.
Apparently those involved in the recoveries were to report their
findings to scientists connected with the Research & Development Board.

Sarbacher wrote [to] Steinman that he did talk to some of the people at
the office about what was learned. According to Sarbacher, U.S.
laboratories analyzed UFO hardware from the crashes and ... the pilots
looked like certain insects observed on earth.

During a telephone interview with UFO researcher Stanton Friedman,
Sarbacher was asked if he could recall anyone who did attend the
meetings. Sarbacher gave enough clues to Friedman about a scientist he
remembered being there that when Steinman cross-checked the information,
the description fit the profile for Dr. Eric A. Walker, the former
President of Penn State University. Steinman said [that] he called
Sarbacher to confirm his suspicions and [that] Sarbacher allegedly
confirmed that Dr. Eric Walker, who was then Executive Secretary of the
Research & Development Board, attended all the UFO meetings.

When Cameron and I discovered [that] Dr. Walker might be involved, we set
out to document what he may have learned from those meetings and what the
Canadian and American governments were doing with this new-found
knowledge.

Although our investigation started in 1987, William Steinman had been
familiar with Walker's potential involvement since 1984. After several
 ... [unproductive] attempts to correspond with Walker by mail, Steinman
phoned him on August 30, 1987. During the conversation, Steinman said
that Walker indicated [that] he had known about MJ-12 since 1947 and
that Steinman '... was delving into an area that you can do absolutely
nothing about,' and to '... drop it."

Cameron and I pursued the Walker connection for a book we were working
on entitled *UFOs, MJ-12, and the Government* [subtitle: *A Report on
Government Involvement in UFO Crash Retrievals*] up until 1991. Walker
was contacted by various UFO researchers from 1987-1990, and we were
privy to the notes of these conversations in which Walker made some very
candid remarks about MJ-12 and UFO crashes. In a conversation in 1990,
Walker described MJ-12 as a '... handful of elite' and [that] he would
know if you were invited into the group.

Besides the in-depth reporting on Walker, we investigated several other
scientists who may have been involved, including Dr. Luis W. Alvarez, a
Nobel Prize winner, who allegedly assisted in the recovery of a saucer in
Mexico. We corresponded frequently with news commentator George Knapp of
KLAS-TV in Las Vegas, Nevada, to get the story behind physicist Robert
Lazar, who claims the government has at least nine flying saucers
they're test flying and taking apart out at Nellis Air Force Base, in
Nevada. We looked at the experiences noted UFO researchers have had in
dealing with the government, including those of Bill Moore, Linda Howe,
Wilbert Smith, Lee Graham and Donald Keyhoe. We also looked at putative
government agents who appear to be involved, including Richard Doty and
several who go by the names 'Falcon' and "Condor."

We examined several UFO crashes that the government appears to have been
involved in, including those in Roswell, New Mexico; Kecksburg,
Pennsylvania; and the Kalahari Desert in South Africa. MUFON's State
Director Stan Gordon opened up his files to us on the 1965 Kecksburg UFO
crash. New evidence released in December 1990 indicated that the
acorn-shaped object [recovered] was eventually moved to Wright-Patterson
Air Force Base. We corresponded with Michael Hesemann in Germany and
Henry Azadehdel in England to uncover the facts behind the alleged 1989
incident over South Africa, where a UFO was supposedly shot down by a
South African Air Force pilot.

Finally, we explored the possibility that perhaps what might have been
learned from UFO crashes in the late 1940s/early 1950s may have been
instrumental in helping the U.S. Government develop certain technologies
that are now being used on the advanced aircraft being secretly test
flown in the 'Dreamland' area of Nellis Air Force Base. The evidence we
have gathered seems to indicate [that] the government developed teams to
retrieve unknown aerial objects, that they analyzed the recovered UFO
hardware, and [that] they are now attempting to duplicate that technology
on today's aircraft.

Our book presents an interesting mix of various government documents,
letters, telephone notes, and photographs detailing how the government is
misleading the public about the true nature of UFOs.

* Grant Cameron and Scott Crain's new book *UFOs, MJ-12, and the
* Government---A Report on Government Involvement in UFO Crash
* Retrievals* is being published by the Mutual UFO Network and will be
* available May 1, 1991. The 218-page, 8.5x11 paperback book is heavily
* illustrated with documents, correspondence and photographs. The price
* for this revealing book is $18.45 plus $1.50 for postage and handling,
* totaling $19.95. Orders are now being taken by MUFON in Seguin, TX.
* [ADDR: Mutual UFO Network, 103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, TX 78155-4099 USA]
* Make checks or money orders payable to MUFON in the U.S.A. All foreign
* purchases must be by International Postal Money Order, checks made
* payable to a U.S. Bank with electronic route coding across the bottom
* of the check, or by cash in U.S. dollars.

-------------<<<Article ends here>>>-------------




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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: (none)
Date: 27 May 91 02:12:49 GMT

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


Subject: Bicyclists and Bush lost in a fog

?   From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
?   Date: 15 May 91 18:05:42 GMT
?
?   Does the article say when this happened (the actual date of the
?   occurance?) to the ten missing people?

Pete,

I typed in the story completely so there is no mention of date
of occurrence.  It turns out that the date I gave was correct.
The reason I was confused was that the date (May 14, 1991) of the
issue of the tabloid was the same date of the day I submitted it.
I forgot that I always receive Time and Newsweek the week before the
actual official date of issue.  I thought too much and confused myself!

?   I wonder if someone in France has the original and any follow-up
?   report on the 10 young riders. Maybe they rode over a cliff, in
?   which case it's 5 + 10 in recent months? Just wondering if there
?   are any more specifics. Interesting story.

Note that the police said they 'searched every square inch of
ground for miles around and there's no indication any of the
kids has ever been there.'  The cliff idea doesn't work there.

What do you mean by '5 + 10 in recent months.'

Finally, that same Canadian tabloid has just run a story about
an alien meeting with George Bush at Camp David.  There's a
picture (so it must be true?).  If anyone would like a copy of
that story, I would be willing to make a copy and send it.
Just posting would prevent you from seeing the picture of
the alien and Bush.  (I always thought Bush was taller.)

Greg ([e-mail])





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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Miscellaneous
Date: 26 May 91 20:30:00 GMT


 > From: [e-mail] (UFOlogy SIG)
 >
 >
 > I've opened up many new publications only to find great
 > articles of both scientific and amateur written articles written
 > on the subject of UFOlogy, only to find in the back of the
 > publications ways in which you can find out your secret lottery
 > number schedule, how to tune in the aliens so when they fly
 > over your house you can awaken, and which crystal to wear depen-
 > ding on the mood of the day or the mood that you want to be
 > in.  All this limits the credibility to what those in
 > UFOlogy truly want to accomplish, and that is to find
 > out the truth in a nuts and bolts fashion without having
 > those with bizarre claims and remedies going along for the
 > ride in this gullible market.  And indeed, the market is full
 > of it.

I agree that there is a lot of this that abounds in the publications, but does
this necessarily denegrate the actual content of some of the writing?  On the
other hand, I feel that this only indicates the viewpoint of most people who
read these publications, and that is that they are generally in that camp.

 > If you go to a book store in an attempt to find a book on UFOs,
 > you'll proabably end up in the cult section of the store looking
 > at not only books about UFOs, but also about spirits of old
 > talking to today's people, the collective works of Nostradamus,
 > and some person wearing magenta and looking like Judy Tenuta
 > wearing an accordian chanting some ancesteral chime that will
 > enlighten the world on a new course.

This is the fault of the publishers and the authors writing the books.  I have
seen numerous books published by some good authors with the classification
listed as "New Age" or "Occult."

 > People in fringe groups or even with fringe beliefs tend to
 > gravitate towards the UFOlogist community.  Don't let those who
 > are fringe elements harm us.  Don't let us harm ourselves
 > by adhering or even listening to or adoping their views.  Let us
 > stay a nuts and bolts group who only report what people say,
 > investigate what we can, and keep our remarks only to the
 > facts concerning the case without offering our sometimes
 > embarrassing theories.

Very interesting point.  But, let us not forget that we are dealing with a
phenomeona that has many strange elements to it.  We should not be as
concerned with the jacket covers and the trappings as we are with the hard
data that they contain.  Even the most bizarre claims may have important data
(signals) in them that, if applied and worked with properly, could yield some
very interesting conclusions.  On the same note, I feel it is important to
study, not by active participation, but by observation and testing.  Even
those who feel strongly about one viewpoint or another can be accused of not
looking at the whole picture.  Instead, they tend to accept given ideas and
notions without testing the data.  In addition, I feel it is very important to
re-evaluate our conceptions about those that we tend to label as "kooks" since
there could be very important data involved that would indicate more clearly
what it is that we may be dealing with.  We do know that even among the more
credible reports, there is that element which appears to be psychic.  Before
jumping to conclusions, we should attempt to model this process and apply
scientific observation to it to find out what the physiological elements are
at work here.  There is some very good work already done that clearly shows
the human brain can be stimulated to hallucination with certain frequencies in
the microwave range.  I believe that study will yield this physical property,
and may even bring us closer to the reason for implants, if they truly exist.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Gresser)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 26 May 91 20:12:00 GMT

->Does anyone know if this eclipse will be able to be seen
->elsewhere besides in Arizona?  I live in Santa Barbara Ca.
->and to put it frankly, would really like to see this
->eclipse.

Paul,
        Technically, the eclipse will not be "visible" in Arizona.  We'll
get about a 70% eclipse on 11 July 1991.  However, it will only be visible
with special tools, like a box with a hole in it (point the hole at the sun,
look at the opposite end of the box - NEVER NEVER NEVER look into the sun).
So, check your local papers, they should tell you about what time to look
for the eclipse, and - with some special tools - you should be able to see
it, too!


                                        Steve

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Dr. Nathan
Date: 27 May 91 01:31:00 GMT

Mike,     In which book does Ed
make the statement that Dr. Nathan
supports the authenticity of the Gulf Breeze photos? I've never
seen that in print! I'll ask him anyway.
  Sheldon
--
Sheldon Wernikoff - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: (none)
Date: 27 May 91 05:34:54 GMT

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


Subject:  Meier, pictures and plagiarism...and crop circles (that's all)

There was a comment about one picture in the 'Contact from the Pleiades'
book being a very poor fake.  Doesn't that seem out of place with all
the other excellent pictures?  Can we discard ALL if ONE appears to be
faked?  Wendelle Stevens said Meier's photos were the best he had ever
seen--in the book 'Light Years' by Gary Kinder.  (Oh, I see, but Stevens
molests children!)  It seems that the ones who bring forth the most valid
and objective data are the ones who have the most trouble and end up in
jail or 'broken' people.  Meanwhile, Bill Cooper just keeps lecturing and
scaring the sh*t out of people and making piles of money.

I understand that frequently authors put in non-truths to catch those
who would copy.  This would be true for any kind of investigative book.
One cannot be accused of plagiarism if one copies
truth because there is no way to prove that the second 'author'
didn't research the same material.  The writers of some trivia book
sued the creators of Trivial Pursuit under such conditions.  I believe
also, that the publishers at America West, who distribute Hatonn's
material, say they have a letter from the originator of the
'Original Hostage Krlll' story saying that it was just such a
plant--I don't know if a part of the story or the whole thing was a plant.

Billy Meier did not write the books 'Contact from the Pleiades I and II';
they were written by the Elders, were they not?  Could it be that they
inserted a fake picture so that if someone copied that picture, it would
be proof of plagiarism?  I don't know, just a thought.
It seems as though Billy Meier's pictures, for the most part,
are excellent and have stood up to (a lot of) scrutiny.

Someone just submitted a post talking about 'mircowaved' crop circles,
and there was another's 'weather' explanation earlier.  Do these
explanations account for the fact that the crop circles around Meier's
home resume growing in the HORIZONTAL position?  The 'Meier' grass didn't
DIE either, so the stalks were not broken.  How does the 'NUKED' grass
grow after exposure? Does it survive?  What about the grass exposed to
these unique winds in the laboratory?

Greg ([e-mail])





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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Letter
Date: 24 May 91 05:42:00 GMT

Mike Keithly said:

 > I just recieved this in the mail today, from who i
 > dont know but here it is in it's entirety.
 >
Well, there is your first problem, if they won't or don't
sign their name, warning flags should go up.

 > What is going on?  Something very sinister is going
 > on.

Something sinister always goes on, so which sinister are
you speaking of?
> Polls reveal that over 90% of the
americans
> people believe in UFO's and 95% of these people
> believe the government is keeping this knowledge from >
the public.

OK, but that is not news.

 > There is overwhelming evidence in the past several
 > years from "Whistle Blowers" retired military officers
 > who have finally said, "Enough is enough! It's time
 > the government told the people the truth!" These
 > officers, such as Navy Intelligence officer, William
 > Cooper, Major John Lear (whose father founded the Lear
 > Jet Corp.) and Air Force officer William English, to
 > name but a few, have all discovered the truth, and at
 > the risk of their very lives,

Keithly, if you believe that, PLEASE, call me, I got some
prime bottom land for sale!

First, Milton "Bilkum" Cooper was NEVER a Navy Intelligence
Officer. He was, when he claims he worked with Navy
Intelligence, an E-5, or if it were an Army rank for
example, a JUNIOR Sgt.  John Lear NEVER served in any
military service, although he is a civilian airline
Captain. Bill English was a Spec. Four, or E-4 to you, in
the Army, and carried an MOS in line repair.  I do not know
how this crap continues to survive, but I guess when people
just vomit this crap back up without doing any checking, I
just answered my own question.

And considering what you don't know, I will now stop, and
let you do some READING before we proceed any further.

Don Ecker

--
Don Ecker - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 411

                            Wednesday, May 29th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                  CROP CIRCLES
                          Uncle Sam's Moon Mountain...
                                  Re: FLIGHT 19
                     Re: MEIER, STEVENS, TUCSON AND CAMELOT
                                     Woo-woo
                                     Letter
                                     (none)
              Questions, questions, and more questions--any answers?
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                             Bush and Grey buddy...
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                  CROP CIRCLES
                                    Hard Copy
                                  Re: FLIGHT 19
                              Trilateral Commision.
                                Dr. Robert Nathan

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

From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 21 May 91 18:12:09 GMT

I tend to agree with your ideas. Ed is also destined to make a killing from
movie rights if there is one. He's no fool either way, and the constant flow
of information keeps GB in the lime light. Sometimes I think the UFO model
made out of Plans, was a great publicity plant. Just enough confusion and
question to keep the interest up. Lets say I'm trying to keep a story active,
I make a model, just close enough to be wrong (not matching the photos) with
plans that can be confused with older plans, conveintly leave it behind (or
plant it during an inspection) for someone to discover later, leak news of it
to the reporters, etc. This is not as far fetched as some other things we
come across.

Destined to remain a mystery, and that's the key to interest because by
nature we want answers.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: CROP CIRCLES
Date: 21 May 91 18:14:56 GMT

From: LARRY F. JOHNSON
    When I first began hearing of the "chemical and molecular changes"
in plants associated with the crop circles, I began scouring books and
articles trying to find a solid reference to the testing of the plants
within crop circles, and lab test results.
    Thus far, the only citation I've found which mentions a specific
test and laboratory is from a review of the latest Andrews and Delgado
book by Dennis Stacy in the March 1991 MUFON UFO Journal.  In the
review, Stacy expresses frustration over the vagueness of A&D 's
references to "the only laboratories in the UK conducting such a test".
    Stacy then quotes from "Crop Circles - The Mystery Deepens" by
Richard Beaumont -
    " In Stroud the HSC (UK & Ireland) Limited Laboratory provides a
specialized service where crystalline structures from blood are analysed
and crystalline patterns of herbs can be matched to those of the
each individual's needs and which has been successful in treating
patients holistically. "
    " This process being one of `energy medicine' was applied to the
cereal crop from various circles with interesting results."
    " From the photographs (see below) it is clear that there is a
noticeable change in the energy patterns of the corn from inside the
circle to that of the control sample which was taken from the outside of
the field."
    " This is just an interim finding as experiments are still being
carried out, and a report will be published later this year."
    I would be extremely happy if people would start beating me over the
head with the names of specific studies by specific laboratories, with
the names of specific individuals I could contact.  Until then my
skepticism about these "chemical and molecular changes" I keep hearing
about is going to have to stand.

I thought this might be interesting enough to forward over to Paranet from
UFO echo.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: Uncle Sam's Moon Mountain...
Date: 20 May 91 17:47:36 GMT

In a message to Steve Rose <18 May 91 20:24> Linda Bird wrote:

 LB> Hi Steve,
 LB>   Good point!  I think Hollywood is going to break the UFO story
 LB> to us first.  What if?  Wouldn't that be IRONIC?

I think 'history' will always be dramatized by Hollywood, but never
legitimized.  We already had our "Close Encouters" movie.  Now they
(apparantly) found those five missing planes, and a bit of our hope dies with
the discovery and its seemingly mundane explanation.

No...I believe Hollywood's *role* if there is one...is more in line with
keeping the dream alive, more than anything else.  It is the one avenue of
existance reality can NEVER touch...until we let it.  ;-)



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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: FLIGHT 19
Date: 22 May 91 08:06:00 GMT


 PP> Sure thing John and if they find them to be the right ones,
 PP> the initial story that started the Bermuda Triangle will
 PP> have died.

  I really think I liked it better as a mystery.

 PP> And if it's not the right planes, we still have a mystery
 PP> to solve.

  You just had to say that, didn't you. ;-)

                                        jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: MEIER, STEVENS, TUCSON AND CAMELOT
Date: 22 May 91 16:48:12 GMT

Your message made my day and it's only 9:45 here. By the way did we get a
cross feed from the Rush Limbaugh echo or something. <DITTO'S>

If I ever get his FAX number I'll be sending some paranet files off to him,
and I'll save your message about disabled politicians.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Tyson Mitchiner)
Subject: Woo-woo
Date: 20 May 91 23:27:22 GMT


 nc> intercontextual communication that's a *minimum* requirement for
 nc> solving the multidimensional UFO riddle. Some 'woo-woo' might be the
 nc> price we have to pay for this, but the alternative would seem to be
 nc> a situation that could set our understanding back many decades...
 nc> and that is no doubt precisely what some people would like to have
 nc> happen.
 nc> Comments?
 nc> =d=


  Christopher Columbus, The Wright Brothers, and countless of other pioneers
were considered "woo-woo" people.  The important thing is that they never gave
up despite the jeers and taunts of others.

                                             Tyson

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: Letter
Date: 22 May 91 22:01:26 GMT

In a message to All <20 May 91 13:30> Mike Keithly wrote:

 MK> I just recieved this in the mail today, from who i dont know but
 MK> here it is in it's entirety.

 MK> President Eisenhower  met with the aliens and a
 MK> formal treaty was signed.  The treaty stated the aliens would not
 MK> interfere in our affairs and we would not interfere in theirs.
 MK> We would keep their presence on earth secret; they would furnish
 MK> us with advanced technology. They could abduct humans on a
 MK> limited basis for the purpose of medical examination and...

HAHAHAHA!!!  Thanks for the comedic material you received.  It really gave us
the humor of the day, and proves that this sillyness still exists in this day
and age.  Please do let us know if you receive more of this same 'stuff'.  I
haven't laughed as hard as when I read the 'Phoenix transcripts' and the time I
saw that 'photograph' of the President and a Grey walking arm in arm on the
White House lawn.  Guess they would like to claim that as 'proof' now...
wouldn't they?  :-)


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



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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: (none)
Date: 27 May 91 19:35:47 GMT

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


Subject:  Questions, questions, and more questions--any answers?

To all,

I have some questions for which I would welcome any comments from any
and all persons.  I'm trying to understand what people are thinking
with regard to UFOs and aliens.  I don't mean any part of this to
be beligerant; I'm just trying to understand others' points of view.
It seems as though most of the postings just go around in circles
from believers to skeptics to the 'middle road' people.

I want to understand what it is that makes people want to discuss UFOs.
Has anyone changed his/her mind about the subject of aliens/UFOs since
participating in this newsletter?  Why are you reading this newsletter?
Some people have said that they 'saw something' and want to know what it
was.  Even the strongest skeptics MUST believe that there is the
possibility of aliens or else they wouldn't waste their time and the
other readers' time as well.  Am I correct?

Let's start with an example which was stated, I assume, to cast
doubt on the validity of Ed Walter's photographs:

Someone posted something about Ed Walters and the fact that
a model was found in his attic.  This would cast doubt on some of
his pictures if the model looked ANYTHING like ANY of his pictures.
Could the model have been planted there?  Will we ever know?

There has been a large number of complaints about a conference where
a woman from Venus was allowed to talk.  This gives UFOlogy a bad
name, people say.  Why do you care what others think?  Seeking
understanding about these phenomena seems like one of the most personal
ventures a person can make.  Let this 'Venitian' do what she feels she
needs to do, and you can filter out her input if you deem it inappropriate.
I think most of us are able to do that.

What would it take to convince people that aliens are here?
And further, what are you going to do with the information if it
is proven to you, personally, that aliens are here?  What does/would
it mean to you?
I am genuinely curious.  It seems that any photo, person, story, etc.
can be called a fake.  No one thing should convince anyone of anything.
There was a discussion about what would be proof.  There were several
possibilities mentioned but the only thing that I
remember being called 'proof' was if we could find a piece of material
which 'could not have been made on earth.'  We know the government keeps
secret research going (for military, 'national security,' etc.).  Couldn't
any such material be explained that way?   So that
doesn't seem to prove anything either.  Besides, Meier produced such a
specimen and the conclusion of one investigator was that it could not
have been made on earth.  So what?

What if a saucer landed on your front lawn?  Is there any way you could
know whether that was alien rather than another product of secret
governmental research?  So you saw an alien come out.  How do you prove
he's not wearing a disguise?  Do you check for genitals?  That might be
considered very rude on his planet--earth or otherwise.  Certainly our
government's telling us that aliens DO exist should not be taken as
proof--that would only mean 'they' are either lying now or were lying before.
You still wouldn't know which.

What if we assume that there ARE aliens?  What with all the stars
and planets out there, there must be life somewhere.  It is reasonable
therefore, to assume that one civilization might be advanced (or patient)
enough to visit here (to see that 'Epcot Center' they had heard so much
about!).  Does that mean that ONE valid picture would PROVE their presence?
Is there any way to get a 'valid' picture?  It seems as though people just
wait until someone finds some way to re-create the picture and then
declare it bunk.

Are there other sources of information which can teach us something?
No one talks much about all the myths from ancient civilizations
from South American indians, the Hopi's, Hindus, Greeks, to the Dakotas
and others being visited by and taught by aliens, many of which are
associated with beings from the Pleiades.  In one of my first posts I
mentioned that in the King James bible in Genesis there is a line about
'Sons of God' mating with humans and that the "Nephilim" were on the
planet then.  I only found the word 'nephology' in the dictionary
(study of clouds), so I wondered (aloud) if these were the
'People from the Clouds.'  Since then, I talked with a Greek fellow
about this.  He then looked up some Greek roots to our words which I wish
to share (used without permission, by the way):

    Nephele = ancient greek female god of clods/weather
    Nephele = Cloud, Fog, Darkness or Crowd
    Nephelegeretes = Cloudcollectors

    Ne = negation (un-, -less, anti-, etc.)
    Philos = Friend
    Phile = Friend (feminine)
    Philia = Friendship
    Phili = Kiss
    Philema = the respectful Kissing
    Nephiles = Friendless, Unfriend

He said that there can be some confusion as to i's and e's during
translation so he gave both possibilities.  It seems as though the
proper translation is likely to be 'friendless, unfriend.'  There
are tales about UNFRIENDLY Pleiadians in these myths as well.

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

    Now to the Pleiades and the Pleidians:

    Pleia/Pleon = more (adverb) ---> Pleiades = majorities (substantive)

    Pleio/Pleo = sailing, travelling without engine by using the natural
             power (like wind, waves, sun and stars --->Navigation)
             (transitive verb also: crossing, driving through)
             ---->Pleiades = the sailing/travelling units.

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

Does anyone find that second definition (Pleio/Pleo) fascinating?

I know this isn't 'concrete evidence' of anything, but I think it's
pretty cool!  I don't think it should be discarded entirely.
I believe that many 'myths' are largely truth or based on true
events.  (Just like our network newscasts!)  And I think there is a
lot that can be gleaned from them.

I'm asking these questions because I don't see any way to 'scientifically'
PROVE the existence of aliens, short of a personal ride out of the galaxy.
I don't think any alien has the 'time' to take us all for a ride one
by one.  I guess there IS the method used in the movie
'The Day the Earth Stood Still,' but if it is true that they cannot
interfere, that won't happen either.

I believe/know aliens are here.  That's my opinion/feeling.  It seems to
'fit the data' better than the idea that there are none here.  The problem
is sorting out which data points are valid and which are not.  I guess I
believe Billy Meier's contacts are valid, so that is a start for me.
Perhaps better questions to ask, even if you don't believe yet, are:
           Why are they here?
           Why are they being so discreet/evasive/selective as to contacts?

Maybe some of the answers people might come up with will
cast new light on this whole bag of issues.

I'm sorry this is so long, but I didn't feel like I was getting
much out of the newsletter because it wasn't addressing the
questions I have.  I want to stimulate some discussion along lines
I feel will be more fruitful, for me anyways.  Hope some people are
interested.

Greg ([e-mail])





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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Gresser)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 23 May 91 18:48:00 GMT

Yes, it's happening the 17th of July, but no I don't have a time that it is
happening.  If anybody knows, I would really be interested, but I am quite
shure that it will be in the papers.


Be seeing you ...

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 24 May 91 21:01:00 GMT


 > think the UFO model made out of Plans, was a great publicity plant. Just
 > enough confusion and question to keep the interest up. Lets say I'm
 > trying to keep a story active, I make a model, just close enough to be
 > wrong (not matching the photos) with plans that can be confused with
 > older plans, conveintly leave it behind (or plant it during an
 > inspection) for someone to discover later, leak news of it to the
 > reporters, etc. This is not as far fetched as some other things we come
 > across.

Pete, I suggested that the moment I heard about the model. It is in perfect
keeping with Ed's history of practical joking. Ask yourself, what is more
likely, that Phil Klass managed to go from Washington to Gulf Breeze and back
in total secrecy, managed to get into the house unnoticed, and plant the
model, or is it more likely that Ed himself planted it on purpose, knowing it
would "backfire" and create more sympathy for him? If Klass were to go to all
that trouble, don't you think he would at least take the time to make the
model a perfect double for the ones in the photos? I assure you, whatever else
he is, Klass is the picture of thoroughness.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 24 May 91 20:15:00 GMT


   I have recently read _Gulf Breeze Sighting_ and sent a letter to Ed
Walters.  I got back a small postcard with prices for the UFO poster and
Video Tape, plus a little signiture which was all too suspicious as a "here
is my autograph" type situation.
   I understand that he must get a great volume of letters every week but it
was not what I expected.  I also understand that, because of the growing
interest in Ufology, it would be hard for a person in his situation to
refuse to make a little money off of his experiences.
   So, there is a flipside to the Gulf Breeze story.  Models?  I guess I
have not had access to any information regarding the current situation in
Gulf Breeze.  What do you reccommend I read to update myself on this topic?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Bush and Grey buddy...
Date: 24 May 91 20:25:00 GMT


   Haha, yes, I saw that picture as well, while standing in line to purchase
my groceries.  Quite funny.  It's amazing what people will read these days.
It was even more funny that the "Alien" was obviously just a man in a body
stocking, blurred a little bit.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 24 May 91 20:28:00 GMT


   Wow, I have been in Arizona once before traveling early in the morning.
Those vast, wide-open spaces would be great to watch a meteor shower.  And
that eclipse might even be worth travelling out there for.  Being in
Southern California, myself, it's not that far a trip.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 24 May 91 17:28:03 GMT


 >  Sometimes I think the UFO model made out of Plans, was a
 > great publicity plant.

  That's a good idea. Wonder if anyone's considered that aspect.
  Note that the model flap started flapping shortly before the MUFON
symposium, where Ed was the big attraction.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: CROP CIRCLES
Date: 24 May 91 17:29:04 GMT


 > I thought this might be interesting enough to forward over to
 > Paranet from UFO echo.

  Yeah, I'd read before that the "scientific lab" may be something
goofy.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Hard Copy
Date: 25 May 91 07:43:01 GMT


  I understand there'll be something interesting ufo-related on Hard Copy
Monday night. No other info.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: FLIGHT 19
Date: 24 May 91 15:16:20 GMT

I like a good mystery as much as the next person, especially when it
involves real situations. If this is the solution to Flight 19, it's not
going to change my world, just my information which I use to view the world.
There is more than enough unsolved out there to keep anyone busy. At this
late date the Govt. doesn't need to cover-up anything about this flight,
except if the familys have some cause to sue their buns off for something.
(CYA principles)

My thoughts on the events of the past weeks: If people had scrutinized the
original reports with the care they are taking to pick away at this
discovery, there would be no Bermuda Triangle mystery.

I was takin in for many years, but the whole thing started to fall apart
piece by piece, including erroneous reports, neglected follow-up on events,
and rational answers to many of the disappearances. IMHO There is nothing
unusual in the area (which varies by author inclusions) called the Bermuda
Triangle. At least nothing more than anyplace else on this planet.

It brings up a discussion that people were having a couple of years ago
suggesting that UFO sightings and contacts be mapped. After some time it was
determined that the coverage was fairly universal. Sure some places seem to
have more events, but as far as finding a pattern, it would be like throwing
a hand full of pepper on a chart, random distribution. (that's my comparison)
The project was shelved.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: Trilateral Commision.
Date: 28 May 91 11:32:26 GMT

From: andy cobley <[e-mail]>

I have seen mention of the Trilateral Commision on this digest
for some time, along with the Bildeborg (sp?).  My question is
this, What are these two groups.  What is there cover purpose,
and what is their real purpose ?

Andy

[e-mail]





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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Dr. Robert Nathan
Date: 25 May 91 15:46:00 GMT


 > On Wednesday, May 29, I shall be speaking with Dr. Robert Nathan
 > at the California Institute of Technology's Jet Propulsion
 > Laboratory re: Gulf Breeze photos.
 >
 > As most of you know, Dr. Nathan's view of Ed Walter's films
 > differs significantly from Dr. Bruce Maccabee's opinion.
 > I find it quite puzzling that these two respectable scientists
 > should have such opposing convictions.
 >
 > If any of you have any questions or comments for Dr. Nathan, please
 > reply to this message, and I shall post his response at the end of
 > next week.

I would like to know what he is planning on doing about Ed using his name in
the book as a supporter of his claims, while in fact Nathan did not state
those things.  Nathan has always felt those photos were faked.

Mike

--
Michael Corbin - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 412

                            Wednesday, May 29th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                  Re: The Moon
                                    Anderson
                        Re: Uncle Sam's Moon Mountain...
                                   Re: Letter
                 My message regarding Mike Keithley's print-out
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                               Re: Csicop members
                               Re: Csicop members
                                 George Adamski
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                           Re: Bush and Grey buddy...
                            Re: Stranger Than Science
                                Dr. Robert Nathan
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                                  Re: The Moon
                             Re: ARTHUR C. CLARK BAR
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                                HARD COPY BOOBOO!
                             Re: ARTHUR C. CLARK BAR
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                              Bike ride last night
                            Re: Bike ride last night
                            Re: Bike ride last night
                            Re: Bike ride last night
                                 So. cal uof bbs
                              Trilateral Commision.
                                 George Adamski
                               Dr. Marina Popovich

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: The Moon
Date: 25 May 91 15:51:00 GMT


 > I've always heard the same, that the moon is 'dead'.  I have, however,
 > heard that little is known about the moon's core, that it may be hot and
 > molten like earth's.  I haven't heard of any volcanoes...

I ran across an article which I am posting here over the weekend concerning
the continuing mystery that is stumping the astronomers.  The phenomenon is
known as Lunar Transient Phenomena (LTP).  It is very interesting, but not
enough to speculate that there are alien bases on the moon as some allege :-)

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Anderson
Date: 25 May 91 15:54:00 GMT

We are checking a rumor that Mr. Anderson, the *new* Roswell witness who
claims to have seen the bodies, is another brick in the wall of lies,
disinformation and other fantasy.  There is a witness who can prove that
Anderson is lying.  More will follow soon.  Stay tuned!

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Uncle Sam's Moon Mountain...
Date: 25 May 91 15:39:00 GMT

Hello Steve,
        Thanks for your thoughtful comments.  Regarding the 5 missing
WWII planes found off coast of Florida, was there anything "concrete"
that made the UFO community think these pilots had a Close Encounter
while out over the ocean?  I thought tn\hey were just terribly
disoriented.  Nothing happened to them like the Australian incident
back in the late 70's in which Frederick Valentich, flying his small
Cessna over the open sea, reported a large disc over his plane.  Next
thing, radio static, and his plane was missing.  (Somewhere I heard
that this plane, too, was recently found.)

        See you,
                Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Letter
Date: 25 May 91 16:01:00 GMT

Don,
    I must humbly inform you that Mike Keithley did not originate that
paranoid message.  He was only sending it out over the BBS from someone
else who would not identify himself, perhaps hoping someone could.  It
looks like you, and a lot of us, saw that it was indeed "smelling" a
{xD
   That's how I interpreted it....
    Thanks,
              Linda

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: My message regarding Mike Keithley's print-out
Date: 25 May 91 16:10:00 GMT

Don,
    The line in my message that got "blipped" should say:  That a lot
of us, like you, "smelled" Cooper/Lear in the paranoid message.
   Hope this clears that up....
                     :-)
                          Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Gresser)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 25 May 91 20:18:00 GMT

They tell me that the best place to see the eclipse is in lower-Baja (lower
lower?) California.  But I bet it would be good here, too!

Steve

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Rick Moen)
Subject: Re: Csicop members
Date: 22 May 91 21:59:41 GMT

> I recently received a letter from CSICOP advertising something called
> 'Skeptical Notes,' which comes out quarterly for $15/year.  The letter
> had a sidebar listing the members of CSICOP.  There are all the well
> known people: Asimov, Randi, Sagan, Klass, etc., as well as a number
> of academics.  I'm not volunteering to type the whole list in (about
> 30+ people), but it should be clear now that they do publish it.

Paul --

What you saw in "Skeptical Briefs" was not the membership of CSICOP (the
committee), but rather a list of "Fellows", people who support the aims
of the committee, and allow their names and titles to be listed, as it
says, "for identification only".

The actual committee numbers something like seven people, and I've
finally gotten a definitive list.  (Randi isn't on it anymore, since
he recently left the committee.)  Unfortunately, I don't have the list
with me, but will post it to this forum later.

Best Regards,
Rick M.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Rick Moen)
Subject: Re: Csicop members
Date: 22 May 91 22:07:55 GMT

> I used to know the answer to this question, but now I'm just guessing.
> But I think you've nailed them all. The only one I'm not real certain
> of is Alcock. Oh, and I think I read somewhere that whatsisname from
> Cal Poly, the guy that plays with Pterodactyls.....MacReady, I think
> he was named a couple of years back, wasn't he?

Jim --

Paul MacReady (Gossamer Albatross, etc.) isn't on the Executive Council.
That much I remember.  I'll post the full list later, when I get a
chance.

Best Regards,
Rick M.

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



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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: George Adamski
Date: 28 May 91 19:13:05 GMT

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


Could I get a paragraph or two (without opinion inserted)
about what George Adamski is about and what is the history
of what has been 'decided' about the validity or non-validity
of this person's story?

Thanks, in ignorance...

Greg ([e-mail])





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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 25 May 91 18:06:00 GMT

Does anyone know if this eclipse will be able to be seen elsewhere besides
in Arizona?  I live in Santa Barbara Ca. and to put it frankly, would really
like to see this eclipse.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: Bush and Grey buddy...
Date: 25 May 91 18:09:00 GMT

Yes, I saw that picture as well, but I have found that usually most of those
stories in those types of magazines have -SOME- basis in truth, weather it
is the story, or possibly the picture. So it does leave me wondering what
exactly what was the part of it that was -True-..?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Tender)
Subject: Re: Stranger Than Science
Date: 15 May 91 01:08:35 GMT


 RE: David Lang

 LB>        Just to throw a "monkey wrench" in here - - - it's
 LB>  interesting to see that a "large circle, 15 feet in diameter"
 LB>  was left at the spot where he disappeared.  In the light of
 LB>  the crop circle mysteries that we are seeing today, I wonder
 LB>  if there's any connection...

     I never though of that... Have there been any abduction reports
connected with crop circles? (Why do I have the feeling that if there
havn't been, there will be?)

 LB>  Of course it could just be a good
 LB>  story.  Just recently someone else posted some information
 LB>  about this story (how one reporter got it from someone and
 LB>  didn't check out the facts).

     I don't have any information to either refute it or confirm it. In
the same book, Edwards gives an account of the "Oregon Vortex" which
upholds it's "mystical" properties; but the vortex has been completely
explained as an illusion caused by land subsidence. Based on that, and
the general tone of the book, I'd put most of the accounts in the
category of modern myths.

  A million thanks for posting your
 LB>  information.  It brings back memories.
 LB>        Take care,
 LB>                Linda

     cf. Hitchikers Guide: "Glad I could be of assistance."

 ... from the purlieus of Pittsburgh
--
John Tender - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Dr. Robert Nathan
Date: 26 May 91 20:45:00 GMT


 > If any of you have any questions or comments for Dr. Nathan,
 > please
 > reply to this message, and I shall post his response at the end
 > of
 > next week.

  Please ask Dr. Nathan to what extent he's analysed the original Ed
photos. His early comments were based on a cursory examination, as
he's said.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 27 May 91 02:34:00 GMT


   Wow, maybe a short trip into Mexico (past Tijuana of course!) would be
worthwhile.  I have very vague memories of a total eclipse while in
pre-school.  From what little I remember, it was quite an amazing event.
I'd settle for a partial one though.  I'm easy to plaase. :)

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Bob King)
Subject: Re: The Moon
Date: 24 May 91 22:24:00 GMT

I've always heard the same, that the moon is 'dead'.  I have, however,
heard that little is known about the moon's core, that it may be hot
and molten like earth's.  I haven't heard of any volcanoes...
--
Bob King - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: ARTHUR C. CLARK BAR
Date: 27 May 91 18:09:00 GMT

->"One either progresses or regresses, there is no standing
->still"  Emerson?

No, it was Pete Barbutti on the Johnny Carson show.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Gresser)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 27 May 91 23:10:00 GMT

There's a story about a man who spent his life examining total eclipses (his
name escapes me, but he was a proffessional at it - some kind of scientist).
Anyway, he knew he was dying, knew that the eclipse he was watching would be
his last.  He had been collecting data all of his life, but his last eclipse
he just sat there and said "wow!"  They are impressive, like nothing else
anywhere.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
Date: 28 May 91 02:46:00 GMT

In my opinion, "Hard Copy" was really less than honest with its'
viewers in the portrayal of the massive cigar shaped object that
was allegedly photographed by a Soviet Mars probe in 1989

The caption should have read in bold type  ARTIST'S DRAMATIZATION
or RE-ENACTMENT. I wonder...what percentage of their viewers
thought that was actual film footage depicting a shadow passing
across Phobos' face, followed by the camera going dead?
Remember, I'm talking about Mr. & Ms. IQ 100 average American.
Where was the real photograph?

If were going to do it, let's do it right!

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: ARTHUR C. CLARK BAR
Date: 25 May 91 18:27:29 GMT

As for test ing and accepting, that's the hard part. What valid methods of
analysis do I have at my disposal? Just my own opinions based on previous
experiences and study. So I admit my perceptions are limited by my knowledge
and viewed in that personal context. I tend to believe I am open minded
though, and have a background in scientific research and expermental science.
Nope I cannot accept things on blind faith without at least some reasonable
evidence or minimal logical progression in the theory.

"One either progresses or regresses, there is no standing still"  Emerson?
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 27 May 91 08:22:00 GMT


   July 11th????  Wow!  That's my birthday!  I must see that eclipse
afterall!  I'll go down to the local telescope/photography shop and ask them
what kind of showbox-device I can rig to observe the sun.  This is getting
more interesting all the time.  Now that you mention it, I seem to recall
having used some shoebox device to observe the eclipse I saw durring my
pre-school years, as I mentioned in my previous message.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Bike ride last night
Date: 27 May 91 19:00:00 GMT


   I was out, riding my mountainbike last night at about 1am with a good
friend in the areas behind my house.  Night riding, I have allways enjoyed
due to it's calmness and stable temperature.  Last night was very different
however.
   We stopped at a park to rest and just relax and talk.  I notticed that I
was feeling uneasy.  I am wondering if this is normal.  Ever since I have
gotten into the stories of UFO abduction and sightings, I am very objective
and do not tell myself any of it is true nor false..  Yet, lastnight, I felt
a strange uneasyness being out, below the wideopen sky in the park.  Almost
as if, being the UFO abduction stories I have read are true, I was making a
damn good target of myself.  It wasn't a fear, but rather an inner awareness
of my situation.  I also found myself paying more attention to the skies
above me then I usually do.
   How has the UFO phenomena changed your perspective view of your physical
situation in this way?  Am I just letting it get to me too much?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (James Clark)
Subject: Re: Bike ride last night
Date: 27 May 91 21:06:00 GMT

Well, it hasn't made me PARANOID! :)

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Bike ride last night
Date: 28 May 91 04:14:00 GMT


   Heh, yes, I guess PARANOID is the appropriate word after all..  <grin>.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (James Clark)
Subject: Re: Bike ride last night
Date: 28 May 91 05:15:00 GMT

Actually, wouldn't a Para-Noid be like an alien pizza-wrecker?
Like, if you were to call the Alpha Centauri Dominos, and the pizza was all
cold when you got it, couldn't you say that it didn't "avoid the para-noid"?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Mark Pope)
Subject: So. cal uof bbs
Date: 28 May 91 22:38:00 GMT

Does anybody know of a UFO info BBS that is in Southern California?


Any info would be appreciated......


thanks...


Mark Pope.


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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Burke)
Subject: Trilateral Commision.
Date: 28 May 91 06:39:00 GMT


 >
 > From: andy cobley <[e-mail]>
 >
 > I have seen mention of the Trilateral Commision on this
 > digest
 > for some time, along with the Bildeborg (sp?).  My question
 > is
 > this, What are these two groups.  What is there cover
 > purpose,
 > and what is their real purpose ?
 >
 > Andy
 > [e-mail]


Clark Matthews is the guy who can answer this question properly.
(evil snicker!)   BTW, I think it's Bildenburg.
                                                 --  John

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Burke)
Subject: George Adamski
Date: 28 May 91 06:44:00 GMT

Greg Lush writes:

 > Could I get a paragraph or two (without opinion inserted)
 > about what George Adamski is about and what is the history
 > of what has been 'decided' about the validity or non-
 > validity
 > of this person's story?
 >
 > Thanks, in ignorance...
 >
 > Greg ([e-mail])

Check out _The UFO Conspiracy_ by Jenny Randles for a good
explanation of what George Adamski was all about.
                                                   --  John

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Dr. Marina Popovich
Date: 25 May 91 06:11:00 GMT

The interview with Dr. Marina Popovich, Retired Soviet Air
Force Colonel and top Soviet UFOlogist will air on Hard Copy
on Monday May 27th. This should be of great interest so if
you get a chance make sure you do not miss it.

Don

--
Don Ecker - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 413

                            Thursday, May 30th 1991

Today's Topics:

                            Jacques Vallee Interview
                              Vallee Interview, (2)
                              Vallee Interview, (3)
                              Vallee Interview, (4)

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

From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Jacques Vallee Interview
Date: 29 May 91 06:26:00 GMT


(C) 1991 ParaNet(sm) Information Service.  All Rights Reserved.
****************************************************************
ParaNet File Number:  01154
****************************************************************
                    A VOICE IN THE WILDERNESS

     Recently,  Jacques  Vallee  has  been  making  more   public
appearances following a hiatus which took him out of the american
ufological  scene  for  nearly ten years.  His  reasons  for  the
absence  were  directly tied to the disgust he  felt  toward  the
methodology  employed  by UFO researchers and  investigators.   A
very  controversial figure, Vallee is highly regarded within  the
French and European community, where it appears progress is being
made  due to a diverse attitude among our European  counterparts.
One  has  to agree that things are a sad state of  affairs  right
here  at  home.  Virtually no progress is being made  as  we  are
actually further from an answer than we were ten years ago.  This
can  be credited to the lack of a focused,  scientific  approach,
coupled  with a move away from critical thinking so necessary  to
begin to understand the complexities that this enigma presents.
     Vallee has published two books of late - Confrontations  and
Dimensions,  which detail the fruits of his  research,  conducted
quietly  and  away from the public scene.   Vallee's  message  is
clear - The UFO phenomenon represents a clear and present danger.
His  research indicates that we may be dealing with an  extremely
complex  set  of models that demand scientific discipline  and  a
whole  new approach to the problem.  Vallee is  highly  concerned
with the public's seeming "blind faith" acceptance of the  "space
brothers"   scenario,   considering  that   there   are   serious
actions  on the part of the phenomenon to do harm to  individuals
without  any  consideration  for our comfort  or  feelings.   The
problem  is agitated further by unqualified personnel  performing
hypnotic regression which seems to cement the contact to fit  the
hypnotists  idea  of  what  happened,  instead  of  what   really
happened.  This, as Vallee says, attempts to force the event into
the  victim's reality, when it really doesn't  belong.   Although
Vallee  has drawn a lot of fire from noted abduction  researchers
such  as  Budd  Hopkins,  his ideas are  not  far  from  accepted
scientific  methodology.  Hypnosis is not for the unqualified  to
be  performing.   It  belongs  with  credible,  degreed   medical
personnel  who know the intricacies involved with the  procedure.
More  harm  is being done to the alleged victim  than  good  when
unqualified  people perform the regression.  The victim is  often
left with the trauma of the contact, and cannot effectively  deal
with  it.   It must be treated as a medical problem.   As  Vallee
states about unqualified hypnotists dealing with victims:  "It is
unprofessional  and unethical."  With this he sharply  criticizes
Dr.  Edith Fiore, who took a course on hypnosis during a  weekend
and began to regress abductees the following Monday morning.
     The question comes down to:  Are we interested in getting to
the  bottom  of this problem, or are we more concerned  with  the
sensational  aspect of it?  If the answer is the former, than  we
must begin to police our own backyard and change the direction of
things.    The  data  pool  is  so  polluted  and  corrupt   with
information  that has been arrived at with  faulty  investigative
methods,  that we are drawing false conclusions about  what  UFOs
really represent.  We must have an open mind.  But, we also  must
employ  a  methodology  that is akin  to  forensic  investigative
methods.  In this respect, we will make substantial progress, and
with  the  data  that is collected in this fashion,  be  able  to
construct theoretical models which hold some hope for the answer.
     ParaNet  has  reprinted the entire  interview  with  Jacques
Vallee.  We invite your discussion and comments.
=================================================================
This  article was reprinted from FATE Magazine, Vol. 44,  No.  7,
Issue 496, July 1991.  (C) 1991 Llewellyn Worldwide, Ltd.

Subscriptions:  $22.95/yr. to:

P.O. Box 1940, 170 Future Way
Marion OH  43305-1940
=================================================================

AN INTERVIEW WITH JACQUES VALLEE

BY George W. Earley
     In   1980,  Jacques  Vallee  "disappeared"  from   organized
ufology.  The  author  of  several  ground-breaking  (and   often
controversial) UFO books, a one-time associate of (and  co-author
with) the late Dr. J. Allen Hynek, vanished almost as quickly and
quietly as a UFO itself.
     Almost a decade would pass before Vallee reappeared; when he
did, he aroused even more controversy than he had in the 1970s.

<<Continued in next message..>>

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Vallee Interview, (2)
Date: 29 May 91 06:27:00 GMT

<Continued from previous message>

     Vallee's  reappearance  was signaled by publication  of  two
books:  Dimensions  (Ballantine; 1989) sought to  show  that  the
phenomenon  we  call UFOs has been with  humanity  throughout-and
likely   even   before  recorded  history.   His   second   book,
Confrontations   (Ballantine;  1990),  chastised  ufologists   as
scientifically  inept  investigators, detailed the  in-depth  and
hands  on investigations (many of them done outside the U.S.)  he
undertook during the 1980s, and expressed his strong belief  that
UFOs  and  their  allegedly  attendant  beings  were  likely  not
extraterrestrial, but interdimensional forms.
     I caught up with him in Portand, Oregon, several months ago,
and between his early morning appearance on a local TV show and a
press  conference,  the  following  tape  recorded   conversation
ensued.
     Earley:  I  saw  the  program on TV  this  morning  and  you
mentioned  the  Costa  Rica photograph. I looked at  the  one  in
Confrontations  and  the  analysis  of  it  and  it  still  seems
inconclusive. What do you feel we need to have for a photo to  be
thoroughly acceptable not only to the scientific community but to
the media and the public?
     Vallee:  Well, in this case we are taking the analysis  step
by  step.  We are purposely very careful, not making  any  claims
that we can't prove as we go along.
     The  first  thing  that  was done was to  work  from  a  2nd
generation  negative  that I brought back from Costa  Rica.  Dick
Haines1  and  I published an initial article in  the  Journal  of
Scientific  Exploration.2  When  that article  was  refereed  and
reviewed,  a couple of referees raised questions about  what  the
image  could be and what artifacts could have caused it.  Now  we
have the original negative which I have succeeded in getting  out
of Costa Rica. As you know, it is a photograph taken by a mapping
aircraft  of the government of Costa Rica and it belongs  to  the
government.  What I have now is the original uncut negative,  the
frame  that  shows  the object, the frame before  and  the  frame
after,  taken  at  20 second intervals. We  have  looked  at  it,
magnified  it,  printed it with different densities, and  so  on.
That  eliminates  all the claims of possible artifacts.  We  know
this  is  not  a  double exposure, we know this  is  not  a  fine
particle  trapped  in the film...this is a real image.  It  is  a
large  image.  The  next step is to digitize it-we  do  not  have
access  to  such a place here [in America] but I know  people  in
France  who can do it, with superb facilities for computer  photo
analysis.  We are waiting for them to digitize the frames and  to
do enhancement and comparisons of one frame to the next.
     Earley:  I'll be interested in hearing the results of  their
work.   Now,  during your TV appearance today,  just  before  and
after  each  commercial  break, the station used  some  of  those
controversial saucer photos taken in Switzerland by Edward Meier.
Has  anyone  analyzed them?  I know there have been a  couple  of
books  about  him but I don't believe his claims have  ever  been
seriously examined.
     Vallee:  In the case of Meier, the negatives have never been
available,  to my knowledge.  Without the negatives, one  can  do
nothing.   So it goes back to a question of belief.  I  am  very,
very  skeptical  of the Meier case.  I've been to  his  place  in
Switzerland.   Nobody  can  tell  me this  is  an  average  Swiss
farmer...[chuckles]...the  man has led an  extremely  interesting
life.   The  photographs themselves are not convincing.   No  one
will  be  able  to  tell for sure until  we  can  work  from  the
negatives  and  the  negatives have never  been  available.   And
there's  no  good reason for withholding them.   In  a  situation
where someone has had a genuine experience, there should be  full
disclosure.  There is no reason to hide anything.
     Earley:   I agree.  I would also note that the space  beings
he says he's meeting with are more like those described by George
Adamski in the 1950s than the beings that are reported today.   I
don't  know how you feel about this but it raises a warning  flag
for me.
     Vallee:   Yes.   And  the place...I was  there  last  summer
[1989].  The place is run like a cult.  Visitors are screened  by
members  of  his  group.  He is not at  all  living  in  poverty,
getting up at sunup to work in the fields.  He has a large house,
with  the flag of his organization in front of it, a  guest  book
which has been signed by every TV station in Japan which has come
through  there.  There is a satellite antenna to pick up  foreign
television  broadcasts...this  is an organized cult.  It  is  not
just the average farmer who has happened to see UFOs.

                           GULF BREEZE

     Earley:   Very interesting.  Have you talked with Dr.  Bruce
Maccabee about the Gulf Breeze case?
     Vallee:   Yes  I have.  And I respect Dr. Maccabee,  he's  a
good  scientist.   I've looked at the photographs, spent  two  to
three  hours with him in Washington.  I should qualify this --  I
don't like to talk about cases I have not investigated myself.  I
have  not  gone  to Gulf Breeze purposely, I  am  not  trying  to
investigate  it.   As you know from my book, I  put  the  highest
priority on cases that have not been reported and cases that  are
not  big media cases with fanfare...those are the cases  where  I
can  achieve  something within my limitations, where  I  can  get
somewhere.   I like the cases that have been very quiet or  where
interest  has disappeared over the years.  Then I can go  to  the
site  and meet the people and be seriously involved and  this  is
certainly not the case in Gulf Breeze.
     Now  on  the technical questions I have about  Gulf  Breeze,
I've never gotten an answer.
     One  question  is:   Why don't we have  a  spectrum  of  the
illumination?  The object appeared again and again and again;  it
appeared  often enough that the witness could be supplied with  a
camera that had four different lenses on it.  Well, it would be a
simple   thing  to  sacrifice  one  of  the  lenses  and  put   a
[diffraction] grating in front of the objective [lens] and get  a
spectrum  and then we would know once and for all if it's a  good
old  200-watt Sylvania light bulb in there or if it is  something
unknown  to  physics.   At least we would know  that.   From  the
photographs you can't tell.
     Another thing that is very, very disturbing is that, as  you
know,  the witness, Ed Walters, has a (criminal)  record.   Well,
that  is neither here nor there -- people with records  see  UFOs
just  like  people  with  no records.   But  that  does  have  an
influence on the way one would analyze a sighting.  And the  fact
that  he has a record is not disclosed in the book.  And I  think
that's wrong!  I feel there should be full disclosure.
     Earley:   There was a vague mention of an "indiscretion"  or
something like that.  I would note that in a recent issue of  Jim
Moseley's Saucer Smear newsletter 3, Walters writes that  because
of  "my  reputation as a responsible business man  and  community
leader"  he has been granted "a Full Pardon" by Florida  Governor
Bob Martinez.  Of course that doesn't take away the guilt of what
he  did...I know Phil Klass loves to get into things  like  that.
He  pointed  out that Travis Walton had also  been  charged  with
forgery...

<<Continued in next message..>>

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Vallee Interview, (3)
Date: 29 May 91 06:27:00 GMT

<<Continued from previous message>>

     Vallee:   I  think that's relevant and it should  always  be
disclosed.   There should be no question in disclosing  it.   The
fact that in this case there is no full disclosure, that the book
represented him as a pillar of the community, I find that wrong.
     Earley:   I  think  the  pardon  came  after  the  book  was
published. Perhaps it will be put in the 2nd edition...
     I'd like to talk about witness harassment and ridicule.  You
mentioned this topic in your book; I believe in one instance  you
wrote of "vandalism."  Was this to a victim's home or car?
     Vallee:   If  you remember, there were  several  cases  like
this.   There was a policeman in the Midwest,  Herbert  Schirmer,
who suffered from harassment.  Even in the case of Lonnie Zamora,
he  was  harassed and had to leave the  police  department.   The
kids, when he tried to arrest them in Socorro [New Mexico], would
say  "Why  are  you after me?  Look at that  flying  saucer  over
there.  It's going faster than I am.  Why don't you arrest it and
leave me alone?"  And in the famous case in Michigan, the  "swamp
gas"  case, the witness's house was pelted with beer bottles  and
Coke  bottles and cans...jsut the reaction of the friendly  local
community.
     Earley:  And the police chief in Alabama I think it was, who
took the picture of an alleged entity...Greehaw, was it?  I think
he  resigned  because of the hassles he had.  Have  any  of  your
fellow  scientists done any sociological studies as to why  there
should be this reaction to UFO reports?
     Vallee:   Not  any  formal studies.  It is  a  normal  human
reaction  in  a way; there is a reaction of laughter  to  relieve
tension  and  the fear of the unknown.  It's nice to be  able  to
laugh at it and it makes you look smart.  It is a normal reaction
by people who don't want to be bothered by such things.  I  don't
know  what it will take for people to grow up and recognize  this
phenomenon as something very important.  I hope that my book will
be a contribution in that direction.  Among my colleagues it  has
started  to  have  that  effect.  After  reading  the  book  they
understand that this is obviously not just a bunch of  uneducated
people  in  the  countryside sitting by the  river  and  watching
flying saucers come by...
     Earley:   So  you're getting a positive reaction  from  your
colleagues in the United States as well as in France?
     Vallee:  Absolutely.

                       COSMIC IMPLICATIONS

     Earley:   That's encouraging.  Because what it gets down  to
is how do we develop a proof that will allow people to take  this
seriously...why  are people ignoring the, shall we say,  "cosmic"
implications of the UFO phenomenon?
     Vallee:   Well, you know, the people who are  interested  in
the   UFO   phenomenon...we've  been  guilty   of   pushing   the
extraterrestrial theory to the exclusion of everything else.  The
word  from many people in the public and also in  the  scientific
community  is -- either UFOs don't exist and it is all  illusions
and mistakes and hoaxes and so forth, or we are being visited  by
beings from outer space.  It seems to be either one or the other.
     Well,  it doesn't have to be one or the other.  What I  find
is that people start paying attention when you tell them "Hey, of
course  it could be aliens or a form of intelligence  from  outer
space,  but  it could be other things too!"  Then they  start  to
want  to  know  more, they start thinking...before  they  had  to
decide  between not believing the witnesses or agreeing  that  we
were being visited by aliens.  People have reacted negatively  to
that narrow choice.  Scientists have certainly reacted negatively
to it.  They say "Oh yeah?  If they are space aliens, how and why
do  they  come here?"  I had that reaction yesterday at  a  radio
station  in Seattle.  "Why do they do these absurd things  people
say they do?  Why do they look like us?"
     We have to deal with the fact that while this phenomenon  is
very   complex,   it  does  not  have  to   be   extraterrestrial
necessarily.   That  opens  up many  other  hypotheses  including
interdimensionality, which is now mainstream physics.  There  are
theories about the universe having more than four dimensions, and
to me the UFO phenomenon is interesting to the extent that it  is
forcing  us to ask those questions and to test some of those  new
and  exciting  theories.  When you say  that,  scientists  become
interested  once again because it means that the UFO  problem  is
not a closed system anymore.
     What has surprised me is that when you start proposing  such
ideas,  the  people  who react the most negatively,  not  to  say
venomously,  are  not  the skeptics but the  people  in  the  UFO
community  themselves.   I have been astonished by  this  violent
reaction  and you may have seen the comments of Budd Hopkins  and
of  Jerry  Clark4  calling  me  a  flake  for  opening  up  these
possibilities.
     I've argued before, as you know, with Donald Menzel and I've
argued  with  Philip  Klass,  yet  I've  never  experienced  such
polemics.   Mind  you,  I  don't  mind  the  polemics.   I'm  not
particularly looking for it, but if it happens, it happens.   Yet
I've never encountered the kind of vitriolic reaction I have with
Jerry Clark, which was totally uncalled for.  It just came out of
nowhere  as  far as I'm concerned.  That taught me  an  important
lesson,  though,  that  I'd not  realized  before:   parochialism
within the UFO community itself may be what is preventing us from
being heard by the scientific world.
     Earley:   I  think that could be a possibility.  The  "house
divided" effect...
     Vallee:   Jerome  Clark  is  reacting almost  as  if  I  had
questioned something very sacred for him, something that must not
be questioned by someone who calls himself a UFO researcher.  I'm
questioning  the  dogma that these beings are  ETs...yet  when  I
listen  to  the witnesses, which is what I try to  do  carefully,
they  tell  me  they see objects appearing out  of  nowhere,  and
disappearing on the spot.  They don't necessarily see things that
take off and go up in the sky and go through the atmosphere.   In
some cases they do, but in many cases they describe objects  that
seem to have the ability to operate on space-time, to  manipulate
space-time.  Well, if there is a form of consciousness that  does
that,  if there is a technology that does that, then it opens  up
all  kinds  of  questions that we have  never  really  considered
seriously.   And from a scientific point of view, number one,  it
makes  a lot more sense.  Number two, it is much richer in  terms
of what we can do with it in our own research.

<<Continued in next message..>>

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Vallee Interview, (4)
Date: 29 May 91 06:28:00 GMT

<<<Continued from previous message>>>

     Earley:   It  is,  of course, a regrettable  fact  that  the
scientific  community,  by  and  large,  has  rejected  the   UFO
phenomenon out of hand without making any real study of it.  I've
talked  to Isaac Asimov.  He speaks of "UFO maniacs" in a  recent
book5  on  the NASA/SETI program, yet he knows nothing  of  UFOs.
When  you  try  to pin him down about his  skepticism,  he  says:
"Well,  I've  devoted enough of my time to this and I  have  many
other  things  to do."  Carl Sagan does the same thing.   A  very
personable  man  but  very glib and  shallow  in  some  respects,
particularly with regard to the UFO phenomenon.
     Vallee:   They've  never  taken  time  to  study  the  cases
themselves.   All  they know about it is what they  read  in  the
National Enquirer...
     Earley:   Are  you saying that to a large degree  you  wrote
Confrontations  for the scientific community and that  while  you
are  hoping  it  will  have an impact on  the  public  at  large,
basically you were trying to speak to your colleagues?
     Vallee:   I'm trying to show that, number one, the  data  is
robust enough that it can be studied scientifically.  There is no
lack  of  parameters that are quantifiable, there is no  lack  of
data  from  technically  trained observers.   Number  two,  I  am
showing   that   the  phenomenon  also  has   important   medical
implications, physiological implications that should be  studied.
A lot of attention has recently been placed -- and rightly so  --
on  the  abduction  phenomenon.  That is  fine,  but  beyond  the
abduction phenomena there are other types of impacts that  should
be  documented  and  studied:   that  includes  the  medical  and
physiological impact and I'm trying to call attention to that.

                     ABDUCTIONS AND HYPNOSIS

     Earley:   You  mentioned  Hopkins'  disagreement  with  your
theory  as to the possible origin of the aliens -- do  you  still
feel the abduction phenomenon is a real one?
     Vallee:   I've never said otherwise.  People have  tried  to
imply  that I was rejecting the abduction phenomena and  I  never
have.   As  you know, both in this book (Confrontations)  and  in
Dimensions,  I even talk about abduction cases I've studied.   In
Confrontations  you will find the case of the woman I call  "Mrs.
Victor" and several other cases.
     In  Happy  Camp  (California), for  example,  there  was  an
abduction  case, among many other things.  In some cases  I  have
studied  those  incidents  whit the help of  hypnotists.   But  I
surely would not do the hypnosis myself as some abductionists so.
As I have said before, and I will say it at every occasion,  this
is   unethical  and  unscientific.   What  they  (the   abduction
hypnotists)  are  getting  is not the truth.   They  are  wrongly
assuming that they are looking at the first level interpretations
of  what  the  witnesses  have encountered.   In  many  of  those
hypnosis sessions you will find that leading questions are  being
used.   Besides, there is obvious screening or self-selection  on
the part of the people who come forward to be hypnotized.   There
is a framework that is put on the experience itself.
     The tragedy is that once that kind of framework has been put
on  the  experience, you cannot go back.  I've had  a  number  of
people who have been studied and hypnotized, people who have been
mentioned  in some of the more prominent books on abduction,  who
have come to me saying "my experience was much wider than what is
described in the book.  The author took things out of context  to
fit them in his book, but I need help to deal with other  aspects
of my experience that nobody wanted to look at."
     I'm  not in a position to help these people because  they've
already  been hypnotized a number of times, they are stuck  in  a
certain framework -- I don't know of any way one can go back  and
rehypnotize these people to get back to the original  experience.
Which is why in many cases a...psychiatrist using hypnosis in his
work  will tell you that you have to be very careful and that  in
many cases hypnosis is not even the proper form of investigation.
     Earley:   That's  why I was frankly appalled  at  Dr.  Edith
Fiore's book6 because she "learned" hypnosis over one weekend and
then began using it the following Monday.  And now she thinks she
is an abductee after having been hypnotized by Dr. James  Harder.
I  understand  Dr. Rima Laibow is saying she's an  abductee.   It
seems to me there is a lot of self-contamination and pollution in
this business.
     But  let's take a scenario here.  Suppose I came to you  and
said  I've been having disturbing dreams and I've read things  in
newspapers  and  magazines  about  abductions;  maybe  I've  been
abducted; you're the first person I've come to about this.   What
would your step-by-step procedure be with a person who approached
you in that manner?
     Vallee:  I think witnesses should only go to trained people.
Hypnosis is a complex and dangerous thing; people should only  go
to clinical psychologists or M.D.s for that kind of work.   There
is an objection to that, which I have heard from Jerome Clark and
other  people in the UFO field, saying that many witnesses  don't
have access to such experts, so Budd Hopkins and Dave Jacobs  and
others  are  performing  a  valuable  service  when  they  do  it
themselves  because  the  medical professionals  are  not  always
available to do it.
     Well,  it's  obviously a flawed argument.   It's  like  your
coming  to me and saying "I need a triple [heart] bypass.   Would
you  please take your kitchen knife and do it because  my  doctor
doesn't  want to do it?"  Well, I'm not qualified to do a  triple
bypass  and  I'm not qualified to hypnotize anybody and  I'm  not
going  to learn the technique so I can start  hypnotizing  people
left   and  right.   Again,  I  think  this  is   unethical   and
unscientific  and  it doesn't get us to the kind of UFO  data  we
need.
     In  the  cases when this situation has happened,  what  I've
done  is to go to professionals I know.  I would not discuss  the
case with a witness.  I would say, "Look, we are going to get  to
know  each other.  You are going to tell me about  yourself,  but
let's  not  talk about UFOs.  Please don't read any more  on  the
subject  for a few weeks until we can get you to see someone  who
is trained in hypnosis."  In one case I went to a friend of  mine
who  is  a  clinical psychologist and he said,  "You  won't  need
hypnosis with this person, there are other ways -- there are much
more  sophisticated  techniques that can be used to  help  people
remember what happened to them, under their own control."

<<Concluded in next message..>>

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 414

                            Thursday, May 30th 1991

Today's Topics:

                          Vallee Interview, Conclusion
                             Alien Fetus Recovered??
                       Clandestine Mars Observer Launch??
                                  Re: FLIGHT 19
                                 Re: WALTER.SAL
                                Dr. Robert Nathan
                               Dr. Marina Popovich
                                   Re: (none)
                              Re: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
                    Re: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                                   Re: (none)

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

From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Vallee Interview, Conclusion
Date: 29 May 91 06:29:00 GMT

<<<<Continued from previous message>>>>

     In  certain  cases, a "day dreaming" type of  technique  can
help  the  person remember things at his or her own  pace.   This
could   also   come  through  dreams,  it  could   come   through
drawings...it  could take a long time, like months.  But this  is
much more intrusive than saying  "You-Are-Now-Under-My-Power-and-
You-Will-Remember-the-Time-When-the-Aliens-Took-You..." which  is
very often what you hear on those ridiculous abduction tapes.
     Earley:   This  goes along with a recent book  review7  that
examined  hypnosis  and questioned if hypnosis  per  se  actually
existed or whether we can, by simply relaxing people, enable them
to  be  in a fully waking state but simply have  more  access  to
their memories.
     Vallee:   Again, I'm not a specialist of that field and  I'm
just  relaying what different professionals have told  me.   They
disagree  among  themselves so I should obviously  qualify  that.
There  are  obviously  some  instances  where  hypnosis  is   the
technique of choice.  There is another case in my files in  which
I  went to a...psychiatrist who is trained in hypnosis.  He  told
me he did not want to do it.  And his reasons showed the reaction
of  a true professional.  He said "I should not be the one  doing
it  for two reasons.  First of all, I do not have  enough  recent
clinical experience with hypnosis.  And second, I know you.  I've
read  your books and you're a friend of mine and I know too  much
about the subject.  We should find somebody who is qualified, who
knows hypnosis, who has an open mind on UFOs but does not have  a
personal framework..."  It is difficult, but such people exist.
     Let  me  mention another case I've worked on  recently,  the
case of a man with a Silicon Valley computer company, who came to
me  because  he remembered seeing some objects over  Hawaii.   He
wanted  to  be  hypnotized because he felt there  had  been  some
action  of  that type (abduction).  I took him to a team  of  two
doctors.  One is not a psychiatrist but an M.D. who uses hypnosis
in  his medical practice and the other one is a psychologist  who
teaches hypnosis to psychologists -- in other words, he is  doing
research  on hypnosis and he teaches it.  I asked them what  kind
of  methodology could be used in abduction cases, how would  they
go  about it.  they said the only way we should do it is  to  use
the  standards of admissibility of hypnosis in court.  The  state
of California has published some very strict guidelines for  when
hypnosis  is  admissible   in the courts of  that  state.   These
guidelines  are  perfect.   They are tailor-made for  us  in  UFO
research.   Hypnosis  is not admissible unless everything  is  on
video tape including the induction phase, so you can see if there
are leading questions, you can check if there is full  disclosure
in the beginning by the hypnotist on what the person is to expect
and so on.  You should also have physiological measurements;  for
example, skin response measurements and pulse measurements.   You
never see this in UFO abduction research.
     In this case, the two doctors set up a number of instruments
that  were  visible  to  the cameras.   There  were  two  cameras
shooting at the same time so you could always see the instruments
as   you  heard  the  answers;  you  could   have   chronological
correlation.   Another  expert  could alter  say,  "that  person,
doctor,  was not hypnotized when he said this.  He was not  in  a
state  of hypnosis."  And different experts could  challenge  the
data  and  argue.  Otherwise what you have is pure  garbage,  you
just have someone saying something on tape.
     In the case of this man, we found that indeed he  remembered
a lot about the incident in Hawaii but that the real incident did
not  happen  in Hawaii.  It was many years before and  there  may
have been an abduction in the south of the United States when  he
was  in  a  car with his parents.  At that  point  he  became  so
agitated  that the two doctors hot him out of hypnosis, which  is
precisely  the point where a ufologist would have jumped  up  and
down and said "Oh goody, let's find out what happened!  Did  they
have  big  eyes, were they grey, which planet did they  take  you
to..." and so on.
     But  the  doctors stopped everything and said  "We  are  not
going  to  do anything further until we have a  therapy  contract
with  this  man.   Obviously  this  is  an  extremely   traumatic
experience for him and if we pick it up again we will pick it  up
as  part of a course of therapy."  That is the reaction  of  true
professionals  in  the business, where you have  to  worry  about
possibly  causing harm to the patient, and keeping  your  license
and malpractice and everything else -- all the things  ufologists
treat very lightly.
     Earley:  Have they gone deeper into it?
     Vallee:   We  did not pursue it yet.  It will be up  to  him
[the subject] to decide if he wants to do more.

                       ANIMAL MUTILATIONS

     Earley:   You  wrote  some  introductory  remarks  to  Linda
Moulton Howe's book, An Alien Harvest...
     Vallee:   There  are certain parts of the book I  would  not
condone  or agree with but it is her right to publish it,  and  I
wanted  to  support  her work on mutilations.   I  think  she  is
raising  a  number of important questions the UFO  community  has
been ignoring.
     Earley:  Do you feel that the mutilations are not being done
by a normal human agency?
     Vallee:  Ahhh...let me put it this way.  I made it clear  in
Confrontations  that I was not going to discuss mutilations  even
though they were a possibly relevant subject.  I've done a number
of field studies of mutilation cases on the same level as this in
which  there  was certainly no classic explanation for  what  had
happened  to the animals.  The witnesses had seen objects in  the
sky  at about the same time the mutilations had  happened.   That
doesn't  mean that I can prove a correlation and that's  where  I
stop.  I do have an open mind on that.  Linda is doing some  very
good work in that field.  More people should be looking at it.  I
cannot   tell  you  that  there  is  a  link  between  UFOs   and
mutilations.
     Earley:   Would you be planning to publish your research  at
some point?
     Vallee:  I don't know.  I might.
     Earley:   Thank you very much for your time, Dr. Vallee.   I
am sure FATE readers will be interested in your remarks.

NOTES:

1)   Dr.  Richard  Haines, a retired  senior  scientist  formerly
employed  by  NASA,  is  the author  of  several  books  on  UFOs
including,  Advanced  Aerial Devices Reported During  the  Korean
War; L.S.A. Press; 1990
2)  "Photo Analysis of an Aerial Disc Over Cost Rica" by  Richard
F.  Haines & Jacques Vallee; Journal of  Scientific  Exploration,
Vol. 3, No. 2, 1989.  A response by Haines & Vallee, based on  an
examination  of  the  original negative,  to  referee  questions,
appeared  in Vol. 4, N. 1; 1990 as "Photo Analysis of  an  Aerial
Disc Over Costa Rica:  New Evidence."
3)  Saucer Smear Vol. 37, No. 3, April 30, 1990.
4)  "The Thickets of Magonia" by Jerome Clark; International  UFO
Reporter; Jan.-Feb., 1990.
5)  First Contact. ed. by Ben Bova & Byron Preiss; NAL; 1990.
6)  Encounters by Edith Fiore, Ph.D.; Doubleday; 1989.
7)   "Demystifying Hypnosis" in the Skeptical Inquirer, Vol.  14,
No.  3/Spring  1990.   the book under review  is  Hypnosis:   The
Cognitive-Behavioral  Perspective edited by Nicholas P. Spanos  &
John  F. Chaves; Prometheus Books; 1989.  Also see They  Call  It
Hypnosis  by Robert A. Baker; Prometheus Books; 1990; pages  237-
250, "Hypnosis and Alien Abductions."

END

PARANET FILE NAME:  VALLEE.INT

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Alien Fetus Recovered??
Date: 29 May 91 06:31:00 GMT


(C) 1991 ParaNet(sm) Information Service.  All Rights Reserved.
****************************************************************
ParaNet File Number:  01155
****************************************************************

     ParaNet  received a clipping from Lorne Goldfader,  director
of the Vancouver-based UFO Research Institute of Canada (UFORIC).
It  details  an  investigation  by  Goldfader  into  an   alleged
recovered fetus that was miscarried by a British Columbian  woman
who  claimed that she was impregnated during an abduction  event.
Goldfader has disclosed to ParaNet that at this time the specimen
is  in  a pathology lab being tested and that  results  of  these
tests  will  be  forthcoming soon. At this time,  there  is  very
little  information  to substantiate that  anything  unusual  has
happened.   According to the victim, the pregnancy is unusual  as
she claims she is celibate. Although this is not a good case  for
an  unexplained  pregnancy  at  the  hands  of  aliens,  we  have
reprinted  the article for informational purposes.  ParaNet  will
provide an update as information is available.
=================================================================

                  SEX, SURGERY AND SPACE ALIENS

       Extra-terrestrials seem to prefer British Columbia

Reprinted  from an article appearing in The Weekly  Newsmagazine,
British Columbian Report, May 27, 1991, Volume 2 Number 39.

     Last  week researcher Chris Rutkowski, of Winnipeg  revealed
that  British  Columbians  reported 114, or 49% of  the  232  UFO
sightings   in  Canada  in  1990.   For  some  the   survey   was
confirmation of a long-held belief that B.C. is home to more than
its  share  of those on the lunatic fringe.  But  for  those  who
claim to have encountered beings from outer space, the survey was
a  confidence-builder.  They could take comfort in the  knowledge
that  more and more of their neighbours[sic] are willing to  risk
being classified as crazies[sic], by speaking of encounters  with
extra-terrestrials.
     Alvena  Scott, a 41-year old Vancouver receptionist, is  one
of those finding security in numbers.  Miss Scott claims she  has
been  about as close as anyone can get to a space alien.   Indeed
she is one of about 20 people in the Vancouver area who say  they
have been abducted by extra-terrestrial.  Apparently some of  the
aliens  were  nice enough to operate on her to  repair  a  faulty
kidney.    Others,   however,  were  only   interested   in   her
reproductive capacity.  She says the latter group impregnated her
during  a March 1990 abduction.  Three months later, despite  the
fact  she  had  been  celibate  for  years,  she  experienced   a
miscarriage.
     Miss  Scott  says  that  in  the  summer  of  1985  she  was
experiencing  excruciating pain in the area of her  left  kidney.
Doctors  told  her the kidney would have to be  removed  but  she
feared  surgery  and  would not consent  to  an  operation.   She
explains  that during this period she began  nightly  meditations
and  it  was  after one of these sessions that  the  first  alien
showed  up in her bedroom.  The next thing she knew she was in  a
circular  room surrounded by seven-foot-tall,  blue-eyed,  human-
like  creatures.  She awoke in her bed the next morning  to  find
blood on her sheets and on her torso.  But her kidney problem was
gone.
     Miss Scott says that five years after her encounter with the
beneficent, tall, blue-eyed beings she had a bad experience  with
some small, insect-featured extra-terrestrials.  She claims  that
in  March of 1990 she was "forcibly taken" in the middle  of  the
night  to  a  spaceship.  Apart from going through  a  series  of
tunnels she remembers nothing of the journey to the spaceship but
she has vivid recollections of her experiences aboard the aliens'
craft.  She was one of about 20 "earth people," of both sexes, on
the  ship.  After communicating with the aliens by telepathy  she
learned  the earth women would have sperm "injected  into  them."
She  received  sperm but was not told who or  what  provided  it.
Three months later she had a miscarriage.
     A  tissue  sample from the miscarriage  has  allegedly  been
given  Lorne  Goldfader,  director  of  the  Vancouver-based  UFO
Research Institute of Canada (UFORIC).  Mr. Goldfader says  other
UFO   researchers   have  had  evidence  of   UFOs   mysteriously
disappearing.   To reduce the risk of theft he's  not  disclosing
where  the  tissue is being stored.   The  41-year-old  Vancouver
postal  worker  says the sample, which "appears to be  the  first
stage of a foetus[sic]," will be examined by a pathologist in due
course.   However, as of last week, despite a  year-long  search,
Mr.  Goldfader had been unable to find a lab willing  to  perform
the analysis.
     Another UFO researcher, Graham Conway from Delta, says  that
based on his knowledge of the case and the phenomenon, the sample
tissue "does indeed look to be what he (Mr. Goldfader) claims  it
is."   Mr.  Conway,  64, described the material  as  a  tiny  but
"perfectly  human  (-looking) foetus[sic] with a  tiny  umbilical
chord[sic] attached to it."  The former high school teacher  says
he  has no doubts about Miss Scott's "sincerity" in  the  matter.
And  after 44 years in the (UFO research) field, he  thinks  this
might well be the long-awaited breakthrough in abduction research.
     His  experience  in  the field leads  him  to  believe  that
accounts  like those of Miss Scott are becoming too  numerous  to
ignore.   "If it's a figment of the imagination, it is  happening
to a lot of imaginations.  I believe that there's inference  with
birth."
     In another case he investigated, a B.C. woman reported being
taken  aboard a spacecraft and introduced to a boy she  was  told
was  her son.  He says most of the women who report such  genetic
tampering are in the 35-40 age group.  He adds that a significant
number  of  "abducted" women have been sexually abused  in  their
earth lives.
     For  her part Miss Scott says the alien encounters not  only
cured  her kidney problems but also gave her a whole new  outlook
on life and made her "a much more spiritual person."  Still,  she
confesses  that  there  has been  a  negative  side-effect.   "My
relatives think I'm nuts."  -- Barbara Tandory

END

PARANET FILE NAME: FETUS.UFO

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Clandestine Mars Observer Launch??
Date: 29 May 91 06:31:00 GMT


(C) 1991 ParaNet(sm) Information Service.  All Rights Reserved.
****************************************************************
ParaNet File Number: 01156
****************************************************************

     On  May  26th, our own Don Ecker was seen on  Hard  Copy,  a
television  news  program,  discussing the recent  visit  to  the
United  States  by Marina Popovitch, a Russian  Colonel  who  has
knowledge of the ill-fated Phobos II space probe sent to Mars  to
send  back  information  on the red planet  and one of its moons,
Phobos. According to Popovitch, the probe was destroyed by a long
cigar-shaped  object  as it approached  the  orbiting  satellite.
Although  this  information is speculative and not  confirmed,  a
recent  article  appearing in a science publication  did  confirm
that a strange shadow was seen prior to Phobos II spinning out of
control  and breaking contact with earth.  Obviously there  is  a
lot yet to be learned about what really happened up there.
     ParaNet  has received information that Richard C.  Hoagland,
the  noted author of The Monuments of Mars - a book  detailing  a
possible  surface anomaly on the planet, that NASA  has  covertly
launched  the Mars observer spacecraft to speed to Mars  to  find
out  what  is  going on up there.  Below is  a  reprint  of  that
article.   Our members are encouraged to provide any  information
that would substantiate or disavow these claims.
=================================================================

                       U.S. MARS MISSION?

[Extracted  from  SpaceNews,  5-13-91,  a  publication   normally
concerned with amateur radio topics.]

WWCR's  radio broadcast "For The People" on 03-May-91  carried  a
report  by  Richard C. Hoagland, who believes the  United  States
might have a spacecraft on its way to the planet Mars in order to
investigate  the  "Cydonia Message" first  discovered  in  photos
taken  by Viking 1 in 1976.  Hoagland believes the Mars  observer
spacecraft  was  deployed  by the  Space  Shuttle  "Atlantis"  on
mission STS-38.  According to official records, STS-38 carried an
AFP-658  satellite into orbit.  An AFP-658 satellite measures  65
feet  long  and  15 feet in  diameter.   Hoagland  believes  this
payload  was  actually  a booster rocket for  the  Mars  observer
spacecraft   which  was  later  mated  with  the  Mars   observer
spacecraft on a following STS mission.

Observers  reported seeing Atlantis and its satellite  deployment
during  mission  STS-38.   Some observers  reported  seeing  both
objects  illuminated  by  a reddish glow, which  has  yet  to  be
explained.   On later orbits, the deployed satellite appeared  to
have vanished.

Hoagland feels that if such a spacecraft were on its way to Mars,
it  should  be transmitting on X-band using  pseudo-random  noise
encoding.  Hoagland is trying to get in touch with scientists who
have deep space X-band receive capabilities to see if signals can
be detected coming from Mars.  The reception of intelligent radio
signals from Mars could indicate that either the US or the Soviet
Union   have  Mars  observers  sending  valuable  data  back   to
scientists on Earth.

Cydonia is a Martian desert located in the northern hemisphere of
Mars.   It contains a mile-long, 1500 foot humanoid "face" and  a
system of five-sided pyramids.  Through images taken by Viking 1,
the  "face"  was found to contain such detail as an  eye  socket,
eyeball  and pupil, nose and mouth.  The facial  proportions  are
those of early man.

An  investigation  into  Cydonia  could  help  to  confirm  these
findings and shed light into their meaning.

END

PARANET FILE NAME: SPACENEW.TXT

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: FLIGHT 19
Date: 27 May 91 17:18:01 GMT


 >  IMHO There is nothing unusual in the area
 > (which varies by author inclusions) called the Bermuda Triangle.
 > At least nothing more than anyplace else on this planet.

  The only thing that might be considered unusual is fast-developing
nasty thunderstorms. Since we get the same weather here in Florida I
don't think of it as being unusual at all.
  There's an old saying about Florida weather, "If you don't like the
weather, wait a minute."  ;-)

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 27 May 91 17:23:02 GMT


 >    So, there is a flipside to the Gulf Breeze story.  Models?  I
 > guess I have not had access to any information regarding the
 > current situation in Gulf Breeze.  What do you reccommend I read
 > to update myself on this topic?

  Pick up a copy of the MUFON Symposium Proceedings, which will be
available in July from MUFON. It'll contain Bruce Maccabee's
exhaustive compilation of the other Gulf Breeze area incidents and
their relationship to Ed-incidents.
  As far as other stuff, call my bbs [phone] and you'll find a
Gulf Breeze files area, which contains lots of stuff both pro and con,
including an interview with Ed and the Salisberry report.
  Leave me a note in the local message area when you call so I can
upgrade your access.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Dr. Robert Nathan
Date: 27 May 91 17:25:03 GMT


  Maybe I should be a little more specific.
  Please ask Dr. Nathan how (in a technical sense) he's analysed any
Ed photos and the results of that analysis (also in a technical
sense).

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Allen)
Subject: Dr. Marina Popovich
Date: 28 May 91 07:52:01 GMT


 * Replying to a message originally to All

 DE> The interview with Dr. Marina Popovich, Retired Soviet Air
 DE> Force Colonel and top Soviet UFOlogist will air on Hard
 DE> Copy on Monday May 27th. This should be of great interest
 DE> so if you get a chance make sure you do not miss it.
 DE>
 DE> Don


I'll say!! That was probably one of the BEST pieces I've ever seen.

Has anyone mentioned what they think the "shadow" was, as indicated by the
Russian probe before it went ...poof?

Your comments were excellent and I just wonder what OUR Govt/Military
does/reacts to the presentation. It's indeed a shame when the Soviets
are forthright about their evidence and their military admits to being
"baffled" and *our* military just stonewalls the public.

I'm *glad* my VCR was working fine :-)

Regards,
Don

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: (none)
Date: 29 May 91 04:15:29 GMT

Thanks Greg, for all your thoughtful comments.  I especially liked the comments you made on the origi

ns of the Greek nam.

You surely have given us all some food for thought!

Best regards,
                Linda Bird

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
Date: 29 May 91 04:20:38 GMT

Sheldon,
      You said it!  Those photos Marina held up were less than exciting, too.
And why couldn't we see the actual footage of the object casting a shadow? Why all the secrecy and ga

mes?
      (Don't you think Phobos is one of the strangest objects you have ever
seen?  That huge hole reminds me of a gaping mouth...)
       Keep them eyes sharp!
                              Linda

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info
Date: 28 May 91 17:50:00 GMT


   Hmm, I fail to understand how a document released to the public via the
Freedom of Information Act can still have questionable validity.  I would
think our Govt., being so careful and into keeping reccords of everything,
would photograph all their documents on microtape before releasing them.
How are these documents released?  Obviously, someone doesn't show up
knocking at MUFON's door saying, "Hey!  Look what I just got from the Govt!"
and a Govt. document can't be easy to forge, let alone have a problem with
validity.  I guess what I am asking is, obviously our Govt. knows when a
document said to be released under the FIA turns up, if it is a valid
dicument or not.  Would then, the reason its validity is not known to the
public be that the Govt. itself claims it is fake?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 28 May 91 17:57:00 GMT


   They sure are.  The total eclipse I observed was a long time ago but it
is still a vivid memory so it must have been spectacular.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: (none)
Date: 29 May 91 01:00:00 GMT

Well, I find that also there is an amazing amount of evidence that would
incline people as well as myself to believe that there is some other life
out there in the universe. But one thing is somewhat bothersume to me, that
is why these aliens that people are always claiming to see:  Why is it that
they look so much like humans, Two eyese. Bipeds, two arms ect.  The only
reason that WE have those characteristics is according to the theory of
Evolution, they were necessary to adapt the our environment, and helped us
to survive.  There doesn't seem to be any other reason that On other planets
where other situations might have arisen to have allowed for some other
types of environments that made it necessary for other charactersitics to
arise within their (the alien life forms) own environments.  What is to say
for sure that they can see on the light spectrum what we see.. Maybe  they
don't, possibly during they day they are sensitive to Infra Red so they
might be somewhat blinded by it. I don't know.  Maybe they could see on a
range in the neighborhood on our radio wave spectrum.  Imagine the noise!
But then when it is suggested that Alien life forms might have interbred
with humans a long time ago. Then that could have been a cause for the
similarities in form.
     For me personally the only thing that would clinch the idea of their
really being alien life forms that were actually visiting our planet, would
be to see one myself.  I think that if they were to use other forms of
communication, such as ESP, or the like, something that would be highly
unlikely for the government to simulate, then this also might be another
fact that could prove that this was an alien life form.. I Also tend to
doubt that they would desire to speak to people in their own language.
something more Easily understood would be pictures or feelings, but these
forms of communication would most likely have to be done through ESP forms I
would imagine.
     Is there anyone out there reading this that has had an actuall
encounter with alien (or what they thoght to be Alien) life forms?  Any
close friends or family members?  Let's come out of the closet!  That is
waht this conference is here for!

--
Paul Mcavoy - 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************************

                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 415

                             Friday, May 31st 1991

Today's Topics:

                              Re: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
                                 Re: Alien Life
                                   Re: (none)
                                 Re: Alien Life
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                             More on Hoagland's Mars
                            Lunar Transient Phenomena
                         Lunar Transient Phenomena, (2)

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
Date: 29 May 91 01:14:00 GMT

I bet that episode brought a lot of viewers and Commercial Cash though!
( a TAdd bit of Sarcasm )

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Alien Life
Date: 29 May 91 02:44:00 GMT


   Paul, there are just so many unknowns operating at once that to impose a
limitation of alien existance based on their shape should not be done.  It
could be possible that in the basic operation of the Universe, as we know
it, the only planets capable of sustaining life is an enviroment identical
or very similar to our own.  In which case, an alien life form would be very
similar to our own shape and size.  Evolution knows it's stuff.  We were
shaped like this for the very good reason that it was the most functional
form for our environment.  Maybe this form is a close 'standard' to beings
at our stage of evolution.  Obviously, for beings who have susperseeded
imprisonment in their own solar systems, they would be beyond us in
evolutionary progression, hence maybe the slightly different appearance.
   This is PURE speculation of course and blind assumption.  This is in no
way a standard I go by but just an aspect to think of.  Also, another theory
to puzzle over is, if the Big Bang theory is true in itself, the Universe,
or at the very least the galaxy, would have originated from the same source
at roughly the same time.  Because of this, all systems capable of sustaing
life would be progressing at about the same time but maybe not the same rate
due to the differing environment.  From this point, it is basically a matter
of circumstances as to which life-forms leave the others behing, discover
the technology to travel to other unknown areas of space, discover other
races of beings and do what they wish with them.
   Look at what we did to the American Indians and before that the Inca,
Aztecs etc.  It is a pattern in our history to take severe advantage of a
people of lower technology who differ from you.  Do you think this all would
change if we attained the ability to travel through space to different
worlds?  What do you think would happen if we discovered a planet of beings
no more advanced then the American Indians of our past who's environment was
rich in a newly discovered element we do not have but can use?  Do you think
we would give them equal rights and not interfere with their culture in a
distructive manner?  Of course not.  This is not human nature unfortunatly.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (James Clark)
Subject: Re: (none)
Date: 29 May 91 05:07:00 GMT

Paul, I think that if the aliens look similar to us, we might be able to
explain it by reasoning that life needs to be sustained on a liveable
planet... Earth is such an example of a planet that has the proper
characteristics to support life.  It would seem to me that another planet
capable of sustaining life forms would have to be similar to this in most
ways, in structure.  Therefore, if Earth is the model of a "living" planet
that we have to work with, then why can't we assume that the creatures would
evolve in similar ways?
  The Earth creatures evolved to suit their environments... if there are
similar planets supporting life elsewhere, then who's to say that the
creatures there didn't evolve in a similar way to suit a similar
environment?
  That's one of the problems I had with the movie "They Live."  Although I
thought the movie was great, it bothered me that the aliens that had
infiltrated Earth lived on a home planet where the atmosphere was made up
mostly of carbon-monoxides and crap that we would consider smog and deadly.
I seriously doubt that any living creatures, I don't care what galaxy they
are from, could conceivably breathe in acids productively and still be able
to live while breathing oxygen.  I think that life is universal and needs
pretty much the same criteria to exist.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (James Clark)
Subject: Re: Alien Life
Date: 29 May 91 05:16:00 GMT

Hmm.  That's basically what I said!
  Therefore, you must be correct!  :)

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Gresser)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 29 May 91 17:17:00 GMT

->mention it, I seem to recall having used some shoebox
->device to observe the eclipse I saw durring my pre-school

A shoebox will do fine.  Put a piece of paper on the "far" side of the box
and a pin-hole on the "sun" side.  Point the pinhole towards the sun so that
the dot of the sun falls on the paper, and most of what is on the paper is
shadow.  Better yet, get a BIG refrigerator box and put it upside down with
a small hole in it, then get inside of it upside-down so that it's real
dark.  Take a friend, and you can turn your average natural phenomenon into
a really cheap date!


Steve

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Gresser)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 29 May 91 17:21:00 GMT

Not that I don't love to talk about the eclipse coming up, but I think we
have wandered off-topic here.  Thank you for your replies to my messages, I
shall not reply to another on this topic.  Thank you again.

Steve

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



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: More on Hoagland's Mars
Date: 29 May 91 19:45:00 GMT

****************************************************************
ParaNet File Number:
Reprinted from Air & Space Smithsonian, June/July 1991.

                            FACE OFF

In 1976 the Viking I orbiter, flying some 1,100 miles above Mars,
photographed  a  region called Cydonia. Close inspection  of  one
frame  revealed  what looked like a human face  gazing  soulfully
into eternity. A Viking project scientist showed the image to the
press, dismissed it as a trick of light and shadow, and the  Face
On Mars was forgotten-for a while.
  Three  years  later,  Vincent DiPietro  and  Gregory  Molenaar,
computer  imaging  specialists  at NASA's  Goddard  Space  Flight
Center  in Maryland, analyzed a computer enhancement of The  Face
and decided it merited a serious look. Science raspberried  them,
but  it was too late. A new subculture had been born. Today,  two
groups-the  Mars Project in Santa Cruz, California, and the  Mars
Mission  in  Wytheville, Virginia-exist solely to push  the  idea
that  The Face and nearby structures may be monuments left  by  a
long-vanished intelligent civilization.
  Of  the  two  groups, the latter,  founded  by  science  writer
Richard  Hoagland, is the more energetic. Hoagland wants NASA  to
reshoot  Cydonia when the Mars Observer returns to the planet  in
1993,  and he pursues this vision with zeal reminiscent  of  Burt
Lancaster  in  The  Rainmaker.  Like  many  people  involved   in
missionary  work  on behalf of fringe topics,  Hoagland  believes
he's  being thwarted by higher-ups intent on muffling the  truth.
In  this  case, the higher-ups are at NASA. In a 1989  letter  to
Representative  Robert Roe, then chairman of the House  Committee
on   Science,  Space,  and  Technology,  Hoagland  charged   that
"political   obstacles,   within...NASA  have   blocked   serious
consideration of this evidence for 13 years." The  latest-alleged
outrage  involves  the  cancellation  of  a  documentary   called
"Hoagland's  Mars"  that was produced by  NASA's  Lewis  Research
Center in Cleveland, Ohio.
  Hoagland's  version of what happened goes like this:  In  March
1990  he  was  invited to Speak to a group  of  Lewis  employees.
During  that visit, Lynn Bondurant, educational  programs  chief,
interviewed  him  about  The Face with  a  documentary  in  mind.
Hoagland was pleased to learn that Bondurant would "give our work
a  fair  airing,  putting it in context of the  history  of  Mars
explorations."  The program was scheduled for a January  6,  1991
satellite transmission for PBS stations, says Hoagland, when NASA
"pulled the plug." Why? Because "the planetary science  community
hit the roof. They were absolutely furious that this subject  was
going  to  be legitimized." Now, Hoagland says,  the  program  is
being  recut to "put me in the same camp as Percival Lowell-as  a
well-meaning buffoon."
  A  source  close to the production says the  program  is  being
revised  "to present other views on The Face." That's probably  a
good  idea,  because the script I have doesn't present  the  full
pageantry  of  Hoagland's ideas. It covers his  belief  that  the
arrangement  of  The  Face  and  surrounding  structures  reveals
encoded  mathematical  constants,  but it fails  to  mention  his
wilder  extrapolations. Hoagland and geomorphologist  Erol  Torun
argue  in  a  self-published  paper that  the  constants  give  a
startling  insight  into planetary physics. The  theorizing  gets
pretty  dense:  "The  'tetrahedral  geometry'...is  revealing  an
equivalent   higher-order   mathematical   topology:   i.e.,    a
vorticular'two-torus'energy flow.... "
   The  bottom line is this: the entities who built Cydonia  were
trying  to  tell  the universe about a  "new  physics"  that  may
involve "a hitherto unknown relationship between two of the  four
basic forces of the Universe-gravity and electromagnetism:  i.e.,
a 'Unified Field.'"
   Coincidentally,  the miracle math of Cydonia conies into  play
in   a   mind-device  called  the   N-Machine,   which   Hoagland
enthusiastically  promotes. Invented by physicist Bruce de  Palma
(brother of Hollywood director Brian), the N-Machine, as Hoagland
puts   it,  "generates  more  energy  out  of   the   interaction
between 'space' and the hi-speed rotation of a spinning mass than
[is]  required  by  the motors  that  mechanically  rotate  those
masses."  Hoagland dares to say that from which  most  physicists
recoil: 'We may be talking about energy coming from nothing."  He
has  been  flogging this miracle device on "For The  People,"  an
overheated  radio talk show in Cedar Key, Florida.  Hoagland  and
Chuck  Harder,  the show's host, get  pretty  imaginative.  After
cancellation of "Hoagland's Mars," Harder said, "I gotta  believe
one  of the reasons...'Hoagland's Mars' has been put on  ice  has
got to be because of the Middle East thing.... Once your  program
would  be transmitted...the press would jump on it, and it  might
steal some of the thunder from Bush's ''project.'"
  Hoagland  replied,  'Well,  it's  even  more  disturbing   than
that....'Hoagland's  Mars' is the opening gun to a whole new  way
of life that taps a virtually inexhaustible energy source for the
benefit  of mankind. We are about to go to war...over a  resource
that is really useless."
  Hoagland:  buffoon  or Einstein of the 1990s?  Only  time  will
tell. For those wanting a closer look, Hoagland's own version  of
"Hoagland's Mars"-with all the theories-is available from  Curley
and Company, Signal Mountain, Tennessee.
                      -Alex Heard

END

PARANET FILE NAME: CYDONIA2.TXT

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Lunar Transient Phenomena
Date: 30 May 91 00:00:00 GMT

ParaNet(sm):  Freedom of Information for a better world!

(C) 1991 ParaNet(sm) Information Service.  All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
ParaNet File Number:
*****************************************************************
     With  all of the speculation about alien bases on  the  moon
and  strange  phenomena  being seen occurring  around  the  moon,
ParaNet did some research on this and found some very interesting
artilces  pertaining to this phenomena known as  Lunar  Transient
Phenomena.  Although it is far from being proof that aliens  have
set  up bases on the moon, it does provide for  some  interesting
reading.   During our search, we found a NASA publication  titled
"Chronological  Catalog  of  Reported  Lunar  Events."   This  is
contained  in  NASA Technical Report R-277,  published  in  July,
1968.   This  document details Lunar Transient  Phenomena  dating
back to 1540.  We will provide this document in another file, but
for  now,  we  did find an article that  details  the  scientific
communities concern now over this strange phenomena.
=================================================================
Reprinted from Sky & Telescope Magazine, March, 1991.

                    LUNAR TRANSIENT PHENOMENA

by  Winifred  Sawtell Cameron, La Ranchita de la Luna,  200  Rojo
Drive, Sedona, Arizona

     On  January 24, 1956 amateur lunar observer R. Houghton  was
drawing  the  crater  Liebig on the edge  of  Mare  Humorum  when
something  bright flashed in the field of his  7-inch  telescope.
The  flare came from the nearby crater Cavendish, which was  just
emerging from the lunar night. Closer inspection revealed that  a
peak on the crater's eastern wall was repeatedly flashing.
     Houghton called astronomer Brian Warner and told him what to
look  for.  Warner  too  saw the  flashes  and  called  them  "so
conspicuous that they were seen immediately." The other peaks  in
the vicinity remained normal.
     On  the  night  of November  2-3,  1958,  Soviet  astronomer
Nikolai  A. Kozyrev witnessed a strange phenomenon  while  making
spectrograms   of   the  crater  Alphonsus   with   the   Crimean
Astrophysical  Observatory's  50-inch reflector.  As  he  watched
through  the  telescope's guiding eyepiece, he saw  the  crater's
central  peak  blur  and  turn  an  unusual  reddish  color.  The
spectrograms  confirmed  his  visual impressions  of  a  volcanic
event;  they  showed an emission spectrum of carbon  vapor  (S&T:
February, 1959, page 184).
     On  July  19, 1969, the Apollo 11 command  module  had  just
achieved orbit around the Moon when the Mission Control Center in
Houston,  Texas, received word that amateur astronomers  reported
transient  phenomena in the vicinity of the  crater  Aristarchus.
Asked to check out the situation, astronaut Neil Armstrong looked
out  his window toward the earthlit region and observed an  "area
that is considerably more illuminated than the surrounding  area.
It  just has -- seems to have a slight amount of fluorescence  to
it."  Although he wasn't sure, Armstrong believed the region  was
Aristarchus.
     Accounts  of lunar transient phenomena (LTP'S) are not  new.
Over  the  past  30  years,  I  have  collected  close  to  2,000
observations dating from as far back as 557 A.D. Most are  visual
reports  of bright spots, flashes, hazes, and  curious  temporary
colorations  of  the  lunar soil.  Reputable  observers  such  as
William  Herschel,  Wilhelm Struve, and E. E. Barnard  have  seen
them. Some LTP's have even been photographed, as well as recorded
polarimetrically,  photometrically, and  spectroscopically.  Yet,
despite  a profusion of observations and six Apollo  missions  to
the Moon, the nature of LTP's remains elusive and their origin an
enigma.
     About   200  of  some  30,000  lunar  features  visible   in
telescopes  have  been recorded as LTP sources. Half  have  shown
activity  only  once.  Of the remainder, a  mere  dozen  features
contribute  three-fourths of all reports. One area,  Aristarchus-
Herodotus-Schroters Valley, is responsible for fully one-third of
the total number sighted.
     Most LTP activity occurs along the edges of the maria,  near
volcanic  features, like domes, sinuous rilles, and craters  with
dark  halos  or floors. But these regions, like the rest  of  the
Moon, have long been considered geologically dead. Circular maria
are  large, primordial impact basins that were filled  with  lava
about  3  billion  years ago. There is  evidence,  however,  that
volcanism  has occurred in some craters that are perhaps  only  a
million  years old. Could the bright flashes, hazes,  and  colors
reported at these sites be proof that the Moon is still active?

                 THOUGHTS ON THE ORIGIN OF LTP'S

     Possible explanations for LTP's are not lacking. One of  the
earliest  proposals  was made by Jack Green of  Douglas  Advanced
Research  Laboratories  in Huntington  Beach,  California.  While
studying  the standing levels of water and oil in deep wells,  he
found  that  the  levels  varied  in  concert  with  the   Moon's
anomalistic  month (27.55 days, from perigee to perigee),  as  if
the  strength of the Moon's tidal force affected the tiny  cracks
in  the bedrock through which oil and water move. Based  on  this
idea,  he  suggested that LTP's are degassing  phenomena  brought
about  by  the  Earth's  tidal  effects  on  the  Moon.   Maximum
degassing, he believed, would occur at the Moon's most  eccentric
apogees  and  a minimum at the least  eccentric  perigees.  After
analyzing  1,200 observations, however, I could not find  such  a
relationship.

<<Continued in next message..>>

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Lunar Transient Phenomena, (2)
Date: 30 May 91 00:00:00 GMT

<Continued from previous message>

     Some  LTP  phenomena may be caused by  sunlight  interacting
with  the  lunar soil. On October 30, 1963, James  Greenacre  and
Edward Barr observed red spots sparkling on the southwest wall of
the crater Aristarchus, the east wall of Schroter's Valley, and a
hill between them (S&T: December, 1963, page 316). The  phenomena
was observed visually by others and recorded spectroscopically as
well.  At the same lunar phase a month later, Greenacre and  Barr
saw a similar event. Since sunrise on these features occurs  when
the  Moon  is about 11 days old, Greenacre thought that  the  low
lunar Sun was somehow responsible. Indeed, thermoluminesence  mat
be  the cause. Gases in the lunar soil, frozen during the  night,
could heat up and escape near sunrise.
     Could  high-energy solar particles impacting the  Moon  also
trigger LTP activity? Shortly after a large flare erupted on  the
Sun  in  1963,  Zdenek Kopal and Thomas Rackham at  Pic  du  Midi
Observatory  in southern France photographed a local  brightening
around  the  craters Copernicus, Kepler, and  Aristarchus.  Kopal
proposed  that  energetic particles from the flare  caused  lunar
rocks to fluorescence. Such activity might be expected especially
at   full  phase  when  the  Moon  passes  through  the   Earth's
magnetosphere, where solar wind particles become trapped.

                            ANALYSIS

     LTP  sightings  fall  into  five  categories:  brightenings,
darkenings,   reddish   colorations,  bluish   colorations,   and
obscurations.  When plotted against the lunar anomalistic  month,
the  data show that LTP activity peaks somewhat when the Moon  is
moving  from apogee to perigee, especially about halfway  between
these points when the Moon is approaching Earth the most rapidly.
When  the Moon is opposite that point in its orbit, LTP  activity
is  at  a deep minimum.  Since tidal stressed  build  from  lunar
apogee to perigee, one might expect such a pattern.
     When LTP phenomena are plotted against the Moon's phases, it
appears  that  the most phenomena occur around the time  of  full
Moon  (though  LTP's  have been  observed  throughout  the  lunar
cycle).   Also,  more  are seen near the sunrise  line  than  the
sunset line, though that might be simply because far more  people
observe the waxing Moon in the evening than the waning Moon after
midnight.  Gaseous phenomena and anomalistic brightenings seem to
peak when the Moon is a waxing crescent.

                         ARE THEY REAL?

     Some  astronomers dismiss all LTP's as  either  aberrational
effects   in  Earth's  atmosphere,  changes  in  lunar   lighting
conditions,  or  outright illusions.  Such  skepticism,  however,
flies  in  the  face  of  those  who  have  devoted  decades   to
familiarizing  themselves with the Moon, and who very  well  know
these  common  observational  effects.  *   LTP's  are  localized
phenomena.   They are regions or features that experience  change
while the rest of the Moon remains normal.
     No  doubt  some  apparent LTP's are  caused  by  atmospheric
effects.   One is the "ashen glow."  Here, sunlight scattered  by
Earth's  clouds is cast onto the Moon's night surface,  resulting
in   LTP's   that  simply  reflect  changes  in  the   level   of
illumination.    Another  pseudo-LTP  concerns  bright   features
fringed  with  blue  (north) and red (south)  seen  against  dark
backgrounds.   These  probably are aberrational  effects,  namely
atmospheric  dispersion near the observer, perhaps enhanced by  a
lingering temperature inversion.
     Sightings  of  a  starlike point on the  Moon  may  also  be
disregarded  as an LTP.  This is the only transient phenomenon  I
have  ever  observed  myself.   But I  suspect  it  is  merely  a
reflection  effect  from  flat facets on  areas  of  large  rocky
outcrops  when  the  Sun and observer are  at  just  the  correct
angles.   (High  magnifications  spread the light  into  an  area
instead of a point.)
     Even if we eliminate the three types of non-LTP's  discussed
here,  that  still  leaves more than 40 percent  of  the  reports
unexplained.
     There  is  evidence that the remaining LTP's  are  of  lunar
origin.   a  substantial number of sightings  were  independently
confirmed.   Professional astronomers have recorded them on  film
and  spectrograms, as well as with photoelectric photometers  and
polarization  equipment.   Experiments  on  the  Apollo  missions
detected  trace outgassings of the radioactive elements radon  an
polonium,  suggesting that more substantial amounts  of  commoner
substances  were  released  at the  same  time.   One  experiment
possibly  detected  water vapor during the largest  moonquake  on
record  (Richter 4).  the epicenter of that quake was near or  in
the large, fractured crater Gauss north of Mare Crisium.  To  me,
this  is  the  one lunar feature that looks as  if  it  had  been
covered  with a thin crust of glass subsequently shattered by  an
impact.
     While  in  lunar  orbit,  Harrison  Schmitt  of  Apollo   17
witnessed  a  flash  near the crater  Grimaldi  west  of  Oceanus
Procellarum.   Since he was dark adapted, it's possible he saw  a
cosmic-ray flash within his own eyeball.  But it's also  possible
he saw a lunar event.  In the past, Grimaldi had been responsible
for more than a dozen reports of flashes.  The crater Plato  near
Mare Imbrium is another source of flashes.  Although many craters
responsible  for  LTP sightings have central  peaks  with  summit
craters, Plato has none.
     So the Moon may not be such a cold, lifeless neighbor  after
all.  It still breathes through the action of LTP's, which in  my
opinion  are  probably gentle outgassings  of  less-than-volcanic
proportions.   Whatever they are, thanks to the LTP's,  the  Moon
remains a curious place.

<<Concluded in next message..>>

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 416

                             Sunday, June 2nd 1991

Today's Topics:

                     Lunar Transient Phenomena, (Conclusion)
                               Re: So. cal uof bbs
                                   Re: (none)
                                   Re: (none)
                                 green fireballs
                                  Solar Eclipse
                            moon's lack of volcanism
                    Re: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info
                              Re: Greg's Questions
                             Bush and Grey buddy...
                                  Miscellaneous
                                  Re: FLIGHT 19
                               Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
                           Re: More on Hoagland's Mars
                         Re: Questions, questions, [...]
                            Bennington AFB UFO, 1975

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

From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Lunar Transient Phenomena, (Conclusion)
Date: 30 May 91 00:01:00 GMT

<<Continued from previous message>>


--The author directs the lunar transient phenomena section of the
Association of Lunar and Planetary Observers.

                  SOME POSSIBLE CAUSES OF LTP's

--The  following  is  a  condensation of  remarks  by  J.  Hedley
Robinson   in  the  December,  1986,  Journal  of   the   British
Astronomical Association.

     At  least  11 possible causes of lunar  transient  phenomena
(LTP's)   have  been  discussed.   As  a  stimulus   to   further
discussion, it may be helpful to summarize and comment on these.

     1.  Tidal.  There is a greater stress by the Earth when  the
Moon  is at perigee than at other parts of its orbit.  The  tidal
pull  may release strains in the crust and permit the release  of
trapped  gases.   The tidal effect of Earth on the Moon  is  32.5
times greater than the effect of the Moon on the Earth.

     2.    Albedo  changes  due  to  dust  movement.   There   is
essentially no atmosphere on the Moon to raise dust, so this does
not seem likely as an explanation.

     3.   Thermal  shock.  The lunar surface  temperature  varies
from 125 degrees to -80 degrees Celsius during a two-hour  period
at  both  sunrise and sunset, and most LTP's occur  within  three
days  of local sunrise or sunset.  LTP's could be related to  the
fact  that dissimilar materials expand and contract at  differing
rates.  Although the maria heat and cool more rapidly than  other
parts  of the Moon's surface, at a depth of just 10 cm  the  rock
temperature  is constant.  Thermal conditions may be regarded  as
incidental to LTP's rather than the main cause.

     4.  Magnetic.  Solar plasma bombards the lunar surface, even
when  the Moon is in the Earth's magnetic tail, and the  movement
of  the  Moon in and out of the magnetic tail changes  the  field
strength.   But charged particles penetrate the lunar surface  to
only  one-third the depth reached by the Sun's thermal rays.   If
thermal  shock  is  considered to be insufficient  to  cause  LTP
phenomena, then the much weaker electromagnetic effect below  the
surface must also be discounted.

     5.    Ultraviolet  radiation  from  the  Sun   might   cause
fluorescence  at visible wavelengths, because there is  virtually
no  atmosphere  to shield the lunar surface.  I  doubt  that  the
effect  is strong enough to produce visible reactions as  bright,
or as large, as the usual LTP's.

     6.  Solar-wind plasma impacting the surface could produce an
electric discharge, but I doubt that the energy involved is great
enough to cause an effect visible from Earth.
     LTP's  could,  however,  be  caused  by  the  explosion   of
chemically reactive molecules and free radicals in small hollows;
and  solar  wind plasma may produce such  reactive  molecules  in
rocks.  But solar-wind plasma hardly looks like a prime cause.

     7.    Spectral   diffraction   from   surface   grains    or
irregularities  too  small for telescopic  resolution  may  cause
color.   The lunar surface presents many angels to the  observer,
and  these vary with libration in both latitude and longitude  as
well  as with diurnal libration.  With the varying lunar  surface
slopes, many simultaneous diffraction angles should be presented.
But if this were the cause of LTP's, the effects should show  all
over the disk from time to time, whereas they in fact show  local
preferences.

     8.   Meteor  strikes.  These have been  claimed  frequently.
One  of  the  best  observed  was  reported  by  the  Smithsonian
Institution  near  the  Apollo 14 site on May 13,  1972,  when  a
meteor  impact released an energy equal to that of 1,000 tons  of
TNT.   But  meteor strikes cover only a small area on  the  lunar
surface when compared to the size of LTP's.

     9.   Moonquakes are often deep seated but very weak, with  a
preference for times of perigee or apogee.  There seems to be  no
obvious  connection  between  the  frequency  of  moonquakes  and
sightings of LTP phenomena.

     10.   False color is a regular feature in larger  telescopes
due  to terrestrial atmospheric conditions.  This can be  guarded
against by comparing a suspected LTP event with the appearance of
other  formations on the lunar surface at the same time,  and  is
well recognized by practiced observers.

     11.   The piezoelectric effect is well known on  Earth,  for
example  when rock strain generates a strong electric field  that
ionizes the air above the rock, causing a glow.  The field  moves
with  the  strain  source.  There are  Soviet  reports  that  the
magnetic  field  drops  suddenly  when  underground  tension   is
released.

     Conclusion.   The  foregoing  indicates  courses  that   our
thinking  and  research might follow.  I am of the  opinion  that
tidal strain or thermal shock causing outgassing and producing  a
piezoelectric effect might be the most plausible explanation.

J. Hedley Robinson
Helmington, 21 Inverteign Dr.
Teignmouth, Devon TQ14 9AF
England

END

PARANET FILE NAME:  LUNAR.TXT

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: So. cal uof bbs
Date: 29 May 91 17:16:00 GMT


   Mark, SkyWatch BBS / ParaNet ALPHA-IOTA(sm) is in Santa Barbara, CA.
Where are you located?  The number is [phone].

P.S. (No, I don't see the stupid soap opera being filmed around town, you
guys! :)

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: (none)
Date: 29 May 91 21:02:00 GMT

Well there is proof that not all life needs the same criteria to live, take
for example common life forms that are living in your back yard.  These are
commonly known as PLANTS! and they don't breathe oxygen, quite the contrary,
they breathe carbon dioxide, which is oxygen based, yes, but is not oxygen,
Humans as well as the majority of land animals would perish is all we had to
breath was carbon dioxide.  Also, With Dave's theoryhat life developed at
generally the same rate living on planets that were exploded through the big
bang theory, is somewhat incorrect.  Our own sun for instance is a
relativly new sun and our planet is made from the parts of something like
the majority of the explosions of something like 4 suns? I am not sure as
to the exact amount, but I am well aware of the fact that matter was created
through the explosions of suns in supernova's, the extreame heat creates new
matter, and more of the lower base forms of matter such as Hydrogen, and
Helium.
     Supposedly the beginning of life on Earth took place with I think it
was amonia breathing life forms or soemthing, so there is absolutely no
reason whatsoever that life elsewhere has to be anything remotely similar to
our lifeforms on this planet, althougha coincidence could be a reality,
although a slim one, about as slim as there being life elsewhere nearby to
our planet.  Who knows, these are just questions to ponder, and keep you
from sleeping at night and 'counting those bipedal lambs jumping over a
fence'. HAH!

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



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


From: [e-mail] (James Clark)
Subject: Re: (none)
Date: 29 May 91 22:18:00 GMT

I seriously doubt we have been visited by plants, Paul.  :)

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



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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: green fireballs
Date: 30 May 91 13:46:49 GMT

From: [e-mail] (John H. Chalmers Jr.)

Re Streve Gresser and the Green Fireball: I have no idea what
compounds could be present in the meteor to produce such a show.
Elements such as boron, barium and copper just aren't very common,
cosmically. We can mine them on the earth because geochemical processes
concentrate them.
 The initial green color may be an optical effect due to light
scattering in the atmosphere and the fact that our eyes are most
sensitive to green light, but I'm guessing. Another possibility is
that the meteors thermally ionize  nitrogen and/or oxygen in the upper
atmosphere and these gases are fluorescing. After all, the aurora
borealis glows green, pink, and white. However, this is a only a guess.
I'm not even sure the events take place at the same altitudes and the
auroras are electrically excited, of course.
 The Smithsonian used to run a network of all-sky cameras in the
southwest and recorded many meteors. The spectra should have been
published somewhere and one might be able identify the chemical
species from them. --- John





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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: Solar Eclipse
Date: 30 May 91 15:58:18 GMT

From: [e-mail]

Several people have wondered about the locations of the July 11 solar total
eclipse. The path of totality is narrow. It will first touch land  on the
Big Island of Hawaii just after sunrise, cross the lower part of Baja
California near midday, cross central Mexico, and end somewhere in  South
America. It will NOT touch the continental US, where only a partial eclipse
may be seen in the southwest.

Note that one can safely look directly at the eclipsed sun ONLY during
totality, not during any partial phase, even 99%!! That means that NO ONE
in the continental US can safely look directly at the sun. You can see the
partial phase by viewing through appropriately smoked glass or exposed and
developed film, or by viewing the image indirectly through a pinhole camera
or a telescope projected onto a piece of cardborad or paper. Such details
are in articles in Sky and Telescope and Astronomy magazines over the past
year. I am going to see the total eclipse in Baja. It is a spectacular
sight and should be seen at least once in a lifetime!

Dave Webb




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


From: UNHH.UNH.EDU!K_MACARTHUR1
Subject: moon's lack of volcanism
Date: 30 May 91 17:15:09 GMT

From: [e-mail]


 I'm pretty sure that the moon has no molten core.   This is due to
the fact that the Apollo and other unmanned probes report very little magnetic
field, unlike the Earth and some other planets/moons.    The current and
most accepted reason for planetary magnetic fields is as a result of a molten
core of a conductive metal (iron in our case) that induces magnetic fields as
it rotates and flows around.   Barring something like pockets of molten silicon
at the moon's core (even though there is iron there, too and would be melted
in along with it), I sincerely doubt the moon has any volcanic activity at this
point in time, though it may have in the past.  Any planetary geophysisists
out there?

    Korac MacArthur
    INTERNET:  [e-mail]




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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info
Date: 29 May 91 20:30:00 GMT


 >    Hmm, I fail to understand how a document released to the public via
 > the Freedom of Information Act can still have questionable validity.  I
 > would think our Govt., being so careful and into keeping reccords of
 > everything, would photograph all their documents on microtape before
 > releasing them. How are these documents released?  Obviously, someone
 > doesn't show up knocking at MUFON's door saying, "Hey!  Look what I just
 > got from the Govt!" and a Govt. document can't be easy to forge, let
 > alone have a problem with validity.  I guess what I am asking is,
 > obviously our Govt. knows when a document said to be released under the
 > FIA turns up, if it is a valid dicument or not.  Would then, the reason
 > its validity is not known to the public be that the Govt. itself claims
 > it is fake?
 >

David, what document are you talking about? If you're talking about the MJ-12
documents, please be advised they were NOT released through the Freedom of
Information Act, they were allegedly obtained from covert sources within the
government. There's a BIG difference.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Greg's Questions
Date: 29 May 91 22:46:00 GMT


 >      Is there anyone out there reading this that has had an actuall
 > encounter with alien (or what they thoght to be Alien) life forms?  Any
 > close friends or family members?  Let's come out of the closet!  That is
 > waht this conference is here for!

Paul:

I assume that ALPHA-IOTA is receiving the Abductions Conference (ABDUCT). If
so, you are much more likely to get an answer to this last question there.
ABDUCT is the only ParaNet conference in which aliases are allowed, and users
are encouraged to post their alien contact experiences there, where any
ridicule or other vitriolic response is verboten. They find it easier to
"come out of the closet" under those circumstances.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: Bush and Grey buddy...
Date: 28 May 91 18:28:36 GMT

In a message to Steve Rose <24 May 91 13:25> David Villa wrote:

 DV>   Haha, yes, I saw that picture as well, while standing in line
 DV> to purchase my groceries.  Quite funny.  It's amazing what people
 DV> will read these days. It was even more funny that the "Alien" was
 DV> obviously just a man in a body stocking, blurred a little bit.


Haha.  Yeah, I guess if anyone really *pushed* the issue and challenged the
validity of the photograph...they would hide by saying, "Oh!  That is NOT the
actual event taking place...just a photographer's conception!"  ;-)



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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Miscellaneous
Date: 29 May 91 07:53:07 GMT


 > human brain can be stimulated to hallucination with certain
 > frequencies in the microwave range.

  Just want to mention, in  case you missed it, that John Brandenburg
found that microwave energy can cause grasses to lay down flat but
still remain alive.
  Interesting........maybe some connection.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: FLIGHT 19
Date: 29 May 91 16:49:07 GMT

I wasn't sure about the rest of the country but here in the Mid-West they
say the same thing. We are affected by jet stream currents and alberta
clippers and a few others. The funniest one that comes to mind is a guy
running a T-shirt booth at the State Fair here. It was sunny and nice, a few
minutes we had one of those downpours, followed by sunny again rest of the
day. He was from Kansas and said he had never experienced anything that
strange before. I guess they know what's going to happen a few days in
advance, while here it's a guess until it's over. Giant hail storm Monday
about 60 miles North of here. It didn't rain where I live.

Last off topic message to Fla. I stood on the road (Collins Blvd?) and it
was raining on one side, and dry on the other side, Miami Beach.

I have not had time to impliment my "UFO Photos" yet, but came up with a
third method last week. As soon as I can make some, I'll try to send them off
to you, without telling how it was done. You can see how real they look. (now
watch I'll really photograph a UFO and people will say, Oh he wrote that he
was going to fake some!) No way Jose' I won't try to say these are anything
but frauds, and if I ever get a real one, I hope it's not as hokey as my
creations.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: GREEN FIREBALLS
Date: 31 May 91 04:38:00 GMT

I have access to large bike boxes if anyone wants them, but you have to come
and pick them up yourself.. let me know (those around here)

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: More on Hoagland's Mars
Date: 31 May 91 04:43:00 GMT

Wow, that is intriguing, any way of getting any more information about that?
picutres, documents etc?

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



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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Questions, questions, [...]
Date: 31 May 91 23:32:52 GMT

From: [e-mail]

 > From: [e-mail] (Gregory B Lush)
 >
 > I want to understand what it is that makes people want to discuss UFOs.
 > Has anyone changed his/her mind about the subject of aliens/UFOs since
 > participating in this newsletter?

Not really, although the stuff from Belgium was pretty interesting.

 > Why are you reading this newsletter?

I'm interested in all kinds of things, ranging from international
news to orchids & bromeliads to meteorology to computing to
non-rational conceptual frameworks to baseball to astronomy to
floating about in bodies of freshwater suspended by floatation
devices (aka 'bloating').  A lot of intriguing stuff passes through
this discussion group.

 > Some people have said that they 'saw something' and want to know what it
 > was.  Even the strongest skeptics MUST believe that there is the
 > possibility of aliens or else they wouldn't waste their time and the
 > other readers' time as well.  Am I correct?

Although this may sound pretty darn silly, I try not to _believe_ in
anything.  Either I know it or I don't; if I know it, I know it, if
I don't, I try not to form any opinions, but just keep looking.  I
think of a belief as a commitment to something that is not known,
and IMHO this is not necessary and just not a good idea in general.
It's not as if I believe or know that there are no aliens, and the
task is to convince me that there are.  Even if no one had ever seen
a UFO, if the thought had never occurred that there might be other
beings from other planets, that wouldn't lead me to say there
*aren't* any.  It would be just another of an truly infinite number
of things I don't know about one way or the other.

 > I'm asking these questions because I don't see any way to 'scientifically'
 > PROVE the existence of aliens, short of a personal ride out of the galaxy.

While the 'scientific method' can be a darn useful tool, I'm not
about to let it get in the way of my 'knowing' about something that
might not fit the rules.  In the event that I am abducted and
transported through time and space in such a way as to violate
everything I know rationally, and it turns out that I am not an
individual human being but really some small part of a much larger
entity, I won't really care if I can prove it scientifically, since
I don't need to understand it to know it happened.  On the other
hand, I can't know something without some type of experience of it,
or some evidence of it.  If I am abducted, I have evidence, and I
then decided whether or not I'm hallucinating or dreaming or really
being abducted, and then I decide whether or not I 'know' that there
are alien beings.  If someone else presents evidence of such an
abduction, say a photo, it gets the same scrutiny that the evidence
from my own senses gets.  Everyone is free to interpret their
experiences any way they choose; sooner or later the world catches
up with everyone and then you find out how good your analyses
were/are.

 > I believe/know aliens are here.  That's my opinion/feeling.  It seems to
 > 'fit the data' better than the idea that there are none here.  The problem
 > is sorting out which data points are valid and which are not.  I guess I
 > believe Billy Meier's contacts are valid, so that is a start for me.

My question would be, do you *believe* or do you *know*?  And why
would you choose to make what appears to be a relatively final
decision as to whether or not there are aliens based on
opinion/feeling?  Is there a need to make that decision?  Is it
appropriate to make any final decision either way when the evidence
is still so scattered and inconclusive, and the integrity of many of
the individuals reporting such evidence is questionable?  From what
I can tell I wouldn't put much weight behind the Meier evidence, but
at the same time the interview with Vallee leads me to think that
while he on the one hand appears fairly cautious and careful, on the
other hand may have some hidden agendas and may be inclined to make
some statements which are inappropriate in their own right.

Well, I think that's enough babble for one day.  Now off to the lake
to soak my head ;-).

Cheers!  - Gregg

Gregg TeHennepe       | Academic Computing Services         | This is the life
[e-mail] | Connecticut College, New London, CT | you have -V. Reid




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


From: rutgers!phri!marob!upaya!tbetz
Subject: Bennington AFB UFO, 1975
Date: 1 Jun 91 03:10:37 GMT

From: Tom Betz <upaya!tbetz>

 A couple years ago on the old Paranet Alpha I read a text file on the
 subject of a UFO, if I recall correctly, at Bennington AFB in
 Texas.

 In that report, written by a former airman, was something to the
 effect that after the UFO hovered over the airfield, the
 defensive missile emplacements along the runways were discovered
 to have been disabled by forces unknown.

 A friend visiting one of my housemates told me last night that in
 1975, he happened upon a crowd of witnesses to a UFO at a service
 station near Bennington, just after it had left, and he recounted
 the sheer terror of their reactions to it.  He had not heard any
 more about the story, as the Air Force had, of course, denied
 that anything happened.

 I would be greatly indebted to anyone who could find that file
 and either post it to the list or email it to me at the address
 below, so I can share it with this fellow.

 Thanks.

--
--------------           'Hels' og industri, de gaar haand i haand.'
Tom Betz     -----------------------------------------------------------------
914-375-1510 marob!upaya![e-mail] [e-mail]%phri.nyu.edu
GBS          {att,philabs,rutgers,cmcl2}!phri!marob!upaya!tbetz




********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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 417

                             Sunday, June 2nd 1991

Today's Topics:

                    Re: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info
                               Hopkins' INTRUDERS
                              DR. NATHAN INTERVIEW
                                  Face On Mars
                               Face On Mars Quote
                    Re: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info
                                      UFONS
                           Re: Discussion of statemen
                                  Miscellaneous
                                     (none)
                                    HD Crash
                              Communion, the movie.
                            Re: Communion, the movie.
                                Re: Miscellaneous

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

From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info
Date: 31 May 91 09:10:00 GMT


 >David, what document are you talking about? If you're talking about the MJ
 >12 documents, please be advised they were NOT released through the Freedom
 >of Information Act, they were allegedly obtained from covert sources within
 >the government. There's a BIG difference.
 >
 >Jim

       Yes, there is a BIG difference.  The validity of such a document
released into the public in such a way is easily doubted.  Damn, I thought
all this MJ-12 stuff had at least some firm footing behind it.  Is it all
this same case?  Someone claiming they have "obtained" this top-secret info
and are doing their part for the human race by sharing it with us?  As if it
wasn't hard to swallow in the first place.  Sounds like some very clever
disinformation to me.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Hopkins' INTRUDERS
Date: 31 May 91 09:45:00 GMT


   Linda, I have seen your posts here and on the FidoNet UFO echo and you
seem to be very well read and versed in many aspects of this phenomena.  I
had a few questions for you.
   I have just read Bud Hopkins' book _Intruders_ and it has really added a
new aspect for me to consider to what I thought I knew of UFO abductions.
Some people argue that Hypnosis is not a very legitimate way to screen
information because people can easily be influenced by the hypnotist and may
even be able to make things up while under the hypnosis.  I myself believe
in the validity of hypnisis, as my mother is a Hypnotherapist and I have
seen her do some amazing things with it.
   Hopkins' data seems to be very consistant.  That UFO abductors are
observing the progress of certain human beings durring their lives, grabbing
them at consistant intervals to conduct tests on them, and even (and this is
the most disturbing element) taking sperm/ovum samples to artificially
inseminate human females and create a hybrid race.
   My questions pertain to Bud Hopkins himself.  If all his data is valid,
the way he presents it, then he has a very string case.  All the different
abductee accounts seem to form a very clear picture.  So, the only margin
for error would be with Hopkins himself.  How much authenticity does he
have?  Does he have proof to offer of these incredible stories he tells?  I
havn't read _Missing Time_ yet, but I am interested after reading
_Intruders_.  Is there something to Hopkins' writings I would not know from
the books?  Has anyone refuted his claims and had any valid proof to back
themselves up?  I ask these things because Hopkins' book seems to be written
in such a way that he is basically saying, "Here is the most unquestionable
proof found today as to what is realy going on."  I'm just looking for
another side of the coin.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: DR. NATHAN INTERVIEW
Date: 1 Jun 91 13:11:00 GMT


     On Friday, 05-31-91, I had the pleasure of speaking with Dr.
Robert Nathan at JPL in regards to the continuing saga of the Gulf
Breeze photos. Nathan has analyzed several original negatives,
utilizing microscopy, computer digitization and image enhancement,
along with multiple density printing to arrive at the following
conclusion: He has no definitive proof of a hoax, but the data are
consistent with images from double exposures. Nathan does not feel
that the GB images are from real UFO's.
     When asked why he felt the GB photo controversy continues to
this day, Nathan replied in one word "Money". In my (SW) opinion,
that is one of the major reasons Dr. Bruce Maccabee continues to
defend the authenticity of the photos. He receives a fee for each
conference or symposium he attends. When I asked Nathan why he
never speaks at ufology conferences, he responded that he has only
rarely been invited. He stated that most attenders want to hear the
pro, not the con.
     Dr. Nathan also explained that he has asked both Walters and
Maccabee for more original negatives to analyze, but he has
received only duplicates. Apparently, they are witholding requested
materials. He is particularly interested in looking at the negative
containing the three hovering craft shot at dawn.
     He has recently received some new negatives from Tommy Smith's
father, but does not have any analyses completed on these as yet.
     I also questioned Nathan on his opinion of Vallee's "Photo
Analysis of an Aerial Disc Over Cost Rica", but he had no knowledge
of that negative.
     In closing, I find Dr. Nathan to be a most sincere, accessible
and open minded individual, who's main concern is discerning the
truth. It is encouraging to note that although always extremely
occupied with his position at JPL, Nathan will make time for all
who are seeking answers.
     Those of you having further questions for Dr. Nathan may write
to him at the following address:

Robert Nathan, Ph.D.
c/o Jet Propulsion Laboratory
California Institute of Technology
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena, California       Include S.A.S.E. and a daytime phone #

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Bob Hawkins)
Subject: Face On Mars
Date: 30 May 91 18:56:00 GMT


> JL>  The October 88(?) issue of Applied Optics had an article on image
> JL>  enhancement of the face, and their conclusion was that it
> JL>  IS a feature shaped lied a face ....
>
>     This is the second time that I have seen this statement on
> the echo. For the second time, I trekked to my local college
> library to look up the reference.  For the second time, I

    Since there are two bookcases filled with Applied Optics
going back to 1962 wasting space in my lab, I figured I'd be
shirking my duty if I didn't check this out. It turns out the
correct reference is Mark J. Carlotto, "Digital imagery analysis
of unusual Martian surface features," Applied Optics vol. 27,
no. 10, pp. 1926-1933 (15 May 1988). (You can't miss it, it's
the cover story.) I might as well quote his "Summary and
Conclusions"; since it's a long quote, I'll put it in a separate
message.
    Some points to notice: all of Carlotto's analysis was done
on just _two_ images taken under similar lighting conditions.
The conclusion that the object looks like a face even from
different angles and under different illumination is based on
Carlotto's analysis; it is _not_ confirmed by photos taken under
different conditions. Such photos, unfortunately, don't yet
exist.
    Many other scientists believe that some of Carlotto's
features -- particularly the teeth -- are the result of
image-enhancing the noise in the original image. In general, the
scientific community has not shown much interest in the subject.
    And finally, I have to say the enhanced images published in
this paper are not terribly impressive.

    ( quote in following message... )



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



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


From: [e-mail] (Bob Hawkins)
Subject: Face On Mars Quote
Date: 30 May 91 18:57:00 GMT


    From Mark J. Carlotto, "Digital imagery analysis of unusual
Martian surface features," Applied Optics vol. 27, pp.
1926-1933 (15 May 1988); "Summary and Conclusions" from pages
1932 and 1933:

    "Digital imagery enhancement of a mile long feature
resembling a humanoid face and other nearby objects in the
Cydonia region of Mars were performed, the 3-D structure of the
face was derived using a single image shape-from-shading
algorithm, and synthetic views were then generated using
computer graphic techniques. The 3-D analysis was performed
because there is a lack of high resolution images of this area
viewed in conditions other than in afternoon light and from
directly overhead. The intention was to create synthetic views
of the face to determine if the visual impression of a face
persists over a wide range of lighting conditions and
perspectives.
    "The image enhancement results indicate that a second eye
socket may be present on the right, shadowed side of the face;
fine structure in the mouth suggesting teeth are apparent in the
enhanced imagery as well as crossed symmetrical lines on the
forehead. The results of the 3-D analysis show that the
impression of facial features is not a transient phenomenon.
Facial features are evident in the underlying topography and are
shown to induce the visual impression of a face over a wide
range of illumination conditions and perspectives.
    "It is the author's belief that, although the Viking data
are not of sufficient resolution to permit the identification of
possible mechanisms of origin for these objects, the results to
date suggest that they may not be natural. At the very least,
these enigmatic objects deserve further scrutiny by future Mars
probes such as the 1988 Soviet Phobos mission or the U.S. Mars
Observer."



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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info
Date: 1 Jun 91 19:27:00 GMT

In a message to Jim Speiser <05-31-91 02:10> David Villa wrote:

->at least some firm footing behind it.  Is it all this same
->case?  Someone claiming they have "obtained" this
->top-secret info and are doing their part for the human race
->by sharing it with us?  As if it wasn't hard to swallow in

Well, that's not the WHOLE story, Dave, but basically it does look like just
a lot of disinformation. Whether its government-inspired or not is the major
debate taking place now. I suggest you get your hands on a couple of files
called MJ12COM1.UFO and MJ12COM2.UFO, which is a chronology of MJ-12 events
through 1987. I believe they are available at ALPHA.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Peggy Noonan)
Subject: UFONS
Date: 1 Jun 91 19:01:00 GMT

Hi Bob,
        This is the first time I've been able to get back to the BBS
since you've joined here...hope you'll receive the mail message this
way!
        Did you get the copies of the articles I sent about MICAP?
        And are you a subscriber to UFONS or would you like me to mail
you a copy of an issue?  The latest one is almost exclusively UFO
stories (sometimes they use a lot of Bigfoot/Crop Circles/Cattle
Mutilation/etc material.)
        Talk to you soon-=-
                                        ==Peggy==
--
Peggy Noonan - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Moen)
Subject: Re: Discussion of statemen
Date: 1 Jun 91 21:11:15 GMT

> This is just a personal opinion...
> The vitriolic exchanges between Mr. Moen and Mr. Tender are BORING.
> If these two gentleman don't like each other, that is their problem.

Paul --

I absolutely agree with you and Doug Rogers on this point, which is
precisely why I've done my best to end it.  I don't dislike Mr. Tender;
I just find his battological baiting, aspersions on my personal
credentials, etc., to be tiresome and unproductive, and assumed that
everyone else would feel likewise.

It is a common American habit to immediately blame both parties to a
dispute, reflection.  Given that I've been continually attempting to
end the recent discussion, and that Mr. Tender has been continuing to
indulge in a rather low variety of baiting, I hope you and Doug will
reconsider your conclusions.

Best Regards,
Rick M.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Miscellaneous
Date: 1 Jun 91 11:36:00 GMT


 >   Just want to mention, in  case you missed it, that John Brandenburg
 > found that microwave energy can cause grasses to lay down flat but still
 > remain alive.
 >   Interesting........maybe some connection.

Yes, indeed.  BTW, what do you know about the 'Rainbow Declaration?' I
understand that Brandenburg did this work and would like to hear a little more
about it.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: (none)
Date: 2 Jun 91 02:20:00 GMT


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


 > I want to understand what it is that makes people want to discuss UFOs.
 > Has anyone changed his/her mind about the subject of aliens/UFOs since
 > participating in this newsletter?  Why are you reading this newsletter?
 > Some people have said that they 'saw something' and want to know what it
 > was.  Even the strongest skeptics MUST believe that there is the
 > possibility of aliens or else they wouldn't waste their time and the
 > other readers' time as well.  Am I correct?

It would depend on what your definition of a skeptic is.  In my definition, I
am a skeptic in that I do believe that the phenomenon represents a true
physical anomaly, but I can't demonstrate the root cause of it.  However, the
term skeptic is used too loosely.  It seems that the battle lines are drawn
too much askew of actual findings and fact.  It is easy to ascribe a
"debunker" to the skeptic side, but this is highly inaccurate.  I perceive a
debunker much like a fanatic -- they talk of something that they know nothing
about.  There is enough solid evidence to state that UFOs represent a real
phenomenon, i.e., literally thousands of witnesses, physical landing traces,
etc., but the problem is not the data as much as it is the persons collecting
and interpreting it.  Of course, it is very easy for one to look into the
strangeness of a UFO encounter and immediately ascribe it to an intelligence
outside of our realm of understanding.  But, this is faulty as there is a lack
of sufficient evidence to make such a statement.  The second problem with this
is that the data in its raw form could represent something substantial, but
the process that it is disseminated is also faulty.  There are no constructs
apparent and the wrong conclusion is reached as there is no scientific fact
derived out of another's assumption of motive, etc.  I submit that we might
get a much clearer look at what UFOs represent if qualified personnel were
extracting and studying the data that is currently available.

 > Someone posted something about Ed Walters and the fact that
 > a model was found in his attic.  This would cast doubt on some of
 > his pictures if the model looked ANYTHING like ANY of his pictures.
 > Could the model have been planted there?  Will we ever know?

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.  This case represents a complicated set of
circumstances.  There could be several things occurring within the one issue.
Unfortunately, too much good data has been lost to atrition of time and a lack
of coordinated effort by several organizations working as a cooperative to get
to the bottom of this.  It has been a public circus.  The allegations fly
about Ed hoaxing the photos, but there is no more evidence to prove this than
there is to prove that they are real.  To complicate the matters, the
organization which performed the primary investigation has sought to censor
anyone who has a differing viewpoint of the situation -- hardly scientific
methodology!

 > There has been a large number of complaints about a conference where
 > a woman from Venus was allowed to talk.  This gives UFOlogy a bad
 > name, people say.  Why do you care what others think?  Seeking
 > understanding about these phenomena seems like one of the most personal
 > ventures a person can make.  Let this 'Venitian' do what she feels she
 > needs to do, and you can filter out her input if you deem it
 > inappropriate.
 > I think most of us are able to do that.

That is not the point.  Sure, you are capable of making a distinction, just
like most of the other people who have an interest in the subject.  The
problem is that the media takes something like this and makes a mockery out of
it in the main-stream press.  This does real wonders for getting credibility
to the field with main-stream people who see the silly aspects of UFOs and the
people that study them.  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.  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.
For example, would you buy a used car without test driving it?  Not likely.
The same principle applies to this instance.  It is not that she is makes
these claims, but what an unbiased investigation of these claims finds.

 > What would it take to convince people that aliens are here?
 > And further, what are you going to do with the information if it
 > is proven to you, personally, that aliens are here?  What does/would
 > it mean to you?

Proof.  Hard, empirical proof.  This proof can come in many different forms
and is not necessarily limited to the form of a vehicle landing in the backyard
complete with a grey critter stepping out of it.  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.  On the last part of
your question, I cannot say what it would mean to me until I have all of the
information with which to make an informed decision.  This is probably the
best policy that anyone could adopt.  This saves unnecessary paranoia and
anxiety only to find that it was not what was thought or assumed in the first
place.

 > I am genuinely curious.  It seems that any photo, person, story, etc.
 > can be called a fake.  No one thing should convince anyone of anything.
 > There was a discussion about what would be proof.  There were several
 > possibilities mentioned but the only thing that I
 > remember being called 'proof' was if we could find a piece of material
 > which 'could not have been made on earth.'  We know the government keeps
 > secret research going (for military, 'national security,' etc.).
 > Couldn't
 > any such material be explained that way?   So that
 > doesn't seem to prove anything either.  Besides, Meier produced such a
 > specimen and the conclusion of one investigator was that it could not
 > have been made on earth.  So what?

This is well and good.  Meier is not a valid example of proof since it was
found that the specimen was lost and unavailable to others for testing.
Additionally, proof would not necessarily have to be "material" left by a UFO,
although this would be interesting.  But, the material, in and of itself,
unless demonstrated to contain properties foreign to our world, would not
constitute proof.  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.

 > What if a saucer landed on your front lawn?  Is there any way you could
 > know whether that was alien rather than another product of secret
 > governmental research?  So you saw an alien come out.  How do you prove
 > he's not wearing a disguise?  Do you check for genitals?  That might be
 > considered very rude on his planet--earth or otherwise.  Certainly our
 > government's telling us that aliens DO exist should not be taken as
 > proof--that would only mean 'they' are either lying now or were lying
 > before.
 > You still wouldn't know which.

Again, this is very possible, and your argument actually backs up my
contention that we should be more concerned with identifying what is going on
than assuming we have the answers and misleading people.

 > What if we assume that there ARE aliens?  What with all the stars
 > and planets out there, there must be life somewhere.  It is reasonable
 > therefore, to assume that one civilization might be advanced (or
 > patient)
 > enough to visit here (to see that 'Epcot Center' they had heard so much
 > about!).  Does that mean that ONE valid picture would PROVE their
 > presence?
 > Is there any way to get a 'valid' picture?  It seems as though people
 > just
 > wait until someone finds some way to re-create the picture and then
 > declare it bunk.

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.

 > Are there other sources of information which can teach us something?
 > No one talks much about all the myths from ancient civilizations
 > from South American indians, the Hopi's, Hindus, Greeks, to the Dakotas
 > and others being visited by and taught by aliens, many of which are
 > associated with beings from the Pleiades.  In one of my first posts I
 > mentioned that in the King James bible in Genesis there is a line about
 > 'Sons of God' mating with humans and that the "Nephilim" were on the
 > planet then.  I only found the word 'nephology' in the dictionary
 > (study of clouds), so I wondered (aloud) if these were the
 > 'People from the Clouds.'  Since then, I talked with a Greek fellow
 > about this.  He then looked up some Greek roots to our words which I
 > wish
 > to share (used without permission, by the way):
 >
 >     Nephele = ancient greek female god of clods/weather
 >     Nephele = Cloud, Fog, Darkness or Crowd
 >     Nephelegeretes = Cloudcollectors
 >
 >     Ne = negation (un-, -less, anti-, etc.)
 >     Philos = Friend
 >     Phile = Friend (feminine)
 >     Philia = Friendship
 >     Phili = Kiss
 >     Philema = the respectful Kissing
 >     Nephiles = Friendless, Unfriend
 >
 > He said that there can be some confusion as to i's and e's during
 > translation so he gave both possibilities.  It seems as though the
 > proper translation is likely to be 'friendless, unfriend.'  There
 > are tales about UNFRIENDLY Pleiadians in these myths as well.

Sure.  This is historical data, but we have no way of knowing exactly what all
of this represents.  This is subject to interpretation.

 > I'm asking these questions because I don't see any way to
 > 'scientifically'
 > PROVE the existence of aliens, short of a personal ride out of the
 > galaxy.
 > I don't think any alien has the 'time' to take us all for a ride one
 > by one.  I guess there IS the method used in the movie
 > 'The Day the Earth Stood Still,' but if it is true that they cannot
 > interfere, that won't happen either.

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 believe/know aliens are here.  That's my opinion/feeling.  It seems to
 > 'fit the data' better than the idea that there are none here.  The
 > problem
 > is sorting out which data points are valid and which are not.  I guess I
 > believe Billy Meier's contacts are valid, so that is a start for me.
 > Perhaps better questions to ask, even if you don't believe yet, are:
 >            Why are they here?
 >            Why are they being so discreet/evasive/selective as to
 > contacts?

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.

Looking forward to your response.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: HD Crash
Date: 2 Jun 91 07:47:00 GMT

To all ParaNet Users:
I suffered a hard disk crash, and lost my BBS setup. I lost a rather
large package of mail, so if anyone had sent me any messages this week,
please resend the messages.
BTW, I am working on a rather amazing case that has just taken place
back east, much more to come out on it. It involves a police officer,
two UFO sightings he made, black choppers, crop circles, and what may
have been an attempt to extort a video tape he took of the action. Much
more will be coming out shortly so stay tuned.
Don
--
Don Ecker - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Communion, the movie.
Date: 1 Jun 91 10:41:00 GMT


   I just got back from watching movies at a feinds house, late night as you
can tell.  We found that our local Wharehouse has the movie Communion, based
on the book by Whitley Streiber.  I found this movie fascinating!  Have any
of you seen it?  The hypnosis scenes were VERY powerfully done and I found
myself wondering after the film, how much of the movie was hollywood imagery
and how much was based on Streiber's true perceptions (how close to what
Streiber saw were the aliens is the film).  If you can locate a copy at a
video store, I highly recommend it.
   Oh, some other interesting news:  I looked at a recent printing of Bud
Hopkins' book _Intruders_ and guess what!  On the cover is a little blue
star which says, "Soon to be a major motion picture!"  Wow!  This sounds
great.  Do any of you know more about this?  Heard a release date?  Know for
sure the movie is being made?  I just finished _Intruders_ and would love to
see a movie.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (James Clark)
Subject: Re: Communion, the movie.
Date: 1 Jun 91 11:14:00 GMT

Hmm.  I normally don't like alien movies like that.  But, I try to have an
open mind (yeah, right) and I'll give it a look.  I trust your opinion.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Date: 1 Jun 91 18:15:00 GMT

Interesting that Microwave energy can cauase grass blades to lie flat, and
continue to grow, but in the case of the crop circles, does anyone know if
the grasses continue to grow sideways, or do they eventually go back to
growing straight up opposite the pull of gravity?

--
Paul Mcavoy - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 418

                             Monday, June 3rd 1991

Today's Topics:

                                     (none)
                           Bush, Greys, and objectivity
                               Hopkins' Intruders
                                Critical Thinking
                                   Eastern Hub
                                  New Affiliate
                                Re: Miscellaneous
                       Brandenburg's "Rainbow Declaration"
                                      Book
                                 Re: The Nordics
                            Re: Communion, the movie.
                              Re: Critical Thinking
                                    Re: UFONS
                    Re: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info
                             Re: Hopkins' INTRUDERS
                                    Re: UFONS
                                     (none)
                                    Uri Geller
                                Re: Miscellaneous

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: (none)
Date: 2 Jun 91 19:34:08 GMT

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


Subject:  Bush, Greys, and objectivity

A couple newsletters ago, I mentioned seeing an article regarding
the picture of Bush and an alien going for a stroll at Camp David.
I did not mention 'Grey' aliens, nor did the article.  Why does
everyone assume immediately that it was a 'Grey'?

?   From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
?   Subject: Re: Bush and Grey buddy...
?   Date: 25 May 91 18:09:00 GMT

+   Steve Rose - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
+   UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
+   INTERNET: [e-mail]
+   --
+   saw that 'photograph' of the President and a Grey walking arm in arm on the
+   White House lawn.  Guess they would like to claim that as 'proof' now...

*   From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
*   Subject: Bush and Grey buddy...
*   Date: 24 May 91 20:25:00 GMT
*   It was even more funny that the 'Alien' was obviously
*   just a man in a body stocking, blurred a little bit.

I'm certainly not claiming that the story was true, but how was
it 'obvious' that it was a man in a stocking suit?  I keep seeing
people say things like 'just the facts please.'  People seem to have
come up with far-reaching conclusions without even reading what was
written within, and now that three have 'identified'
the alien as being 'Grey,' it must be true.

Does anyone know anything about that fellow Nathaniel Dean--the
self-proclaimed expert on UFOs?  He is the 'investigator' who
'found' all the information and obtained the picture.

Oh yeah, watch out for June 10.  That is the date the alien is
'supposed' to meet with Gorbachev.  According to the article.
Again, I'm not endorsing the story as is; I'm just pointing out
something I think might turn out to be of interest.

Greg ([e-mail])





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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Hopkins' Intruders
Date: 2 Jun 91 17:50:00 GMT


 >    I have just read Bud Hopkins' book _Intruders_ and it has really
 > added a new aspect for me to consider to what I thought I knew of UFO
 > abductions. Some people argue that Hypnosis is not a very legitimate way
 > to screen information because people can easily be influenced by the
 > hypnotist and may even be able to make things up while under the
 > hypnosis.  I myself believe in the validity of hypnisis, as my mother is
 > a Hypnotherapist and I have seen her do some amazing things with it.

Hypnosis is not the issue...It is the use of it by unqualified persons who
attempt to make a case with it.  I understand that California has initiated
new guidelines to be used concerning hypnosis and admissibility in court.  The
guidelines are very strict to assure that the information is not extracted by
leading the witness, among other things that happen under hypnosis.
Hypnotherapy has a valid place in treatment regimen, but when you are dealing
with trauma, it should be performed by qualified medical people.

Mike

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



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


From: well!ddrasin
Subject: Critical Thinking
Date: 2 Jun 91 23:32:33 GMT

From: well![e-mail] (Dan Drasin)

Was just reading the latest UFO Magazine and noticed the Corbin/Ecker
piece, 'Lack of Critical Thinking Feeds Disinformation Virus.' One of
the things that jumped out at me was the following statement:

'Gauges and instruments have been traded for crystals and 'channelers'
who claim that the space brothers are here to save us from ourselves.'

What strikes me as ironic about this is that no contactee I have ever
been aware of has ever claimed that the 'space brothers' are here "to
save us from ourselves.' This myth about 'saving us from ourselves"
was, as far as I can tell, invented by skeptics decades ago as a means
of ridiculing the early contactees, and seems to have been adopted by
generations of ufologists as an article of belief, i.e., without much
research or critical thinking. When you really look into them, most of
the actual 'space brother' messages are nowhere near as simplistic as
these myths make them sound.  I don't mind people criticizing this or
that message, but for crying out loud, let's get it straight before we
criticize it.

There's also another area in which some critical thinking could help:
Since at least the 1950s we have heard claims of Venusian contacts.
These are often dismissed out of hand due to the fact that the surface
of Venus is hot enough to melt lead. There's only one problem with
such dismissals: Not *one* of these alleged Venusians has ever, to my
knowledge, claimed that life on Venus is physical-plane life; what
*is* claimed is life on the so-called etheric plane. The 'etheric'
plane is said to be essentially a 'parallel universe,' functioning on
what is commonly called a higher spectrum of vibration, and virtually
isolated from the spectrum of stimuli available to our senses (and the
instruments we build based on the assumptions about reality that hinge
on those senses). . Some of the leading-edge work in so-called free
energy conversion seems to be beginning to tap into that spectrum of
reality. The existence of these parallel dimensions has been described
by almost every philosophical system in history except our own.


Dan Drasin
[e-mail]%Apple.Com




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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Eastern Hub
Date: 2 Jun 91 21:56:00 GMT

This is to notify the network that Paul Faeder's system has lost its power
supply which will have him out of service for approximately a week.  We are
sorry for the inconvenience.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: New Affiliate
Date: 3 Jun 91 02:09:00 GMT

I apologize for the lateness of this, David, but I would like to welcome the
newest member to the ParaNet family.

ParaNet ALPHA-IOTA(sm)
David Villa
Santa Barbara, CA
805-687-0039

On behalf of the group, WELCOME!

Please introduce yourself to the others with a short bio.

Michael Corbin
Director

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Date: 3 Jun 91 05:15:00 GMT

Subject:  Brandenburg's "Rainbow Declaration"

Mike,
    You can find the "Rainbow Declaration" in the 1990 MUFON Symposium
Proceedings.  It has somewhat religious overtones.
    I bought a copy of the Proceedings last summer and will be happy to
send you a copy of the
Declaration.  I know I must have your address around here somewhere....
Why don't you just post it to me?  Then I'll send it by SnailMail.
See you,
         Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Deane Ward)
Subject: Book
Date: 3 Jun 91 04:30:07 GMT

Jim, I found a book written by W.A. Harbinson ..GENESIS that has a few
questions that are bothering me.  He writws the book as a novel but names
people that have been or still are active in UFO Reseaarch....Jessup, Klass,
Ruppelt Menzel and others.
He speaks of the Robertson Panel and Operation Mainbrace.  Have you any
information at all about these ?
He also states that some type of experiment began in Canada but was turned over
to the USAF and Navy.**  There is nothing available from the Freedom of
Information Act.  This has grabbed my interest. I would appreciate any help
you could give me in and about these two areas.  Enjoy your postings.                   Kindest Regar

ds
                  Deane Ward

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: The Nordics
Date: 3 Jun 91 06:23:00 GMT

Linda:

I'm not familar enough with LDS philosophy to comment intelligently, but I
did take the liberty of moving your message to the public UFO echo, where
others might respond. Hope you don't mind.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Communion, the movie.
Date: 3 Jun 91 06:39:00 GMT

In a message to All <06-01-91 03:41> David Villa wrote:
->Whitley Streiber.  I found this movie fascinating!  Have
->any of you seen it?  The hypnosis scenes were VERY
->powerfully done and I found myself wondering after the
->film, how much of the movie was hollywood imagery and how
->much was based on Streiber's true perceptions (how close to

Well, that makes two of us who actually liked the movie. I, too, thought the
hypnotic recollections were very well done...Mora succeeded in getting
across the "Oz Factor", the feeling of utter unreality. And from what I
understand, there was very little artistic license taken...most of what you
saw was the way Whitley claims he remembered it. I think most people didn't
like it because it didn't measure up to their expectations of what it would
be like to be abducted.

->On the cover is a little blue star which says, "Soon to be
->a major motion picture!"  Wow!  This sounds great.  Do any
->of you know more about this?  Heard a release date?  Know
->for sure the movie is being made?  I just finished
->_Intruders_ and would love to see a movie.

Its been an on-again, off-again project for about 3 years now. It was
started in the middle of some Hollywood strike, I think it was a writer's
strike. Then the rights expired, and I think CBS picked them up and is
holding on to them, trying to decide between several projects. The bottom
line is, it may never be made.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Critical Thinking
Date: 3 Jun 91 06:44:00 GMT

->reality. The existence of these parallel dimensions has
->been described
->by almost every philosophical system in history except our
->own.


How did the proponents of these philosophical systems gain access to these
parallel dimensions in order to describe them?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: UFONS
Date: 3 Jun 91 02:41:00 GMT


   What is UFONS?  I would be interested in aquiring an issue or two, maybe
subscribing.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Here's an Item for Inclusion in Info
Date: 3 Jun 91 02:43:00 GMT


 >Well, that's not the WHOLE story, Dave, but basically it does look like
 >just a lot of disinformation. Whether its government-inspired or not is the
 >major debate taking place now. I suggest you get your hands on a couple of
 >files called MJ12COM1.UFO and MJ12COM2.UFO, which is a chronology of MJ-12
 >events through 1987. I believe they are available at ALPHA.

       Thanks, Jim, I'll inquire as to those files.  One of the most
annoying things about a precarious situation like this (UFO speculation and
research) is that with so much assumed and extrapolated data floating
around, it is incredibly easy for anyone intending to throw a monkey wrench
in the works to do so.  Is most cases with UFO info, it's all based on
credibilty of witnesses and interpreting mere hints of happenings.  It is
all too easy for disinformation to get around, I agree.  Looks like we had
best just keep objective and deal with the facts.  Thanks.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Hopkins' INTRUDERS
Date: 3 Jun 91 03:01:00 GMT


       Thanks for the very swift reply, Linda.  Yes, I agree.  Hypnosis,
being the very new, unknown and unfounded science/parapsychological remedy
that it is, is subject to much critical review.  My mother has been a
liscenced Hypnotherarist for many years.  She has done (from what she tells
me) some very amazing things with it, ranging from aiding people to recall
what they experienced as they were 'clinically dead', to guiding people to
heal bodilly damage doctors deemed 'incurable'.  I never have really had
much interest in her work, that is, before I got into this UFO infromation
gathering.  I think I will have a talk with her and ask her about what she
does.  That may be very interesting.  I'll show her some of Hopkin' work and
see what she says.
       From what you say and the way you talk, I get the impression you have
done a fair share of UFO information gathering and field work.  You must
have had an important reason to meet "Kathie Davis".  I feel like such a
small fry caught up in this phenomena sometimes.
       Oh!  I very strange thing happening to me this weekend.  I was
hanging out with a friend, at his house and we were talking about UFO, which
I brought up.  I was telling him about Hopkins' book and the experineces
told in it.  It seemed I struck a memory in him when I told him about these
'dreams' people have and he told me about a dream he rememberes from his
very young childhood in which he saw a weird light in the kitchen moving
around over the stove and it spoke to him.  He says he can't recall any
other odd things that could be UFO related after that and he himself doesn't
know much about the current UFO situation and recent development.  I asked
him if he would like to know what he saw and maybe my mom could hypnotize
him.  He didn't seem to interested.
       It was very weird for me to hear this type of experience from someone
I know.  I didn't know how common it could be.  Wow.  I will have to give
this some thought.
       Hey, I think all us West Coasters (and anyone else who wants to come)
should plan some kind of ParaNet get together somewhere.  Just for us all to
meet, maybe exchange stories and the like.  It would be nice if we all were
a little closer then a 'computer network' seeing as how we are dealing with
such highly controversial material and friends in this situation are allways
very nice to have and share.  What do you think?  Maybe an Arizona camp-out.
I could easily arange going to Arizona or Oregon or one of the other
neighboring states to CA.  It's not that bad a ride.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Bob Trevithick)
Subject: Re: UFONS
Date: 3 Jun 91 13:35:00 GMT

Hi Peggy,
This is my first message here...I'll probably mess it up somehow!  I
have yet to send in my bucks (procrastination again!) but plan to soon.
 In fact I will write out the check now so I get it over with.

No..don't get the ufo magazine...but I DID get the packet of articles
you sent me.  Thank you!  Much appreciated, and very interesting.  I
will comment further on CIS...easier to talk when the meter isn't
running, ya know?  :-)

Thanks again!

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



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


From: scicom!ncar!ecn.purdue.edu!lush
Subject: (none)
Date: 3 Jun 91 17:47:10 GMT

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


Subject:  Uri Geller

I wasn't following the talk about law suits regarding Geller
and Randi, so I don't know exactly what was going on, but...

I talked with a fellow who knew or talked to Geller (so this
falls under the heading of rumor), and he had something
interesting to say about him.

Geller was making a lot of money bending spoons and whatnot
for a long while, right?  This fellow said that Geller knew
how to bend a spoon the same way a illusionist can because
if, for some reason, his mental prowess were having a bad day
and he couldn't do bend anything that way, he couldn't afford
to 'disappoint' his audience.  It's not good for business!

Am I to understand that someone 'proved' Geller to be a "fraud"?
I thought that there is a case where they compared two bent spoons
and found that Geller's spoon did not suffer from the strain that
the other's did.  Anybody know anything about this?

Thanks.

Greg ([e-mail])


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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Date: 3 Jun 91 21:33:00 GMT


 >     You can find the "Rainbow Declaration" in the 1990 MUFON Symposium
 > Proceedings.  It has somewhat religious overtones.
 >     I bought a copy of the Proceedings last summer and will be happy to
 > send you a copy of the
 > Declaration.  I know I must have your address around here somewhere....
 > Why don't you just post it to me?  Then I'll send it by SnailMail.

Thanks.  It is P.O. Box 172, Wheat Ridge, CO  80034-0172.

Also, I would be interested in hearing your interpretation of what that
document represents.

Thanks again.

Mike

--
Michael Corbin - 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************************

                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 419

                            Thursday, June 6th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                Wernikoff on Maccabee
                               Welcome to Paranet
                               Hypnosis for truth
                                Re: New Affiliate
                                      JAFT
                     INFO REQUEST - Bennington AFB UFO, 1975
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                                the wrong planes
                                Critical Thinking
                                   Re: (none)
                            Re: Communion, the movie.
                             Re: Welcome to Paranet
                                      Book
                             Re: Hopkins' INTRUDERS
                             Re: Hopkins' INTRUDERS
                                Re: Miscellaneous
                                 Valle Interview

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

From: watson.acc.virginia.edu!JBB
Subject:      Wernikoff on Maccabee
Date: 3 Jun 91 21:32:21 GMT

From: [e-mail]

Sheldon Wernikoff writes (Date: 1 Jun 91 13:11:00 GMT)

+     On Friday, 05-31-91, I had the pleasure of speaking with Dr.
+Robert Nathan at JPL in regards to the continuing saga of the Gulf
+Breeze photos. Nathan has analyzed several original negatives,
+utilizing microscopy, computer digitization and image enhancement,
+along with multiple density printing to arrive at the following
+conclusion: He has no definitive proof of a hoax, but the data are
+consistent with images from double exposures. Nathan does not feel
+that the GB images are from real UFO's.
+     When asked why he felt the GB photo controversy continues to
+this day, Nathan replied in one word 'Money'. In my (SW) opinion,
+that is one of the major reasons Dr. Bruce Maccabee continues to
+defend the authenticity of the photos. He receives a fee for each
+conference or symposium he attends.

In the interest of fairness to Dr. Maccabee, both he and I were in
attendance at a recent international conference of the Society for
Scientific Exploration (SSE) held on May 23 thru 25, 1991 here at
the University of Virginia. After reading Mr. Wernikoff's post to
PARANET, I contacted Dr. Lawerence Fredrick of the Astronomy Depart-
ment at UVa and Treasurer of the SSE to inquire about policy regard-
ing remuneration of those who present papers at SSE conferences. Dr.
Fredrick told me that SSE does not offer remuneration to those who
present papers at their conferences. He stated emphatically that Dr.
Maccabee did NOT receive payment of any sort for either his formal
presentation on Saturday, May 25 or his informal presentation during
the evening of May 23.

Considering the serious nature of Mr. Wernikoff's charges, I feel he
should offer in this forum an immediate public apology to Dr. Bruce
Maccabee.

Sincerely,

Joseph Burch                        [e-mail]
Academic Computing Center
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA  22903




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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Welcome to Paranet
Date: 4 Jun 91 04:06:18 GMT

Welcome, David, to Paranet.  We appreciate your participation and hope you get
a lot of board callers.
      Formerly from Long Beach, California,

                                          Linda Bird

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Hypnosis for truth
Date: 3 Jun 91 09:20:00 GMT


   I agree.  My mother's hypnosis is in no way admissable in court.  She
would have to take many courses in Law and proper proceedures indeed before
she could do anything legal-like with it.  She basically uses it for her
patients only and does not gaurantee it's results - Self healing and
enlightenment only.
   Hmm, I guess it is key for the hypnotist to forget himself while
conducting a hypnotic regression and not let any of his personal biases or
beliefs get in the way.  He/she must be an impartial guide allowing the
patient to choose his own path.  I guess the only way to test the
credibility of the hypnotic session is to have it observed to make sure
there was no 'leading' or 'suggesting'.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: New Affiliate
Date: 3 Jun 91 09:30:00 GMT


   Ah!  I've been waiting for that! :)  Heh, well let's see...  I was born
in Los Angeles in July of 1971.  My parents, deciding to keep my away from
the large city and growing smog, moved to Santa Barbara, California in 1973
where I have lived ever since.
   We moved around a bit in SB at intermittent stages of my life but kept
fairly stable places of residence.  We have had our fair share of adventure
in this ever-growing quiet little town, ranging from our house burning down
durring the late '70s fire which destroyed many houses to simple house
robery.
   Durring my later stages of schooling (Jr. High - High School) I became
interested in computers, and with a old ATARI 800 with a 300 baud modem on
loan from a friend, made my enterance into the local Telecomm world.   I
have made most of my local friends through the local bulletin boards and am
quite happy with them all.  They are all wonderful individuals whom I value
most highly.
   I started my own BBS about a year ago and it didn't have much of a theme.
It was mostly just a place to call and leave messages of no real value.  I
have allways been interested in Sci/Fi and space so when one of my friends
invited me over to his house to hear a man talk about UFOs, I was quick to
say 'yes!'.  The man mostly talked of Govt. Conspiracy and UFO coverups but
I came away with an avid interest and a list of books to get me started.
   I changed my BBS' theme to UFOlogy/Paranormal Phenomena and got the
number from a friend of a long distance BBS which had UFO text files and the
like.  When I called that system, I saw the name ParaNet somewhere on-line
and was curious as to what exactly ParaNet was.  This same friend returned
from a trip to L.A. with a copy of UFO Magazine which had an add for
"ParaNet!  The world's largest UFO computer network!" inside.  I promptly
got in touch with Michael Corbin at ParaNet ALPHA and inquired as to
affiliation.
   Currently I am 19 years old (will be 20 July 11th) and am attending Santa
Barbara City College (my first year).

   As for my personal interests and hobbies:

   I love gaming - Role Playing Games and Strategy games most of all.  My
mountain bike, being my primary source of transportation and exercise, has
also become a very pleasurable hobby for me.  I play Tennis and Raquetball
as well as practicing swordsmanship in the Society for Creative Anachronism.
I am very much a fan of the fuedal Japanese culture - Samurai era - and
collect many traditional Japanese items and study the culture (I am even
signed up for a Japanese language class in the Fall).  I enjoy reading and
seeing exciting movies at home or in the theaters.
   Well, that about summs it up.  If you have any questions, please feel
free to ask.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: JAFT
Date: 4 Jun 91 16:38:00 GMT

This is a test. This is only a test.

For the next sixty seconds, this node will conduct a test of the
Non-Emergency Qecho Mail Processor sans the -C parameter, in order to
determine whether Crash Mail to 104/422 can be disabled. The programmers in
your area, in voluntary cooperation with FIDONet, ParaNet, and other
authorities, have developed this test in order to keep Long Distance charges
down for ne'er-do-wells such as myself. Had this been an actual emergency,
the 7062nd Airborne Intelligence Gathering Squadron would have shut down
your node, and you would have been instructed to report to the nearest alien
relocation center.

This concludes this test. Thank you for your attention, and have a nice day.

Jim Speiser

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



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


From: upaya!tbetz
Subject: INFO REQUEST - Bennington AFB UFO, 1975
Date: 5 Jun 91 00:14:06 GMT

From: Tom Betz <upaya!tbetz>

A couple years ago on the old Paranet Alpha I read a text file on the
subject of a UFO, if I recall correctly, at Bennington AFB in
Texas.

In that report, written by a former airman, was something to the
effect that after the UFO hovered over the airfield, the
defensive missile emplacements along the runways were discovered
to have been disabled by forces unknown.

A friend visiting one of my housemates told me last night that in
1975, he happened upon a crowd of witnesses to a UFO at a service
station near Bennington, just after it had left, and he recounted
the sheer terror of their reactions to it.  He had not heard any
more about the story, as the Air Force had, of course, denied
that anything happened.

I would be greatly indebted to anyone who could find that file
and either post it to the list or email it to me at the address
below, so I can share it with this fellow.

Thanks.

--
--------------           'Hels' og industri, de gaar haand i haand.'
Tom Betz     | -----------------------------------------------------------------
914-375-1510 | marob!upaya![e-mail] [e-mail]%phri.nyu.edu
GBS          | {att,philabs,rutgers,cmcl2}!phri!marob!upaya!tbetz




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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 5 Jun 91 05:23:00 GMT

Mr. Burch,

     In response to your suggestion that I offer Dr. Maccabee an
immediate public apology, I would like to take this opportunity to
state the following:

     Apparently, in quoting my post out of context, you have
misinterpreted my opinion. My reference to renumeration was meant
to be specific to ufology conferences (see message #2998),not the
international conference of the Society for Scientific Exploration
(SSE) that you mention.

     If my intended meaning was unclear, I do sincerely apologize
for that. However, I do maintain my opinion that Dr. Maccabee is
involved in Gulf Breeze at least partially for the continuing
monetary compensation he receives. If he is sincerely concerned
about resolving this quagmire, why does he not provide Dr. Nathan
with the negatives he has requested?

Sincerely,

Sheldon Wernikoff

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



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


From: vanth!jms
Subject: the wrong planes
Date: 5 Jun 91 05:00:34 GMT

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

A short AP article today stated that the five planes found off Fort
Lauderdale aren't Flight 19 after all.

Just why *are* there so many planes down there?

*  From the disk of:  | [e-mail]       | 'You know I never knew
Jim Shaffer, Jr.      | amix.commodore.com!vanth!jms | that it could be so
37 Brook Street       | uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms  | strange...'
Montgomery, PA 17752  | [e-mail]    |       (R.E.M.)




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


From: [e-mail] (John Burke)
Subject: Critical Thinking
Date: 3 Jun 91 05:13:00 GMT

Dan Drasin writes:

 > There's also another area in which some critical thinking could help:
 > Since at least the 1950s we have heard claims of Venusian contacts.
 > These are often dismissed out of hand due to the fact that the surface
 > of Venus is hot enough to melt lead. There's only one problem with
 > such dismissals: Not *one* of these alleged Venusians has ever, to my
 > knowledge, claimed that life on Venus is physical-plane life;

To the contrary, the AP report on the presentation by "Omnec
Onec", quoted her assertions about the climate on Venus, which
she described as being like one of the many desert areas here on
earth.  She went on to point out that we would be amazed to find
out how adaptable the human body would be to such an environment.
The excuse/explanation that the name "Venus" as used in the 50's
& 60's contactee cases is really a reference to "Venus in another
dimension" started popping up in various Wendelle Stevens books
when we started to learn more about the real planet.  (i.e. in
_Koldas_ "Venus" was actually the name of an other-dimensional
counterpart for *Earth*.  Small Cosmos, eh?)  I should have known
that Wendelle was getting us ready for his own book on the
Adamski case!

 > what *is* claimed is life on the so-called etheric plane. The 'etheric'
 > plane is said to be essentially a 'parallel universe,' functioning on
 > what is commonly called a higher spectrum of vibration, and virtually
 > isolated from the spectrum of stimuli available to our senses (and the
 > instruments we build based on the assumptions about reality that hinge
 > on those senses)  . . .

What I'm wondering about is whether entities from an "etheric
plane" would need a planetary environment or physical bodies.

                                             --  John

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: (none)
Date: 5 Jun 91 07:06:00 GMT


 >A couple newsletters ago, I mentioned seeing an article regarding
 >the picture of Bush and an alien going for a stroll at Camp David.
 >I did not mention 'Grey' aliens, nor did the article.  Why does
 >everyone assume immediately that it was a 'Grey'?
 >
 >*   From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
 >*   Subject: Bush and Grey buddy...
 >*   Date: 24 May 91 20:25:00 GMT
 >*   It was even more funny that the 'Alien' was obviously
 >*   just a man in a body stocking, blurred a little bit.
 >
 >I'm certainly not claiming that the story was true, but how was
 >it 'obvious' that it was a man in a stocking suit?  I keep seeing
 >people say things like 'just the facts please.'  People seem to have
 >come up with far-reaching conclusions without even reading what was
 >written within, and now that three have 'identified'
 >the alien as being 'Grey,' it must be true.

       Sorry if you were bothered by my message about the aforementioned
article.  I was stating my oppinion of the situation, which may have been a
little (well, ok, maybe more then a little) sarcastic.  Seeing as how the
article came from a 'read-it-while-you-wait-in-line-at-the-grocery-store"
type publication, I was not giving it that much credit.  These are the type
of periodicles which boast such outrageous headlines as, "Watch out!  There
is a three-headed monkey behind you!" in very bold, large letters on the
covers.  The pictures included with the article seemed to be obvious fakes
to me.  The poses of the 'being' and president in the picture were unreal.
I thought I could see what looked to me like 'superimposure' marks on the
President's head over the rest of the body.  Maybe these articles in such
suspicious publications are based on some bit of truth but the hard part is
finding that inkling of truth inside the gross exageration.  I was jumping
to conclusions, yes, but seeing as how the searching for the truth in an
article of this type is a very fruitless search, we might as well get a
*little* humor out of it, if nothing else.  Don't you agree?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Communion, the movie.
Date: 5 Jun 91 07:20:00 GMT


 >Well, that makes two of us who actually liked the movie. I, too, thought
 >the hypnotic recollections were very well done...Mora succeeded in getting
 >across the "Oz Factor", the feeling of utter unreality. And from what I
 >understand, there was very little artistic license taken...most of what you
 >saw was the way Whitley claims he remembered it. I think most people didn't
 >like it because it didn't measure up to their expectations of what it would
 >be like to be abducted.

       I was watching it with a friend of mine who is familiar with
Streiber's book, _Cummunion_ and he commented durring the film that the last
scene with the ET's, when Streiber returns to his wilderness home and enters
the alien ship on his own accord, was not, as far as he could remember, in
the book.  This was a very odd scene, which I am not completely sure I
understood.  Streiber sees himself as a magician and tells himself, in a
rather riddle-like manner that there is more to the ET's that he is not
allowed to know.  One of the ET's removes a bottem portion of his face to
show a rather grisley, horrific mouth and surrounding face area beneath.
Streiber then says, "No, I don't believe that's it.  This is like a Chinese
box.  You open it and there is another box inside and another box inside
that.  You are a Chinese box" or somthing to that effect and the Magician
Streiber image confirms this.  Do you have any theories as to what this
scene intoned?  I should watch it again.

 >Its been an on-again, off-again project for about 3 years now. It was
 >started in the middle of some Hollywood strike, I think it was a writer's
 >strike. Then the rights expired, and I think CBS picked them up and is
 >holding on to them, trying to decide between several projects. The bottom
 >line is, it may never be made.

       That's too bad.   I would really like to see this story told in a
cinemagraphic sense.  I hope they complete this project.  Who knows, with
UFOlogy so popular these days, there certainly is margin for profit in a
movie of this type.  Incentive for any movie industry, I'd think.
       Hopkins' mentions in his book that there was a movie made about the
Betty and Barney Hill abduction case, which he states, "Can be seen as a
sci/fi rerun on most late night television stations" or somthing to that
effect (not wanting to misquote Budd).  Have you seen this film?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Welcome to Paranet
Date: 5 Jun 91 07:34:00 GMT


 >Welcome, David, to Paranet.  We appreciate your participation and hope you
 >get a lot of board callers.

       Heh, for a second there I thought you said, "We appreciate your
participation and hope you get a lot of BORED callers." (Not really, I'm
just teasing you. :)
       Thanks for the welcome, Linda, here is to a very prosperous, very
informative long-lasting relationship to all my new friends out there!
<toast> Salude!

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Book
Date: 4 Jun 91 16:56:00 GMT


 > Jim, I found a book written by W.A. Harbinson ..GENESIS that has a few
 > questions that are bothering me.  He writws the book as a novel but

Yeah, a friend of mine was telling me about that.

 > names people that have been or still are active in UFO
 > Reseaarch....Jessup, Klass,Ruppelt Menzel and others.

Yes, he uses "pastiche" to create a sense of reality.

 > He speaks of the Robertson Panel and Operation Mainbrace.  Have you any
 > information at all about these ?

The former, yes, the latter I've never heard of. Robertson Panel information
can be gleaned from the ParaNet files. Michael Corbin has done some
background research on the panel, some of which can be found in TABAROB.UFO, I
think.

 > He also states that some type of experiment began in Canada but was
 > turned over to the USAF and Navy.**  There is nothing available from the

He might be referring to Project Magnet. As far as I know, that was never
turned over to the US, but the data and results may have been.

Others here will probably know more than I. Thanks for writing!

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Hopkins' INTRUDERS
Date: 4 Jun 91 17:01:00 GMT


 >        Hey, I think all us West Coasters (and anyone else who wants to
 > come) should plan some kind of ParaNet get together somewhere.  Just for
 > us all to meet, maybe exchange stories and the like.  It would be nice
 > if we all were a little closer then a 'computer network' seeing as how
 > we are dealing with such highly controversial material and friends in
 > this situation are allways very nice to have and share.  What do you
 > think?  Maybe an Arizona camp-out. I could easily arange going to
 > Arizona or Oregon or one of the other neighboring states to CA.  It's
 > not that bad a ride.

That's an idea I've had for years, but have been afraid to suggest, for fear
everyone will expect me to make the arrangements. I've helped put together one
UFO conference, and I aint-a-gonna do it again. But its a great idea, and I
will make every effort to attend one!

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Hopkins' INTRUDERS
Date: 5 Jun 91 04:14:00 GMT

Dear David,
    Great to hear from you again!  I tried calling your board yesterday
but was unable to get thru - just wanted to see if you were there and
able to chat.  I even dialed the 2nd time with an access code (AT&T I
think it was) and still an operator voice told me to hang up and dial
again.  Any ideas what I should do?
    I think Jim Speiser would be the perfect person to organize a
Western States pow-wow.  After all, he's had the experience...... That
is a great idea, however, and we should have it someplace cool, and
that isn't Phoenix right at the moment!
    I met Kathie Davis last summer at the MUFON conference in
Pensacola, Fla.  One of the organizers held a short social for Kathie
and invited "Ladies Only."  And I was lucky enough to be invited.
    It would be very beneficial for all of us if you talked to your
mother about hypnosis, then posted your findings on the board for all
of us.  There is so much to learn.  (Why wouldn't your friend want to
know more about the light that spoke to him???)

Best regards,

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Date: 5 Jun 91 04:28:00 GMT

Hello Michael,
   I'll send you the entire article so you can see the Declaration in
the context of the article.
   Expect a snail in a few days.     :-)
Best,
          Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Valle Interview
Date: 6 Jun 91 02:21:00 GMT


     George Earley's interview with Dr. Jacques Vallee (ParaNet
file number 01154) was for the most part accurate in describing the
current state of affairs in contemporary ufological circles.

     However, I must disagree with a statement Dr. Valle made in
regard to the beliefs and convictions of Isaac Asimov and Carl
Sagan.

     Dr. Vallee stated (in considering Sagan's and Asimov's
knowledge of the UFO phenomenon) that "...They've < Sagan and
Asimov > never taken time to study the cases themselves. All they
know about it is what they read in the National Enquirer..."

     I must admit that I too don't agree with everything that Sagan
and Asimov say, but do you seriously believe that these two
respected men glean their data from the tabloids?

     As the file header states, "...we must begin to police our own
backyard...", so let's get our act together folks!

            Sheldon
--
Sheldon Wernikoff - 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************************






                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 420

                            Saturday, June 8th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                 Valle Interview
                                HARD COPY BOOBOO!
                                  Re: FLIGHT 19
                             Re: Welcome to Paranet
                           Re: Paranet Newsletter 414
                                Re: Miscellaneous
                             Tab A - Robertson Panel
                          Tab A - Robertson Panel, (2)
                      Tab A - Robertson Panel, (Conclusion)
                           Re: Paranet Newsletter 414
                                      Reply
                              "Martian" Chronicles
                  Re: INFO: Clandestine Mars Observer Launch??

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

From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Valle Interview
Date: 6 Jun 91 02:24:00 GMT


     George Earley's interview with Dr. Jacques Vallee (ParaNet
file number 01154) was for the most part accurate in describing the
current state of affairs in contemporary ufological circles.

     However, I must disagree with a statement Dr. Valle made in
regard to the beliefs and convictions of Isaac Asimov and Carl
Sagan.

     Dr. Vallee stated (in considering Sagan's and Asimov's
knowledge of the UFO phenomenon) that "...They've < Sagan and
Asimov > never taken time to study the cases themselves. All they
know about it is what they read in the National Enquirer..."

     I must admit that I too don't agree with everything that Sagan
and Asimov say, but do you seriously believe that these two
respected men glean their data from the tabloids?

     As the file header states, "...we must begin to police our own
backyard...", so let's get our act together folks!

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
Date: 30 May 91 20:58:00 GMT


 > Where was the real photograph?

  Yep, where's the beef?

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: FLIGHT 19
Date: 31 May 91 16:58:01 GMT


 > Last off topic message to Fla. I stood on the road (Collins
 > Blvd?) and it was raining on one side, and dry on the other
 > side, Miami Beach.

  Typical Florida.

 > I have not had time to impliment my "UFO Photos" yet, but came
 > up with a third method last week. As soon as I can make some,
 > I'll try to send them off to you, without telling how it was
 > done.

  Sounds interesting.
  I think that if either of us ever manage to photograph a real ufo,
the fact that we've been discussing how to fake them will probably be
trotted out as evidence of a hoax. ;-)
  Have you noticed that one of the main objections to Ed's photos is
that the craft looks too hokey to be real? Of course the F-117 doesn't
much look like it would fly either.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Welcome to Paranet
Date: 6 Jun 91 00:40:00 GMT

Hi David,
     Thanks for the informative write-up/short biography you did of
yourself.  This field attracts people of all ages, and I envy you your
early start.
     See you,
            Linda


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



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


From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Paranet Newsletter 414
Date: 6 Jun 91 16:52:35 GMT

From: Paul Carr <[e-mail]>

I am employed at GE Astro Space in East Windsor, New Jersey.  We
are the prime contractor for the Mars Observer spacecraft.  I think
I can report with a high degree of confidence that it is here, and
is not ready to fly.  It is scheduled for a Titan III launch.  This
is a big vehicle, and is very difficult to covertly launch.  Also,
The only Titan III pad at the Cape is down for repairs.  The only
other U.S. vehicle that could launch it is STS (well, Titan IV also).
It might just be launchable on an Ariane 44L, but those launches are
all very public.  A Soviet Proton or Energia could conceivably get
MO to Mars, but that strains credibility even further - and I think
that by now credibility is past the breaking point.





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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Date: 6 Jun 91 19:17:00 GMT


 >    I'll send you the entire article so you can see the Declaration in
 > the context of the article.
 >    Expect a snail in a few days.     :-)

Thanks Linda.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Tab A - Robertson Panel
Date: 6 Jun 91 19:40:00 GMT

(C) 1991 ParaNet(sm) Information Service.  All Rights Reserved.
****************************************************************
ParaNet File Number: 00229


DATE OF UPLOAD:  June 18, 1990
ORIGIN OF UPLOAD: ParaNet Administration/Los Angeles, CA
CONTRIBUTED BY:
========================================================


The  following  file  contains what appears to be Tab  A  of  the
findings of the Robertson Panel in 1953.  The Robertson Panel was
a  highly  controversial meeting which was  conducted  under  the
veil  of a scientific panel, however it was later  reported  that
the  Central Intelligence Agency actually conducted and  possibly
influenced  the panel's findings, and that the whole purpose  was
mainly for the benefit of public relations.

Although  the document appears to be authentic, ParaNet  strongly
advises that the reader of this document take into  consideration
the possibility that it is a fake consistent with the rumors that
have  circulated among the UFO community over the years that  the
CIA  actually  released a "dummy" document to  conceal  the  real
findings of the panel.

=================================================================

TAB A

1.  Motion Pictures, Trementon, Utah

     This   case   involves  the   sighting   and   photographing
(Kodachrome Film) of ten bright lights moving across the sky on 2
July  1952 in rough formation.  Source is a Chief  Photographer's
Mate, USN, with 17 years photographic experience.  The local time
was  1110; weather conditions bright, clear, no clouds.   Objects
appeared  to  be "milling about" while traveling  in  a  westerly
direction across the sky.  Source was driving along the road when
the  sighting occurred.  He stopped the car and photographed  the
event with his personal camera.  Toward the end of the  sighting,
one object separated from the rest and reversed course across the
sky.

Status:   ATIC  Photographic Laboratory examination of  the  film
resulted in following conclusions:

          a.  10 objects, all alike in movement and size.

          b.   Decidedly  improbable  that  they  are  birds   or
balloons.

          c.  Exact nature cannot be determined, because they are
visible  only  as  small  spots of light.   It  can  be  deduced,
however, that they are either non-spherical in shape and  similar
to  bright metal in reflectance or else  variably  self-luminous.
Objects  which  follow similar courses  show  similar  brightness
fluctuations which could be caused by their taking similar flight
attitudes.

          d.   Apparently  a  coordination of  movement  to  some
extent  among  these objects.  They seem to  move  in  formations
which are probably 3-dimensional in arrangement.

          e.   The movements suggest flight paths  consisting  of
skew curves in space.
          f.   The single object which reversed  course  remained
reasonably uniform in brightness.  It followed a nearly  straight
line  path  with reasonable uniformity of motion  at  an  angular
velocity of about 2.1 degrees per second.  (This is equivalent to
the  following speeds:  37 mph @ 500 yards; 75 mph @ 1000  yards;
375 mph @ 5000 yards; 758 mph @ 10,000 yards; etc.).

          g.   It  would  probably  be  extremely  difficult   to
imitate this photography for fraudulent purposes.

This  film is currently under examination by the U.S. Navy  Photo
Interpretation Laboratory, Anacostia.  Estimated completion date:
15 January 1953.

2.   Bright  Light sighted from Presque Isle  and  Limestone  Air
Force Bases, [unknown]

     This sighting occurred the night of 10-11 October 1952  from
2300 to 0300 local time, by observers at the weather stations  at
these  Air  Force  Bases.   The  description  of  the  light  was
"circular   orange  object  with  four  green   lights   nearby."
Theodolites  sightings  of elevation and azimuth  were  obtained.
Weather was clear.

Status:  A comparison of observed azimuths and elevations of  the
supposed object with the calculated position and relative  motion
of the planet Jupiter leave little doubt that the observed object
was actually Jupiter.

3.  Reported Sightings of a Strange Object in Florida

          This sighting was reported by a Boy Scoutmaster to have
occurred  at  2150 local time on 19 August 1952  near  West  Palm
Beach,  Florida.   According to the story given, the  source  was
driving  along deserted road in his car, together with  four  Boy
Scouts.   Sighting  a  strange light,  source  stopped  the  car,
cautioned the boys to wait, and entered the palmetto  undergrowth
alone.   When he did not return in a few minutes, and  witnessing
some strange lights in the vicinity of the scoutmaster, the  boys
went for help, returning with a deputy sheriff.  The  scoutmaster
appeared, badly firghtened, slightly burned on the forearms.  His
story  was that he had seen a large curcular object  about  eight
feet  over  his  head  which had released  a  "fire  ball"  which
descended on him.  He stated that he had thrown himself upon  the
ground and "blacked out."  There were various other [unknown]  to
the  story.   His cap was burned slightly and  samples  of  grass
taken  from  the immediate vicinity of  the  "sighting"  differed
strangely in appearance from samples 75 yards away.

Status:   The  background  of the source  indicates  an  unsavory
personal reputation and criminal record, resulting in the  belief
that  the report may have been an elaborate hoax.   However,  the
unusual condition of the grass samples is currently  unexplained.
This  fact, together with other aspects of the case, leave  final
determination in doubt at this time.

=================================================================

END TAB A DOCUMENT

<Continued in next message..>

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Tab A - Robertson Panel, (2)
Date: 6 Jun 91 19:41:00 GMT

<Continued from previous message>

=================================================================

ParaNet note:  The following text is taken from an attachment  of
the Robertson Panel Tab A document.  It was included in the  FOIA
release  and contains a memorandum for record dated 16 May  1958.
It should be considered in the same way as the previous document.

=================================================================

16 May 1958

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT:  Meeting with Air Force Personnel Concerning  Scientific
Advisory  Panel Report on Unidentified Flying Objects,  dated  17
January 1953 (Secret)


     1.   A meeting was convened this date eiwht  representatives
of the Air Force to discuss what steps should be taken concerning
the subject report in order to take care of inquiries such as the
letters written by Mr. Leon Davidson.  Mr. Davidson has been most
insistent  upon  getting the entire report  released.   The  full
report  is  classified  "Secret."   A  declassified  version   is
available, a copy of which was given to Mr. Davidson.

          The following personnel were at the meeting:

          Mr. Philip G. Strong          DAD/C/SI, CIA
          Major Joseph E. Boland        SAF LL-3
          Major James F. Byrne          AFCIN-XIA
          Major Lawrence J. Tacker      SAFIS
          Dr. A. Francis Arcier         ATIC
          Mr. George Cary               Legislative Counsel, CIA
          Mr. W. E. Lexow               OSI, CIA

          3.  Paragraph 3 of the report cites examples of actions
that  could  be  taken  by  an  enemy  with  possibly   dangerous
consequences to national security.  This is the principal  reason
that  the entire reason the report cannot be declassified.   This
was agreed to in the meeting.  In addition, it was pointed out by
Mr.  Strong  that  several  of  the  panel  members  specifically
requested  that while they had no objection to their names  being
used  in  connection with this report, they did  not  want  their
names connected to the Central Intelligence Agency.  So far it is
believed  that all connections between the panel members and  CIA
have been made by unofficial personnel.

          4.   In dealing specifically with Mr. Davidson  it  was
agreed  that  Major Tacker would answer for the DCI at  the  same
time  that  he was answering for the Air Forces.   (Mr.  Davidson
sent  a  copy  of his letter to Major Tacker to  the  DCI  for  a
response.)

          5.  Mr. Strong pointed out that perhaps the best way to
forestall any future inquiries along these lines was to put out a
press  release  covering  the  subject  of  unidentified   flying
objects,  utilizing the panel report as much as possible.   Major
Boland  agreed that this was perhaps the best way to  handle  it,
inasmuch as in his capacity of Legilsative Liaison, it would best
satisfy  congressional requirements.  Major Tacker will draft  an
Air Force press release, clearing it through the various sections
of the Air Force, and will then submit it to Mr. Cary for  Agency
review,  Mr. Cary will consult with the Office of  Security,  Mr.
Strong  and  the  undersigned when he receives  the  draft  press
release.

          6.  The Air Force representatives believe that much  of
the  trouble they have been having with Major Keyhoe along  these
same  lines  could be alleviated if the Major did not  have  such
important  personages  as Vice Admiral R. H.  Hillenkoetter,  USN
(ret.),   former   DCI,  on  the  board  of  governors   of   his
organization.   They  suggested that perhaps if the  Admiral  was
shown  the  Secret  panel report he  would  understand  and  take
appropriate  actions.   Mr. Cary said that he would  relate  this
suggestion to Mr. Houston (General Counsel).

          7.   Major Boland suggested that it might be  advisable
to contact the panel members to consider a rewording of th epanel
report somewhat along the lines that Dr. Menzel suggested in  his
letter to all the members of the panel.  Dr. Menzel has  received
the  unclassified  version from Mr. Leon  Davidson.   Mr.  Strong
feels that this may be inadvisable at the present time,  inasmuch
as the report has already been made available to thge public  and
any  change may arouse suspicion.  However, he will  contact  Dr.
Roberston and disucss this.

Signed
W. E. Lexow
Chief, Applied Science Division, SI

Distribution:

Orig - DAD/C/SI
2 - ASD/SI
1 - Mr. Chapin (Ass'n to the DCI)
1 - Mr. Cary (Leg. Counsel)
1 - SO/SI ([blanked out] Office of Security)
OSI/ASD/WELexow: gl/682

=================================================================
END OF DOCUMENT

<Concluded in next message>

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: Tab A - Robertson Panel, (Conclusion)
Date: 6 Jun 91 19:42:00 GMT

<<Continued from previous message>>

=================================================================

ParaNet  Note:   The  folowing document was  released  under  the
Freedom of Information Act.  It was contained in the same package
as  the previous material.  As before, we do not  represent  that
the information contained is accurate.

The  documents lists various people who attended an  Intelligence
Advisory  Committee  meeting  to  deal  with  the  UFO   problem.
According  to information gleaned from the document,  it  appears
that  the meeting was number 90 in a series of meetings  of  this
committee.  This does not necessarily mean that the meetings were
specifically  regarding  UFOs, however we are attempting  to  get
information  on  this.   It is further interesting  to  note  the
number   of   CIA  personnel  in  attendence,   indicating   that
information  that has been passed along over the years  that  the
UFO problem was highly regarded by the CIA.
=================================================================

Security Information
IAC-M-90
4 December 1952

INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Minutes   of   Meeting  held  in  Director's   Conference   Room,
Administration   Building,  Central  Intelligence  Agency  on   4
December 1952.

Acting Deputy Director (Intelligence)
Central Intelligence Agency
Mr. Robert Amory, Jr.

MEMBERS PRESENT

Mr.  W.  Park Armstrong, Jr.,   Special  Assistant,  Intelligence
Department of State
Brigadier General John M. Willems, acting for Assistant Chief  of
Staff, G-2, Department of the Army
Rear  Admiral  Carl  F. Espe,  Director  of  Naval  Intelligence,
Department of the Navy
Major   General  John  A.  Samford,  Director  of   Intelligence,
Headquarters, United States Air Force
Dr.  Walter  F. Colby, Director of  Intelligence,  Atomic  Energy
Commission
Brigadier   General   Edward  H.  Porter  Deputy   Director   for
Intelligence, The Joint Staff
Mr.  Meffert  W. Kuhrtz, acting for Assistant  to  the  Director,
Federal Bureau of Investigation

ALSO PRESENT

Dr. Sherman Kent, Central Intelligence Agency
Dr. H. Marshall Chadwell, Central Intelligence Agency
Mr. Paul Borel, Central Intelligence Agency
Mr. Ludwell L. Montague, Central Intelligence Agency
Mr. Philip Strong, Central Intelligence Agency
Mr. Joseph W. Smith, Central Intelligence Agency
Mr. William C. Trueheart, Department of State
Mr. Miron Burgin, Department of State
Lieutenant Colonel T. C. Anderson, Department of the Army
Lieutenant Colonel Edgar H. Thomson, Jr., Department of the Army
Colonel John J. Morrow, United States Air Force
Colonel Jack E. Thomas, United States Air Force
Lieutenant Colonel Thomas J. Grant, United States Air Force
Colonel S. M. Lansing, The Joint Staff
Captain John A. Holbrook, USN, The Joint Staff

Richard D. Drain, Acting Secretary

Declassified per sec 3(A), E011652
Approved for release 207789
Date 6 Ocotber 1978

Approval of Mintues

     1.   Action:   The minutes of the last meeting,  1  December
1952 (IAC-M-89), were approved.

Conditions and Trends in Latin
America Affecting U.S. Security
(NIE-70)

     2.  Action:  Approved with minor modifications.

Unidentified Flying Objects

     3.  Action:  The Director of Central Intelligence will:

          a.   Enlist  the  services of  selected  scientists  to
review  and  appraise  the available evidence  in  the  light  of
pertinent scientific theories.

          b.   Draft and circulate to the IAC a  proposed  NSCID,
which  would  sifnigy IAC concern in the  subject  and  authorize
coordination with appropriate non-IAC departments and agencies.

     4.   Discussion:  The acting Chariman, Mr. Amory,  presented
to  the  committee  the  DCI's  request  that  this  subject   be
informally discussed.  Dr. Chadwell briefly reviewed the evidence
and  peripheral  considerations,  and  noted  that  most  of  the
available  evidence  is  processed  by  ATIC.   General   Samford
offerred his full cooperation.  It was recognized that he problem
is  best approached if directly related to specific  problems  of
intelligence  and  defense.  It was thought  desirable  that  the
action  noted  above under "a" be  undertaken  immediately,  with
consideration  of a proposed NSCID to depend in some  measure  on
the results achieved by the scientist's studies.

=================================================================

END OF DOCUMENT
TABAROB.UFO

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Paranet Newsletter 414
Date: 7 Jun 91 03:32:00 GMT


 > From: Paul Carr <[e-mail]>
 >
 > I am employed at GE Astro Space in East Windsor, New Jersey.  We
 > are the prime contractor for the Mars Observer spacecraft.  I think
 > I can report with a high degree of confidence that it is here, and
 > is not ready to fly.  It is scheduled for a Titan III launch.  This
 > is a big vehicle, and is very difficult to covertly launch.  Also,
 > The only Titan III pad at the Cape is down for repairs.  The only
 > other U.S. vehicle that could launch it is STS (well, Titan IV also).
 > It might just be launchable on an Ariane 44L, but those launches are
 > all very public.  A Soviet Proton or Energia could conceivably get
 > MO to Mars, but that strains credibility even further - and I think
 > that by now credibility is past the breaking point.

Thank you for that information, Paul.  This is why ParaNet stays ahead of the
game!  BTW, what do you know about the failure of the Phobos mission?

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Deane Ward)
Subject: Reply
Date: 7 Jun 91 04:43:32 GMT

Thanks Mike for your prompt answer.  I am waiting for your info.  Could the
other person's name be Lloyd  Berkner?

I am still looking through Hyneks' books, but, up to now I'm still walking
through the desert.
   Thanks again
Deane Ward

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Allen)
Subject: "Martian" Chronicles
Date: 3 Jun 91 04:45:00 GMT



Mike,

Regarding your latest series on Richard  Hoagland; I have
found them enjoyable reading, but certainly wouldn't call
them the absolute last word of "Truth" , nor would I go
out on a limb on categorically stating that the "Face"
on Mars is no more or less than what we all have been
speculating for the last few years.

As you may have have noticed, I have been circulating
a few UFO related files around on UseNet and thought
to provoke some insightful discussions by their subject
matter.

I just got finished cross-posting a few articles off this
echo (intact with headers, as mentioned in your "sharetext")
and some of these have been on Hoagland's Mars theme..

You might be interested in this response I saw tonight in
alt.alien.visitors:

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


>Article 434 of alt.alien.visitors:
>From: [e-mail] (Lydick, Carl)
>Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,alt.paranormal,sci.skeptic,
>misc.headlines ,sci.space,misc.misc
>Subject: Re: INFO: Clandestine Mars Observer Launch??
>Keywords: Follow-ups to alt.alien.visitors
>Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>Date: 1 Jun 91 00:22:23 GMT
>References: <[e-mail]>
>Sender: [e-mail]
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>Organization: California Institute of Technology
>Lines: 18
>News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4x

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Don Allen)
>writes...
>>     ParaNet  has received information that Richard C.  Hoagland,
>>the  noted author of The Monuments of Mars - a book  detailing  a
>>possible  surface anomaly on the planet, that NASA  has  covertly
>>launched  the Mars observer spacecraft to speed to Mars  to  find
>>out  what  is  going on up there.  Below is  a  reprint  of  that
>>article.   Our members are encouraged to provide any  information
>>that would substantiate or disavow these claims.
>
>Thanks, Don.  The folks upstairs working on the Mars Observer Camera got a
>pretty good laugh out of this.  Also, isn't this the SAME Richard C.
>Hoagland
>who, as of about two years ago, was running around ranting that NASA was
>trying
>to SUPPRESS investigation of the Cydonia formations?  Hey, if you believe in
>enough contradictory conspiracies, eventually you may even believe in one
>that
>EXISTS!
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Carl J Lydick   HEPnet/NSI: SOL1::CARL  Internet: [e-mail]
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

This got me to pondering that if the folks that actually WORK on this
project are ridiculing Hoagland, then how much more proof of evidence
(on Hoagland's end) would be required to settle the matter, once and
for all, before the reports come in from the Mars Observer mission?

If people at NASA appear to be "stonewalling" Hoagland, ridiculing his
claims,  and seem to blow off his theories...he is in for a very rough
uphill climb.

IF he is proven right after a time, then what?

Do you suppose that NASA will "suddenly" change their position?

>From what I've read, Hoagland isn't exactly a "nut" nor does he
appear mentally deranged, judging from a small list of credentials
I've seen on him.

He may come off as a "Don Quixote", but my suspicion is there is
"something" that we (the public) aren't being leveled with by NASA.

I just wish I could put my finger on it more.

Just thought you might be interested in this small amount of feedback.

Regards,

Don

--
Don Allen - 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************************





                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 421

                             Monday, June 10th 1991

Today's Topics:

                              Re: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
                                    feeling?
                              FLIGHT 19 *NOT* FOUND
                               Re: Valle Interview
                                    PETIT.REB
                              Re: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
                                Re: Miscellaneous
                               Re--Robertson Panel
                              Re: the wrong planes
                              Re: the wrong planes
            file for paranet news letter Men In Black Countermeasures
                             Re: Re--Robertson Panel
                               Re: Valle Interview

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

From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
Date: 3 Jun 91 07:12:02 GMT


 >       You said it!  Those photos Marina held up were less than
 > exciting, too.

  BTW, the photo of the thing that looked sort of like a giant octopus
in the sky turned out to have been a rocket booster explosion at a
previously-secret launch complex.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: feeling?
Date: 4 Jun 91 05:17:00 GMT


  Interesting. I just came across a major solar flare alert dated June 1, in
which strong flaring is expected until maybe June 10 or so.
  Pondering the coincidences.
  My local guy is just about sure of some strange incident by June 15.
  Coincidences bother me.  ;-)

                                                jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: FLIGHT 19 *NOT* FOUND
Date: 5 Jun 91 17:06:01 GMT

From the Orlando Sentinel, June 5, by Maya Bell:

  The mythic mystery of the Bermuda Triangle remained intact Tuesday
with the revelation that the Navy Avengers found off the coast of Fort
Lauderdale are not the Lost Squadron that vanished 45 years ago.
  Instead of Flight 19 - the five torpedo bombers that disappeared
while on a routine training mission from Fort Lauderdale - salvors
found the Phantom Five.
  "For those who really want to weave a mystery, instead of one group
of fighter Avengers downed in the Bermuda Triangle, we've now given
you two," said Graham Hawkes, whose high-tech vessel, Deep See,
stumbled upon the cluster of five Avengers last month while exploring
for sunken galleons 10 miles offshore.
  The big question is how the Avengers, dubbed Phantom Five by the
Deep See creew, wound up on the ocean floor within 1 1/2 miles of each
other.
  While at least 139 World War II-era Avengers were lost in the waters
of Florida's coast, there is no record of five Avengers other than
Flight 19 sinking together.
  One of the greatest puzzles in aviation history, Flight 19's
disappearance helped spawn the legend of the Bermuda Triangle and its
mysterious forces. About 50 planes and ships have disappeared without
a trace in the patch of ocean between Florida, Bermuda and Puerto
Rico.
  Hawkes contends - and evidence reviewed by an independent wreckage
research firm supports - that the group didn't sink together but
independently over a period of several years. The explanation for
their close proximity? Planes concentrated over the site because it
was the target of low-level bombing practice.
  Historian Roy Grossnick, who heads the aviation history branch of
the Naval Historical Center in Washington, said the Navy needed more
information to confirm theories about the Phantom Five.
  The grouping, number and type of the Phantom Five aircraft fueled
initial speculation last month that the Deep See crew found the
remains of Flight 19, which vanished with 14 crewmen on Dec. 5, 1945.
  One of the sunken planes bore the number 28 on its wing, the same
number on the plane Flight 19 lead pilot Charles "C.C." Taylor was
flying. Two of the planes bore the letters FT, the same letters that
Flight 19 used to designate their base as teh Fort Lauderdale Naval
Air Station.
  But closer inspection revealed that the aircraft have different
numbers and are older Avenger models than those in Flight 19. The
plane bearing the 28 may even have a third digit, Hawkes said.
  The news was bittersweet for the relatives of Flight 19's crewmen,,
only one of whom was married.
                  *irrelevvent stuff deleted*
  While nobody knows where the crew of Flight 19 rests, Hawkes said
the men aboard the Phantom Five met a better fate. no human remains
were evident aboard the planes and, with the exception of the one
bearing the 28, the aircraft are intact and showed damage consistent
with intentional ditching. Their canopies were open, indicating the
crews exited on the surface, Hawkes said.
  The Deep See crewmen are continuing their search for sunken
treasure. And if they stumble on another five planes, they threaten to
keep quiet about it.
  "If we find five more it will just confirm out theory there's a lot
of aliens playing with us," Hawkes said.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Valle Interview
Date: 6 Jun 91 07:37:00 GMT

->     I must admit that I too don't agree with everything
->that Sagan
->and Asimov say, but do you seriously believe that these two
->respected men glean their data from the tabloids?

In the case of Sagan, no. In the case of Asimov....never was I so
disappointed as when I learned that the opinion of one of my childhood
heroes on the subject of UFOs was borne of nothing but gross ignorance.
Asimov probably does not READ the tabloids, but what I think Dr. Vallee may
have been correctly implying was that he sees the headlines, shakes his
head, and laments the sorry state of True Believerism rampant in the world.
In that True Believerism he has probably lumped all UFOlogy without so much
as a cursory study.

I once heard Asimov on Larry King's radio show. When asked about UFOs, he
said they were ridiculous. "But so many people see them" said King. "Of
course they see things in the sky they can't identify. *I'VE SEEN THINGS IN
THE SKY I COULDN'T IDENTIFY*. That doesn't make me believe in little green
men." [emphasis mine]. Now here we have a man that doesn't believe, even
after seeing. THAT'S skepticism.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: PETIT.REB
Date: 7 Jun 91 01:32:00 GMT

Linda:

The other night at dinner your husband and I had a conversation about the
present technological feasibility of defeating sonic booms. He assured me
that there is no way under present technology that it can be done, and that
he frankly can't foresee it. The problem is that its not the object that
creates the boom, per se, but the rapid separation of the air particles as
the object approaches.

I'd like you to do me a favor and try to download a file for him called
PETIT.REB. It's J. Roger Black's rebuttal to Jean-Pierre Petit, a French
scientist, who claims that work is proceeding right now on defeating sonic
booms. I'd like to know what your husband's thoughts on it are.

The file can be had by going to the <F>ile transfer section off the Top
menu, proceed to section A-3, and do a filename or keyword search on the
word PETIT. Up-arrow to the filename then press the space bar, then press N,
D, select a protocol and hit your PgDn.

Let me know what he thinks.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
Date: 8 Jun 91 05:12:00 GMT

Yo John,
    You said:  That photo Marina held up was an explosion of a secret
rocket/missle.

     I'm assuming it was a Soviet rocket explosion?  Boy, that sure
breaks down her credibility, don't you thing??

      Yuk!  How unprofessional!

      Gives me a bad taste in my mouth.      :-(

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Date: 8 Jun 91 05:25:00 GMT

Mike,
    I don;t think I going to get around to reading that Dr. Brandenburg
article on the Rainbow Declaration, so I will just snail/mail it to
you.  Meanwhile, I'll TRY to read it....

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Deane Ward)
Subject: Re--Robertson Panel
Date: 8 Jun 91 00:51:54 GMT

Hi Jim,
Saw your post but haven't had time to read it yet.  I have gone through some of
my books and came up with another name as a possible member of the panel. Lloyd
Berkner.  He went to the Anarctic with Adm. Byrd in 1937. There is another
Operation, I think that is involved with the Panel. Do you remember the Great
Northeast Blackout** on Nov.9, 1965.*???
It has been rumored that the saucer flap around that time was one of the
reasons that caused Project Blue Book (along with the Condon Report) to be
terminated as promptly as it was.  Thanks for your assistance, you triggered my
memory and made it much easier for me to track a few more references.  Why
don"t you do the Research and load me uup with books and/or reports to read. If
there is any way I could take any of the pressure off you, I will be most
willing to help.
              Thanks loads,
              Deane Ward

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Gurzynski)
Subject: Re: the wrong planes
Date: 7 Jun 91 05:01:00 GMT


        If it wasn't flight 19, then who was it?  I had heard that they even
had identified some of the markings on the planes and serial numbers, by
robot as being from that group.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Shaffer)
Subject: Re: the wrong planes
Date: 7 Jun 91 07:23:00 GMT

Who was it?  I wish I knew.  The article didn't say.  It was a very small
article compared to the very large articles that announced the find.
Apparently a few numbers matched but when they got down there for a closer
look the rest of the numbers didn't.

Anybody have a more informative copy of the story?

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



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


From: ncar!cwns2.INS.CWRU.Edu!aa245
Subject: file for paranet news letter Men In Black Countermeasures
Date: 9 Jun 91 03:36:21 GMT

From: [e-mail] (Robert Parish)


      Counter Measures for Men In Black Encounters

   After reading various reports of people who have had
encounters with Men In Black after a UFO related siting or
happening, It has brought to my attention that common,
average people without any previous military tactical or
planing training are defenseless to the tactics that have
been reported to frighten and intimidate these people to be
silent or change their minds about reporting or turning over
any information or evidence to UFO Investigators. I have
decided that this would be a good application of some of my
U.S. Army (Over Training) that I have acquired in my younger
days. This should not deal with weapons or combat, but more
of a counter physiological warfare approach. Although weapons
training and hand to hand combat training greatly enhance
confidence of an individuals ability to cope with an
abnormal encounter situation. It gives you a power platform
to relate from. The so called (EDGE). But knowledge and
reasoning is a greater power and can and should be used first
to avoid any physical conflict.
   The key to winning any conflict either mental or physical
is to turn the enemies forces exerted against himself or to
use it for your advantage and to exploit his weaknesses.
Remembering and working from some of the Men In Black
document files I have read, I will try to recreate some
reported situations of Men In Black encounters and give the
reader my responses to repel, stop or eliminate the Men In
Black threat.
   First, we will start off with the hypothesis that you have
witnessed an unusual aerial craft and you have reported what
you have seen to the press or radio or television reporters.
That your story was printed or told on radio or television by
reporters. And then a big new black car arrives at your
address with two men dressed in black show up on your front
porch or doorstep. They knock, ring your door bell and you go
to the door and there they are! The Men In Black! You spot
the big knew black car!

1. They announce that they are from such and such and flash
   I.D. at you and quickly put it away.
   a. State, you to wish to verify their credentials. Tell
      them that you want each of them one at a time to remove
      the Badge or I.D. Card plus a drivers licence and one
      major credit card for your examination for proof of
      identification.
   b. State, that otherwise you will refuse to speak to them
      and report them to the police for trying to impersonate
      an official.
2. This is a common security procedure. Ever try to cash a
   check or use a credit card at store?
   a. They are trying to cash a check with you using a badge
      or I.D. Card. The payment is to gain information.
   b. The payment also may include intimating you to keep
      silent by the power of their office.
   c. Know who you are dealing with.
3. You want to provoke a response from them to judge their
   reaction. Remember that you are judging them in the same
   manner as store clerk would to decide to cash a strangers
   check or approve credit card use.
   a. If they are truly who they say they are, they wont have
      a problem with complying.
   b. If they refuse, State that, 'this conversation has
      ended'. This is a standard verbal stiff arm. Ask them
      to leave and state that you are calling the police if
      they don't and that they can explain who they are to
      the police.
   c. Retreat and lock your door. Call the police anyway,
      whether or not you see them leaving and file a report
      of the incident.
4. If they comply with presenting identification, remember
   anything can be replicated. Apparent age the item in
   relation to it's printed date of issue, use and ware are
   harder to fake.
   a. Check for the same names used on all items from the
       same individual.
   b. Check for use of a middle initial or the lack of it.
       4.b.1. If the printed name has a middle initial then
              the signed name in hand writing should have it.
       4.b.2  If the printed name doesn't then the signed
              name should not have it.
   c. Check for the individuals date of birth compared to his
      physical appearance.
   d. Ask each for his/her social security card number.  Use
      the palm of your hand it write it down on if you don't
      have paper but have a ball point pin or ask them to
      wait OUTSIDE while you get it. Never invite them in
      while you locate paper and pin!
       4.d.1. All current police computers can I.D. Make
              anyone by running a social security number
              check.
       4.d.2. Military types will know and remember their
              military serial number but have a problem with
              recalling their social security number.
       4.d.3. A social security number is this BEST thing to
              use to run a computer tracer on an individual
              to see if him/her is who they say they are,
              date of birth, where the live and who they work
              for, valid drivers license and so forth.
       4.c.4. As per the above, a social security number is
              better to have in hand from a suspect
              individual than his/her badge or I.D. card
              number!
5. While looking down at the indentification look at their
   shoes.
   a. Most military types were only certain types of dress
      shoes.
   b. Most federal employee types were only certain styles
      and types of shoes.
   c. Undercover Police will copy each other and wind up
      waring the same styles of shoes. Foot care is just as
      important to policemen as it is to the military or
      postmen.
   d. Civilians, non military, non federal and non police
      will were anything that strikes their fancy. This means
      with no thought as to even the proper style for the
      clothes they are waring or (uniformity, ease of care,
      durability or comfort) when walking long distances or
      standing around for hours.
   e. Check to see if the shoes fit the clothes, the right
      shoe on the right foot and matched socks. Someone not
      familiar with earth dress may have got it wrong.
6. Don't let them lead you into any conversation and let them
   do all of talking. Do not elaborate on anything.
   a. Uh-haw, Yes, to respond true answers
   b. Un-haw, No, to respond to false or no answers
   c. Ever try to hold a conversation or get any useful
      information with someone that only says uh-haw and un-
      hah?
7. Do not invite them into you home, house or apartment! Do
   all the talking at the door or porch and in the open were
   others may see you, them or both you and them.
   a. You don't really know who they are and they are no
      friends of yours.
   b. You don't know what action they may take when they are
      sure that no one else could witness it.
8. Offer them a cigarette if you smoke. If they accept a
   cigarette, offer them your lighter. Hand it to them before
   they can get their own.
   a. Try to wipe the sides of the front and back clean on
      the inside of your pocket and remove it from your
      pocket holding the side or edges only.
   b. When they return the lighter to you let them drop it in
      your palm and then let it slide it back into your
      pocket.
   c. You now have a sample of their finger prints if they
      had any so use a soft cloth to remove it later and
      grasp it with at the top and bottom only and place it
      in a plastic zip lock bag.
9. If they don't accept a cigarette, light up one yourself.
   a. If you smoke this will calm your nerves and put you at
      ease and possibly offend them at the subliminal level.
      This makes none smokers uneasy when placed in close
      proximity to a smoker. This gives you another small
      piece of the advantage.
   b. If the air currents are right for it you can slyly blow
      a little smoke their way to judge their reaction to the
      cigarette gases in the smoke.
   c. You can observe their reaction to consumed cigarette
      gases.
10. If they don't accept a cigarette, offer them a beer or
    any liquid refreshment you have on hand. Even a glass of
    water. But ask them to wait while you go and get it! The
    object is to get a finger print sample if possible, not
    to let them into your home!
11. If they really bug you and you get a strange feeling of
    uneasiness buy their presents at your home, standing
    their looking weird, trust your feelings! Excuse yourself
    for a moment, get your car keys and walk out right past
    them to your car, get in, lock the doors and drive
    straight to the nearest police station and park in the
    open right in front of it and ask the first policeman you
    see to help you to file a report of following and
    harassment and file a complaint report!

Written by: Robert Parish
            aa245 Free Net


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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Re--Robertson Panel
Date: 8 Jun 91 22:45:00 GMT

In a message to Jim Speiser <06-07-91 17:51> Deane Ward wrote:

->as a possible member of the panel.  Lloyd Berkner.  He went
->to the Anarctic with Adm. Byrd in 1937. There is another
->Operation, I think that is involved with the Panel. Do you

Interesting...Berkner was of course allegedly on the MJ-12 panel. Why do you
think he may have been on the Robertson panel?

->remember the Great Northeast Blackout** on Nov.9, 1965.*???
->It has been rumored that the saucer flap around that time
->was one of the reasons that caused Project Blue Book (along
->with the Condon Report) to be terminated as promptly as it

The Condon committee was not even formed until 1966, after a Congressional
hearing. Don Keyhoe has some interesting things to say about the Blackout in
Aliens from Space...if his information is correct, it would appear that the
Blackout might be credibly linked to the saucer flap.

->references.  Why don"t you do the Research and load me uup
->with books and/or reports to read.  If there is any way I
->could take any of the pressure off you, I will be most
->willing to help.

OK, can you loan me $15,000?? :-)
Seriously, just keep doing what you're doing, and don't be afraid to post
your thoughts and correlations....some may be shot down, but some may stick!

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Re: Valle Interview
Date: 9 Jun 91 13:07:00 GMT

Jim,

Conceivably Dr. Valle was using a bit of hyperbole in his reference
to Sagan, Asimov, and the National Enquirer, but I still feel we
should all learn to be a tad more tolerant of the skeptical mind.
Asimov has written some science primers for young people which are
quite well done, so even he is being of service to society.

As far as the Larry King interview you referred to, I would have to
ask what SPECIFICALLY Asimov has seen in the sky that he couldn't
identify. From your excerpt taken out of context, it is difficult
to discern if it was UFOs, cloud formations, astronomical bodies,
weather phenomena, etc. ( Of course I realize that the latter could
all be mistaken for true UFOs. ) Additionally, when Larry asked
Asimov about UFOs, and he responded that "they were ridiculous",
what exactly did he mean? UFO's themselves are ridiculous, the
possibility of their being a reality is ridiculous, or the
sightings and/or the individuals reporting them are ridiculous.
Clarification is required.

I must say that I even find myself becoming increasingly skeptical,
not because I don't believe in the reality of UFOs ( I do !! ), but
because it seems that virtually every "breakthrough" case that's
touted as "proof positive" seems to fall apart with time. That's
even occurring as we speak with a personal investigation of my own
with a possible abductee on the west coast. (By the way, I am
following with interest your postings on Lydia, and look forward to
an update soon.)

In any event, I'm certain you'll agree that this whole business
(and it is BIG BUSINESS), gets very frustrating at times. However,
with perseverance, dedication, and sincerity, we shall succeed in
making some sense of this quandary someday.

              Sheldon
--
Sheldon Wernikoff - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 422

                             Monday, June 10th 1991

Today's Topics:

                              Statistical Sampling
                                Hard Copy Booboo!
                               ParaNet GetTogether
                          Hypnosis and Social Gathering
                                    Re: UFONS
                                  Re: FLIGHT 19
                              FLIGHT 19 *NOT* FOUND
                              DR. NATHAN INTERVIEW
                                  Miscellaneous
                                Re: Miscellaneous
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                                 So. cal uof bbs
                                    UFO Board
                             Re: HYPNOSIS FOR TRUTH
                                  Re: FLIGHT 19
                              DR. NATHAN INTERVIEW
                                     (none)
                                     (none)
                               Re: Valle Interview
                             Re: ParaNet GetTogether
                              Re: Hard Copy Booboo!

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Statistical Sampling
Date: 9 Jun 91 17:44:00 GMT

Would anyone on the network have experience with statistical sampling?  I am
interested in forming a questionaire which could poll the scientific community
about this subject to get an "intelligence quotient" on their knowledge of the
scientific merits that this phenomenon holds.

Send me responses here or e-mail me at:

FidoNet:  1:104/422 or
Internet: [e-mail]

Thanks,

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Hard Copy Booboo!
Date: 7 Jun 91 05:20:00 GMT

John Hicks said:

 >  > Where was the real photograph?
 >
 >   Yep, where's the beef?


In reference to the Hard Copy segment, I, having set this segment up can
answer your questions. First, the photo you mention, ( or two or three photos
of the object in question ) were NEVER released by the Soviets. What they did
release was the photo of the ellipse, which by the way anyone can see in
Sitchins newest offering "Genesis Revisited".  As to Mr. Wernikoff's
statement earlier, which I could not respond to since my system was down, the
segment showing a shadow crossing the moonlet Phobos was an artists
depiction. The photo of Phobos was real, having gotten it from JPL, the
shadow was inserted. HOWEVER, considering how most media has treated this
subject, this seems to me IMHO to be a rather nit picky type of remark. No
one else to my knowledge has addressed this subject. So Guys, lighten up why
don't ya?? GRIN

Don

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: ParaNet GetTogether
Date: 6 Jun 91 07:30:00 GMT


 >That's an idea I've had for years, but have been afraid to suggest, for
 >fear everyone will expect me to make the arrangements. I've helped put
 >together one UFO conference, and I aint-a-gonna do it again. But its a
 >great idea, and I will make every effort to attend one!

       What UFO conference did you help put together?
       Hmm, well we would need a place where the people coming from out of
state could stay the night or weekend since a one day thing would be out of
the question.  We would need to see some genuine interest because one or two
people making an effort to go only to show up and have one other person
there is a real downer.  We could do a camping thing for a few nights, under
the stars.  Maybe bring portable telescopes and hiking gear.  That would be
fun.  How about at the sand dunes in northern CA?  Those are great fun when
it is not windy.  There are also some very nice campgrounds along the beach.
Arizona is a good state with nice campgrounds and wideopen views of the sky
and land.  How many of you are outdoorsy people?


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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Hypnosis and Social Gathering
Date: 6 Jun 91 07:37:00 GMT


 >Dear David,
 >    Great to hear from you again!  I tried calling your board yesterday but
 >was unable to get thru - just wanted to see if you were there and able to
 >chat.  I even dialed the 2nd time with an access code (AT&T I think it was)
 >and still an operator voice told me to hang up and dial again.  Any ideas
 >what I should do?

       Hmm, that baffles me.  Sorry to hear you had a problem.  I have no
idea what it could be.  We talked recently but did you have this problem
before or after you got through the other day?  It could have been a
temporary phone company error.

 >    I think Jim Speiser would be the perfect person to organize a Western
 >States pow-wow.  After all, he's had the experience...... That is a great
 >idea, however, and we should have it someplace cool, and that isn't Phoenix
 >right at the moment!

       Well, Jim has allready stated his position on this, and I understand
where he is coming from very well.  I am not much of an organizer and since
I do not have a car, it is hard for me to travel much of anywhere without a
carpool.  I am, however, very willing to put an effort into trying to
organize somthing to meet you interesting people.  I guess I'll start with
gathering a general consensus as to what type of gathering it you are
comfortable with.  One day picnic in the country?  Weekend camping trip?

 >    I met Kathie Davis last summer at the MUFON conference in Pensacola,
 >Fla.  One of the organizers held a short social for Kathie
 >and invited "Ladies Only."  And I was lucky enough to be invited.

       Wow, that sure was a grand opportunity you were given.  Was she
comfortable talking about her experiences or was she pretty burnt out on it?
Did Budd Hopkin speak at that conference?

 >    It would be very beneficial for all of us if you talked to your mother
 >about hypnosis, then posted your findings on the board for all of us.
 >There is so much to learn.  (Why wouldn't your friend want to know more
 >about the light that spoke to him???)
 >
 >Best regards,
 >                                                   .
 >             Linda

       Do you have any questions you would like me to relay to my mother?  I
would be more then happy to act as a go-between for any questions you may
have.  I find my mother an amazing woman.  It is not often I see her 'work
side' but when I get those occaisional peaks I find myself very proud of the
work she does and abilities she possesses.
       She says that Hypnosis is a very inexact science which most people
who utilize it do not understand completely (herself included).  I have been
hypnotized once, long ago when I was about to have oral surgery.  The
hypnotic suggestions I received were to keep the bleeding to a minimum and
reduce any complications which may spring up.  The doctor himself stated
afterwards that he was supprised how little bleeding there had been and how
well the surgery went.
       Judy (my mother) had a female patient who had a problem with a
fertilized egg which blocked her fillopean tube and, as the doctors stated,
"irrepairably damaged her reproductive system as to depriving her of the
abilty to become pregnant".  My mother and this woman began exploritory
hynosis to find out, through the patient's subconscience what the problem
was.  My mother asked her subconscience to do what it could to heal the
damage the body had suffered.  3 years later, my mother received a phone
call from this woman who said that she was now 9 months pregnant and she
felt that the hypnotic work they had done together had given her her child.
       My mom tells me that she talks to the subconscience of the patient as
a very knowledgable being.  She sometimes asks the patient's subconscience
for the best way to treat the patient.
       As for my friend, he is not into UFOs at all and does not speculate
what the light was or if it was a truly a dream.  It just came to mind as I
was telling him about the abductee experiences and 'dreams' in a
conversation, which in itself hints that they are somehow connected.  I
would very much like to know what my friend has seen or may have hidden away
in his subconscience but I know he would not subject himself to hypnosis
over it.  He feels it is not a worthwhile experience to follow which is too
bad.  This must be a common attitude for abductees who never tell their
story to anyone, "They would think I was crazy if I told them about this.  I
am sure it is nothing.  Probably just a dream anyway.  A waste of time and
money to look into."

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: UFONS
Date: 6 Jun 91 08:04:00 GMT


   Thanks, Linda, I'll send Lucius a letter and get some information.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: FLIGHT 19
Date: 3 Jun 91 17:46:28 GMT

The first photo has already been taken, and anyone familiar with photography
knows what a kiss mark looks like, but I was flying back from Reno a couple
of years ago, and just by chance a picture of the clouds has a nice one on
it. It would never make it past first base.

The second one needs some effort to make the UFO image, I'll say no more,
but I already posted how on here a couple of months ago.

Last one I sighted as an optical illusion last week. I was driving along and
saw this glowing thing sort of moving back and forth (mostly just floating?)
and it looked like balls of flames were dropping off of it. Really strange!
So I stopped the car and grabbed for one of the cameras then drove towards
it. Before I could take a picture, I figured out what it was. So I put the
car in reverse and backed up to the original sighting point, and wow there it
was again, bobbing back and forth, dropping illuminated balls of light.

Now that I have pretty well explained them, if I see a real UFO it won't
look like any of these, or be as easy to explain, so hopefully I can retain
some credibility. OR on the other hand it will automatically be shot down as
a hoax without any problem.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: FLIGHT 19 *NOT* FOUND
Date: 6 Jun 91 21:50:38 GMT

In a message to all <05 Jun 91 10:06> John Hicks wrote:

 JH>  The mythic mystery of the Bermuda Triangle remained intact
 JH> Tuesday with the revelation that the Navy Avengers found off the
 JH> coast of Fort Lauderdale are not the Lost
 JH> Squadron that vanished 45 years ago.


Steven Speilberg thanks you.  You saved his movie.  ;-)



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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: DR. NATHAN INTERVIEW
Date: 7 Jun 91 16:18:00 GMT


 > conclusion: He has no definitive proof of a hoax, but the data are
 > consistent with images from double exposures.

  Sounds pretty reasonable. Some would require masking and
double-printing rather than double-exposure in the camera, but all
could be doubles of some kind.
  There's noting in them that precludes them being doubles.

 >      Dr. Nathan also explained that he has asked both Walters and
 > Maccabee for more original negatives to analyze, but he has
 > received only duplicates.

  I hope he means original Polaroid prints, not negs.

 >      He has recently received some new negatives from Tommy Smith's
 > father, but does not have any analyses completed on these as yet.

  Note that the Smith photos were shot on 35mm neg film.
  Thanks for your efforts.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Miscellaneous
Date: 7 Jun 91 16:20:01 GMT


 > Yes, indeed.  BTW, what do you know about the 'Rainbow
 > Declaration?' I understand that Brandenburg did this work and
 > would like to hear a little more about it.

  I think it's in last year's MUFON Symposium proceedings. I'll have a
look and let you know.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Date: 7 Jun 91 16:23:02 GMT


 > does anyone know if the grasses continue to grow sideways, or do
 > they eventually go back to growing straight up opposite the pull
 > of gravity?

  I haven't seen any mention of that. Good question.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 7 Jun 91 16:29:03 GMT


 >  why does he not provide Dr. Nathan with the negatives he has requested?

  That's an easy answer. They're not Bruce's to provide. Ed himself
will not release the originals.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Orchard)
Subject: So. cal uof bbs
Date: 7 Jun 91 07:24:03 GMT

In a message to All <28 May 91 15:38> Mark Pope wrote:

 MP> Does anybody know of a UFO info BBS that is in Southern California?

 MP> Any info would be appreciated......

Hi Mark,
     Well this is quite late and I'm sure you have already found a good board
to find UFO information.  But just incase you haven't my Board is located in
San Diego if you're looking that far south.  The number is [phone], for
now anyway.  It'll be changing on the 21st or 22nd of June.  Take care and I'll
be watchiing for you..

      See Ya!!

        Don



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



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


From: [e-mail] (Dan Sjolseth)
Subject: UFO Board
Date: 8 Jun 91 05:00:46 GMT

Mark,

My system is totally releated to UFO. I carry ParaNet,Mufon,Crystal Link,
idoNet,PODS,GateWay.....

Call anytime and drop me anot and I will validate.

Regards,

Dan Sjolseth

1-805-583-UFOS Stargate Systems BBS

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: HYPNOSIS FOR TRUTH
Date: 7 Jun 91 15:56:40 GMT

Welcome, I saw all your test messages and knew you would soon be fully
connected.

For you or anyone interested in how a person questioning, or interviewing
someone awake can effect the answers try looking up Rosenthal's experiments
on how experimenter's effect studys results, without conciously trying to do
so. Under hypnosis the subtle inferences might also lead people towards
desired responses. I'd be more specific but last time I read this study was
in 1981 and it just seemed to fit the discussion. It should be under
Psychology, and may have been 1971 when I read it during an experimental
psyc. course. It's been a long long time.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: FLIGHT 19
Date: 9 Jun 91 07:27:01 GMT


 > Now that I have pretty well explained them, if I see a real UFO
 > it won't look like any of these, or be as easy to explain,

  Reminds me of the time a few months ago when I was out being walked
by the dog one night and I noticed a triangular pattern of lights just
hovering, apparently above the cloud deck. I watched for a quite a
while and determined that the lights weren't moving, then suddenly
they vanished.
  Really strange. I couldn't figure out what I'd seen.
  A few weeks later, I was driving past the Disney area south of town
and I saw several spotlights being swiveled around. As I watched, they
were aimed upward in a fairly circular pattern, then went off.
  Mystery solved. The night I'd first seen the lights, the cloud cover
had just happened to be right.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: DR. NATHAN INTERVIEW
Date: 7 Jun 91 17:25:06 GMT

In a message to All <01 Jun 91 06:11> Sheldon Wernikoff wrote:

 SW> Robert Nathan at JPL in regards to the continuing saga of the Gulf
 SW> Breeze photos. Nathan has analyzed several original negatives,
 SW> utilizing microscopy, computer digitization and image enhancement,
 SW> along with multiple density printing to arrive at the following
 SW> conclusion: He has no definitive proof of a hoax, but the data are
 SW> consistent with images from double exposures. Nathan does not feel
 SW> that the GB images are from real UFO's.

Thank you!   Thank you!  Thank you!


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: (none)
Date: 7 Jun 91 17:35:48 GMT

In a message to All <02 Jun 91 17:50> ncar!ecn.purdue.edu!lush@ wrote:

 nc> A couple newsletters ago, I mentioned seeing an article regarding
 nc> the picture of Bush and an alien going for a stroll at Camp David.
 nc> I did not mention 'Grey' aliens, nor did the article.  Why does
 nc> everyone assume immediately that it was a 'Grey'?

What else would you wish to call the man in the body-suit?  In addition...
how do you know they were REALLY at 'Camp David'?  heh heh.

We just use the term "grey" for convenience.  After all, it is not considered
a scientific label...now is it?  I prefer it to 'alien being' or some such
nomer.  Since *I* believe it is no such thing in this particular case...I am
marveling more at the digitized 'matting' technique used to produce the
realistic-looking composit image (photograph) on the front page.  Guess those
creative editors really do find new uses for their Apple Mac IIs.  ;-)



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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: (none)
Date: 7 Jun 91 17:49:31 GMT


 DV> the article seemed to be obvious fakes to me.  The poses of the
 DV> 'being' and president in the picture were unreal. I thought I
 DV> could see what looked to me like 'superimposure' marks on the
 DV> President's head over the rest of the body.

Haha!  David...working at a televideo production center, I can tell you how
EASY it is to have YOUR still or video image walking arm-in-arm with the Pope.
 Apparently, this not-so-new technology has been featured in those rag-mags for
some time now...but is improving to the point where honest people (sic) are
having trouble telling the fantasies from the fakes.
So much for one of the down-sides of our First Amendment rights.

I enjoyed the outlandish attempt some months back to show, "SPACE JUNK FOUND ON
THE MOON!!" in which we were treated to a 'lunar surface' with strewned debris
of toilet seats and baby strollers.  People started to think we were actually
launching rockets with our garabage and crashing it into the moon!  Featured in
the same rag that came up with "BOEING 707 UNCOVERED FROM LUNAR SURFACE!" in a
prior issue.  I said, "So THAT's where I lost it!!"  :-)


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: Valle Interview
Date: 7 Jun 91 00:31:00 GMT

I was thinking that it could be that Asmiov, and Sagan realize that they
have many people who follow them and belive what they have to say as being a
possible reality.  Therefore, they might not be so inclined to say anything
For the support of anything that people might claim for Aliens, and UFO's
being real, but what I would not understand is if they claimed to be
vehemently against all possibilities that they might be real.  IF that were
true, then why would they research data so thouroughly for their books, when
they use Aliens and other life forms (If they do at all) in them when they
don't belive in any possibility of their existance...?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: ParaNet GetTogether
Date: 7 Jun 91 00:35:00 GMT

I'm an outdorsy person, I love to camp, I do it every year in northern
california.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Re: Hard Copy Booboo!
Date: 9 Jun 91 23:59:00 GMT

Linda Bird said:

 > Yo John,
 >     You said:  That photo Marina held up was an explosion of a secret
 > rocket/missle.
 >
 >      I'm assuming it was a Soviet rocket explosion?  Boy, that sure
 > breaks down her credibility, don't you thing??
 >
 >       Yuk!  How unprofessional!
 >
 >       Gives me a bad taste in my mouth.      :-(

Would you mind stating which photo you refer to? I am very familar with all
the photos she had, and I am not aware of any depicting a rocket explosion
that she was passing off as a UFO.

As a matter of fact, I just met her again last evening, (she is presently back
here in the States on a speaking tour) and the Hard Copy Producer, Dean Vallas
and I saw THE photo that was alluded to on the segment. She was given the
photo that had not been released prior to now, the one taken by Phobos 2 prior
to its disapearence. The photo sent back shows a very long cigar shaped
"craft"? that is just in front of Phobos-The Moon. I am presently working on
getting a copy of same. Let me say this about Marina. She is not only a
fascinating person, but this would be in the US the equivalent of Chuck Yeager
or John Glenn going public on the UFO phenomenon, using their military
backround as the basis of their information.

Everyone is always complaining about the "apparent coverup" by those in the
know, and here is what is virtually a world reknown avaition hero, speaking
about what she knows about this enigma, and so far as is apparent all I have
seen is complaints about how Hard Copy depicted the shadow, or this alleged
photo of a rocket exploding. What about the information she imparted?

Don

--
Don Ecker - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 423

                            Tuesday, June 11th 1991

Today's Topics:

                               Re--robertson Panel
                                UFO over Romania
                                  Miscellaneous
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                               Re: Valle Interview
                               Re: Valle Interview
                         Men in Black Countermeasures...
                            Re: "Martian" Chronicles
                            Re: "Martian" Chronicles
                        Re: Hypnosis and Social Gathering
                       The Lost Squadron/Bermuda Triangle
                                 New Publication
                                1MUFON SYMPOSIUM
                                    Re: Ufons
                                    Re: UFONS
                              BETTY AND BARNEY HILL
                           UFO over Bucharest Romania

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Re--robertson Panel
Date: 10 Jun 91 00:02:00 GMT

Deane Ward said:

 > It has been rumored that the saucer flap around that time was one of the
 > reasons that caused Project Blue Book (along with the Condon Report) to
 > be terminated as promptly as it was.

 Deane, the Condon Report was not even considered until the Hillsdale
sightings in 1966. The took off circa 1967-68, and was completed in 69, at
which time the AF got out of public UFOlogy.

Don

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



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: UFO over Romania
Date: 10 Jun 91 22:40:00 GMT

From the Rocky Mountain News, June 10, 1991.

Many people in the Romanian capital of Bucharest watched an unidentified
flying object move back and forth in a regular motion overnight on May 30-31.
A journalist for Agence France Presse who witnessed the UFO ssaid it was a
bright object, clearly visible in spite of heavy cloud, and probably an
altitude of sseveral thousand feet.  A Romanian defense official said nothing
unusual had been seen and suggested that the phenomenon might have been an
optical illusion or a trick of the weather.

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Miscellaneous
Date: 10 Jun 91 23:15:00 GMT


 >  > Yes, indeed.  BTW, what do you know about the 'Rainbow
 >  > Declaration?' I understand that Brandenburg did this work and
 >  > would like to hear a little more about it.
 >
 >   I think it's in last year's MUFON Symposium proceedings. I'll have a
 > look and let you know.

Thanks.  Linda Bird sent me a copy.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 10 Jun 91 23:17:00 GMT


 >  >  why does he not provide Dr. Nathan with the negatives he has requested?
 >
 >   That's an easy answer. They're not Bruce's to provide. Ed himself will
 > not release the originals.

What is his reasoning?  I recall Ed telling me that he would release them to
any responsible party after the book was published.  I wonder if he would not
allow this to happen now?

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Delton)
Subject: Re: Valle Interview
Date: 10 Jun 91 06:08:00 GMT

There seems to be little room for middle ground in the UFO field.  Too
many seem to feel that "If you aren't with us (a true beleiver) then
you're against us!!"  Appreciate seeing your reasoned approach.
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Valle Interview
Date: 10 Jun 91 20:21:00 GMT

-> Conceivably Dr. Valle was using a bit of hyperbole in his reference
-> Sagan, Asimov, and the National Enquirer, but I still feel we
-> should all learn to be a tad more tolerant of the skeptical mind.
-> Asimov has written some science primers for young people which are
-> quite well done, so even he is being of service to society.

Absolutely no arguments there, Sheldon. As I said, Asimov is one of the
people I have admired most since childhood. He is probably one of the
great thinkers of the Twentieth Century, certainly one of its most
prolific writers. Which is why I find it all the more surprising that he
displays such cavalier contempt for the UFO phenomenon. It is possible
for him to do great service to society in one area, while doing it great
disservice in another.

I agree we need to be MORE than a "tad" tolerant of the skeptical mind;
in fact I think we should all be skeptics. (Remember that skepticism is
an approach, not a belief system). However, having set for ourselves a
strict set of parameters for analyzing the known data and for coming to
tentative conclusions, we should be prepared to acknowledge and accept,
at least tentatively, the story that data tells. It seems to me that
many skeptics, rather than accept that data, keep changing the
parameters for acceptance - they keep moving the target further back.


-> As far as the Larry King interview you referred to, I would have to
-> ask what SPECIFICALLY Asimov has seen in the sky that he couldn't
-> identify. From your excerpt taken out of context, it is difficult
-> to discern if it was UFOs, cloud formations, astronomical bodies,
-> weather phenomena, etc. ( Of course I realize that the latter could
-> all be mistaken for true UFOs. )

What does it matter? I am not trained in meteorology, astronomy, or
nubology, nor am I particular adept at aircraft identification. Yet in
26 years of fairly intense sky-watching, I HAVE NEVER SEEN A THING IN
THE SKY THAT I COULD NOT APPLY A PROSAIC LABEL TO. I have to assume that
Asimov is a much better observer than I am. What could he possibly have
seen that he was unable to identify? Do you think one of the great minds
of the 20th Century could be mystified by a cloud formation? If not,
then has he not just acknowledged having seen a UFO? And if so, IS THAT
NOT A SCIENTIFIC CURIOSITY? This is my main fear - that science has lost
its basic curiosity and is now preoccupied with formalizing procedures,
obtaining funding, "publish or perish", etc.


-> Additionally, when Larry asked
-> Asimov about UFOs, and he responded that "they were ridiculous",
-> what exactly did he mean? UFO's themselves are ridiculous, the
-> possibility of their being a reality is ridiculous, or the
-> sightings and/or the individuals reporting them are ridiculous.
-> Clarification is required.

I agree with you to some extent, but if he found anything of interest in
them at all, I'm sure he would have said so. The implication seemed to
be that the idea of UFOs as aliens was ridiculous. This underlines
another problem skeptics seem to have: separating the issue of
strangeness from the issue of extramundane origin. They CAN be treated
separately, and should be. Claiming that a UFO phenomenon exists and is
thus far unexplained is a far cry from claiming that the aliens are
here, run for your lives. The latter is premature, and can be seen as
ridiculous, whereas the former is not only NOT ridiculous, its as good
as proven.

-> I must say that I even find myself becoming increasingly skeptical,
-> not because I don't believe in the reality of UFOs ( I do !! ), but
-> because it seems that virtually every "breakthrough" case that's
-> touted as "proof positive" seems to fall apart with time.

I've gone through the same thing myself. Still, there are a few bright
spots that would be impossible to ignore: Hudson Valley, Belgium,
Kanazawa, Delphos, Trans-en-Provence, Santiago, just to name a few.

-> (By the way, I am following with interest your postings on Lydia, and
-> look forward to an update soon.)

June 30 will be my next update.

-> In any event, I'm certain you'll agree that this whole business
-> and it is BIG BUSINESS), gets very frustrating at times. However,
-> with perseverance, dedication, and sincerity, we shall succeed in
-> making some sense of this quandary someday.

Ahlevai.

Jim


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Men in Black Countermeasures...
Date: 10 Jun 91 16:00:15 GMT

Don,
    I liked your briefing on what to do when/if one encounters MIB.  What do
you do if you FAINT first when seeing a MIB, which is what I'd do!!  Next, how
does one stay so cool to do the things you suggest?  I'd fall apart for sure.

Thanks,

Linda

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Shaffer)
Subject: Re: "Martian" Chronicles
Date: 10 Jun 91 07:01:00 GMT

Don,

So there's actually a newsgroup called "alt.alien.visitors"?  Must have
gotten started about the time the big "these phenomena shouldn't be allowed
to have a newsgroup" war was raging in sci.skeptic.  (Which was the same
time I stopped wasting my money on sci.skeptic!)

How active is it (messages/day would be fine)?  I've got to decide whether
to waste any money on it :-)

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Shaffer)
Subject: Re: "Martian" Chronicles
Date: 10 Jun 91 07:15:00 GMT

OK, I guess I'd better clear something up for the people (most of you?) that
weren't there...  I said "the big 'these phenomena shouldn't be allowed to
have a newsgroup' war".  I should've said it was "these *people* shouldn't
be allowed to have a newsgroup."

You see, sci.skeptic seems to be dominated by the "rabid debunker" type.
Maybe not in absolute numbers, but certainly in loudness.  So people were
naturally getting very upset that they couldn't hold a polite discussion on
the possibility of paranormal phenomena without these people jumping all
over them and with their holier-than-thou attitude.  So someone suggested
starting a new newsgroup.  The trouble was that they wanted to put it in the
science hierarchy.  Not surprisingly, there was overwhelming opposition by
the people who insisted that studying such things just wasn't science.  It
was pretty amazing.  You'd think they were trying to suggest that
creationism be taught in schools or something!  About this time, I decided
that I didn't need to be spending money on all the close-minded garbage
getting tossed around.  I imagine that eventually several newsgroups were
created in someplace less sensitive, such as the "alternative" (alt)
hierarchy.  But I don't know for sure, because I only get a few newsgroups.
It's not like I'm at a major node where I can have all of them on the system
and pick what I want to read.

OK, is everybody *more* confused now?  :-)

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Hypnosis and Social Gathering
Date: 11 Jun 91 03:57:44 GMT

Hi David,

  Regarding a ufology social for the western states, I am not much into
overnight camping.  However, for a UFO conference or social, why not meet
halfway at the Colorado River (Lake Havasu City) as that would be cool, fun,
and attractive?  Let us know when you have it organized....<grin>

  As for Kathie Davis, I think she was pretty tired of being chased down by
the media. I think her attitude was, "I don't care if you believe me or not.
Here's what happened."

  I can't think of anything to ask your mother (hypnotist) at the moment;
perhaps some other people will.

Regards!!

Linda
?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: The Lost Squadron/Bermuda Triangle
Date: 11 Jun 91 04:30:21 GMT

This is condensed from the June 7th PHOENIX GAZETTE:

      "What were first thought to be the remnants of the five Navy Avengers
that mysteriously disappeared Dec. 5, 1945, on a training flight from the
naval air base in Ft. Lauderdale, are not the remains of squadron Flight 19.

      "The planes that were discovered 10 miles off the coast of Florida are
remnants of 5 separate incidents, most likely separate accidents during
low- altitude torpedo runs, according to archaeologists.

      "Coincidences contributed to the belief the lost Squadron had been
found---including the same tail number 28 on one of the planes, in addition to
the fact that the 5 Avengers were found within l 1/2 miles of each other.

      "Thus the Bermuda Triangle---bounded by Bermuda, Miami and Puerto
Rico--where ships and planes are thought to mysteriously vanish--perhaps
grabbed by alien visitors or mysterious ocean dwellers--is refueled with
possibilities.

      "What happened to the 14 U.S. crewmen that December day remains a
mystery, a part of the myth of the Bermuda Triangle, a part of legend.

      "The truth is that the crew probably ditched at sea, having become lost
and eventully running out of fuel.  But it is far more exciting to unleash the
imagination in mystery, something that is now destined to run free until the
real Lost Squadron is found."

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Dorsey)
Subject: New Publication
Date: 8 Jun 91 02:15:00 GMT


                            ANNOUNCING:

An international networking journal devoted to the exploration of:

    * electric and magnetic technology  * anti-gravity
    * atomic and space-time concepts    * harmonics and vibrations
    * energy transformation techniques  * natural phenomena

The ELECTRIC SPACECRAFT JOURNAL is a quarterly publication
specifically for those doing creative research and experiments in
the area of spacecraft technology and for those interested in the
subject.  The purpose of this publication is to make it possible
for individuals to communicate and cooperate both formally and
informally with each other in an effort to develop new technology
for spacecraft.  The Journal is an interactive platform for:

    * experiments                * direct observation of phenomena
    * documents                  * investigations
    * historical accounts        * new ideas and concepts
    * speculations               * interpretations and comments

                   ELECTRIC SPACECRAFT JOURNAL
P.O. BOX 18387, ASHEVILLE, NC 28814 704-252-8083 FAX [phone]
--
David Dorsey - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: 1MUFON SYMPOSIUM
Date: 11 Jun 91 13:16:00 GMT

As most of you already know, the MUFON 1991 INTERNATIONAL UFO
SYMPOSIUM will be held in Chicago on the 5th, 6th, and 7th of July.

SPEAKERS AND TOPICS OF DISCUSSION WILL INCLUDE:
___________________________________________________________________

COLIN ANDREWS, England, co-author of _Circular Evidence_ and _Crop
Circles - The Latest Evidence_; "English Crop Circles"

JOHN CARPENTER, M.S.W., Springfield, MO; "Clinical Hypnotherapy"

MICHAEL CHOROST, M.A., Durham, NC and DENNIS STACY, B.A., San
Antonio, TX; "Review of the Crop Circle Mystery"

STANTON FRIEDMAN, M.S., Canada; "New Disclosures on Roswell"

LINDA MOULTON HOWE, M.A., Huntington Valley, PA and JOHN ALTSHULER,
M.D., Englewood, CO; "Cattle Mutilations"

DAVID JACOBS, Ph.D., Wynmoor, PA; "What Can We Believe in Abduction
Accounts?"

C. B. SCOTT JONES, Ph.D., Falls Church, VA; "Government UFO
Connections"

BRUCE MACCABEE, Ph.D., Sabillasville, MD; "Gulf Breeze Update"

{JEAN-PIERRE PETIT, France; "Has Science Something to do with UFOs?"

GENE PHILLIPS, J.D., Highland Park, IL; "Insights Into the Ancient
Astronaut Theory"

ZECHARIAH SITCHIN, author, New York, NY; "The Twelfth Planet - Key
to the UFO Enigma"

MICHAEL SWORDS, Ph.D., Kalamazoo, MI; "Modern Biology, Close
Encounters and the ETH"
___________________________________________________________________

{I will be present at all three sessions of this symposium, and
would like to encourage all users of this echo to post any
questions you might have for these speakers, and I will do my best
to obtain answers for all those unable to attend.

                  Sheldon


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Peggy Noonan)
Subject: Re: Ufons
Date: 11 Jun 91 16:04:00 GMT

Hi David,
        UFONS is "UFO Newsclipping Service," a monthly publication in
which newspaper articles about UFO sightings, abductions, etc., are
reprinted.  The source papers are all over the world -- the US,
Australia, England, Canada, Singapore... you name it.  Also reprinted
are articles about Bigfoot, Forteana, Crop Circles (including the
photos which makes all the difference in understanding what the text is
talking about!), cattle mutilations, -- basically anything in the genre
that people who read about UFOs might find interesting.
        You can buy a single issue to "test drive" it, or a
mini-subscription for a few months, or a full year. Cost per issue is
$5.  Although there are many UFO magazines and a variety of
publications on the topic and we all have our favorites, I like UFONS
better because it's not a writer's distillation of reports but is
instead the original reports themselves and I can do my own distilling
of the information they contain.  (Of course, Don Ecker's UFO Magazine
is good too, but it's a quite different thing--he can take stories into
detail there, where in UFONS you'll only get the raw reports.)
        If you're interested, write or call the editor-publisher at
this address:
        U.F.O. NEWSCLIPPING SERVICE
        Route 1, Box 220
        Plumerville, Arkansas 72127  USA

phone:  Lucius Farish--you can get the number from directory assistance
        He also arranges the annual Ozark UFO Conference which was in
April this year.
        If you try the publication, let me know how you like it, okay?
Oh, and by the way, what you get is 20 pages (printed on both sides)
8-1/2x14 size.  The May '91 issue included these titles:  UFOS REPORTED
IN E. OREGON; SPRINGFIELDIAN'S UFO CRASH STORY TO BE AIRED ON NATIONAL
TV (this was about Gerald Anderson, the man who was AT the Roswell UFO
crash site and saw the live aliens); ALIEN CONTACTEES CREATE
'ENCOUNTER' GROUP; STRANGE SIGHTINGS IN GHE TWO VIRGINIAS; MYSTERY
CIRCLE FOUND IN TUNNEL; CHARIOTS OF FIRE (200 UFO sightings over Haifa,
Israel); CRYPTOZOOLOGISTS STALK ELUSIVE BEASTS, SAVING FACE ON MARS,
YETI TREK, ANIMALS APPEARED AND DISAPPEARED... and so on.  [You can
probably guess by this message that I'm a BIG fan of UFONS!]
        Let me know if you have further questions.  I'll be glad to
help.
                                ==Peggy==
--
Peggy Noonan - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Peggy Noonan)
Subject: Re: UFONS
Date: 11 Jun 91 16:11:00 GMT

Hi Bob!
        Gee, it's great to hear from you again!
        I have been calling in to see if there would be a message here
from you but I've been trying at bad times apparently because I kept
getting busy signals...today I'm calling a bit earlier.
        I know what you mean about "when the meter's running"!  Do you
have an offline reader for BBS (like TAPCIS or ATO)?  I've been told
that we should be using Silver Express Reader which works about the
same way as TAP and ATO, they tell me, and I've downloaded it from a
local BBS, but haven't gotten to unpack it yet...  talk about
procrastinators!!!  --Really, just been trying to keep up with work and
haven't had a chance to experiment with new stuff.
        Anyway, maybe that would help save the old meter fees.  Let me
know if you want a copy of it.  It's either shareware or freeware, but
I'll check to see which.
        Glad you got those clippingstoo.
        I haven't called in to Issues on CIS for a while, hoping that
the test message you posted would show up in Mail but it never did and
this past week when I did call in, it wasn't in Issues either.  Georgia
says I'm the only one this is happening to and I'm really mystified.
She suggested maybe it had something to do with ATO but the last
several calls I made were via ProComm+ (same as here) so I don't see
how that could be linked.  Only other thing I can think of--and this is
totally uneducated guessing because I don't know what I'm talking
about--is maybe my forum setting is botched somehow???  I recently got
into the forum setting inadvertently I recall and maybe I also goofed
and changed something.  If you think that could be a source of the
problem, have you any idea what I should do to correct it?
        Hope your other situation is working out well.  Got to run
now...take care and will talk to you soon.
                                ==Peggy==
--
Peggy Noonan - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: ncar!CU.NIH.GOV!ZAK
Subject:  BETTY AND BARNEY HILL
Date: 11 Jun 91 21:42:49 GMT

From: [e-mail]

From:   [e-mail] (David Villa)
+        Hopkins' mentions in his book that there was a movie made about the
+ Betty and Barney Hill abduction case, which he states, 'Can be seen as a
+ sci/fi rerun on most late night television stations' or somthing to that
+ effect (not wanting to misquote Budd).  Have you seen this film?

The film, 'The UFO Incident,' which was based on the book by John G. Fuller
entitled _The_Interrupted_Journey_, does indeed run on the 'late show' from
time to time.  It might even be available at your local video
rental store.

It's been a long time since I saw it, but I remember being chilled by it
and thought that it was done without unnecessary sensationalism.  The Hills
were portrayed in a very sympathetic manner, and the film was an enjoyable
experience.  Contrast this to _Communion_'s self-satisfied,
trying-hard-to-act-like-a-really-truly-eccentrically-brilliant-writer
Whitley Streiber (SP?).  What an irritating character!  Is he like this in
person?



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


From: ncar!hpvclmd.vcd.hp.com!miked
Subject: UFO over Bucharest Romania
Date: 11 Jun 91 21:43:33 GMT

From: Mike Dobbs <[e-mail]>

The newspaper here in Portland Oregon had the following blurb
yesterday.

        UFO
        Many people in the Romanian capital of Bucharest watched an
        unidentifed flying object move back and forth in a regular motion
        overnight on May 30-31.  A journalist for Agence France Presse who
        witnessed the UFO said it was a bright object, clearly visable in
        spite of heavy clouds, and probably at an altitude of several thousand
        feet. A Romanian defense official said nothing unusual had been seen,
        and suggested that the phenomenon might have been an optical illusion
        or a trick of the weather.

Has anybody elso heard more?  There seems to have been a lot of observers.

--------
  Mike Dobbs        /    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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 424

                           Wednesday, June 12th 1991

Today's Topics:

                             Re: ParaNet GetTogether
                                  Re: feeling?
                            Re: FLIGHT 19 *NOT* FOUND
                              Communion, the movie.
                                    FLIGHT 19
                                  Mars Observer
                                   bashing Sheldon

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: ParaNet GetTogether
Date: 11 Jun 91 08:10:00 GMT

In a message to Jim Speiser <06-06-91 00:30> David Villa wrote:

->       What UFO conference did you help put together?

The '89 National UFO Conference in Phoenix. Officially I was co-chair, but I
really didn't do all that much. It was just the fact that I had to publish
my phone number, and every wacko reader of UFO Review was calling me for
info.

->nice campgrounds along the beach. Arizona is a good state
->with nice campgrounds and wideopen views of the sky and
->land.  How many of you are outdoorsy people?

I'm not usually, but for something like that I could easily become one. Or
how about New Mexico, "Land of Enchantment", the state with the most
colorful UFO history?

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: feeling?
Date: 8 Jun 91 19:01:00 GMT

Intriguing about the coincidences between the solar flares and the supposed
sightings on june 17, is that what you were talking about?? what might yor
speculations be on that?

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: FLIGHT 19 *NOT* FOUND
Date: 8 Jun 91 19:06:00 GMT

Sometimes the truth is weirder than Science Fiction!

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Tyson Mitchiner)
Subject: Communion, the movie.
Date: 8 Jun 91 05:28:48 GMT


  I guess one of the reasons Communion did so badly in the theatres (or was it
ever shown anywhere?  I never saw it except at Blockbuster's) is because it was
so cryptic, so complex that a viewer with no real prior knowledge of the little
tidbits here and there that are found will have a difficult time understanding
the movie.

  The part where Strieber is a magician talking to himself probably would lead
such a viewer to assume the man was crazy.  It seemed to me that the movie was
more of a movie designed for Streiber himself, not a movie that would captivate
an audience.

  If the movie had followed more along the plot of the book, Communion, it's
success would probably have been much better.  The book was more gripping and
fascinating than the movie was.  The movie was a huge disappointment to me (in
terms of being able to convey the story to an uninformed audience).

                                                     Tyson

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Tyson Mitchiner)
Subject: FLIGHT 19
Date: 10 Jun 91 03:10:42 GMT


 PP> Last one I sighted as an optical illusion last week. I was
 PP> driving along and saw this glowing thing sort of moving back and
 PP> forth (mostly just floating?) and it looked like balls of flames
 PP> were dropping off of it. Really strange! So I stopped the car and
 PP> grabbed for one of the cameras then drove towards it. Before I
 PP> could take a picture, I figured out what it was. So I put the car
 PP> in reverse and backed up to the original sighting point, and wow
 PP> there it was again, bobbing back and forth, dropping illuminated
 PP> balls of light.

 PP> Now that I have pretty well explained them, if I see a real UFO
 PP> it won't look like any of these, or be as easy to explain, so
 PP> hopefully I can retain some credibility. OR on the other hand it
 PP> will automatically be shot down as a hoax without any problem.

  Of course, if anyone else observed them, they would have stepped out of the
car and realized the source of the lights.  I dont really think anyone would be
taking pictures from the interior of the car, but rather standing outside
taking the pictures.  It would be extremely obvious if people were taking
pictures from the interior of the car, and the lights could be analyzed and
very easily found to be lights from a distance source reflecting off the glass.

                                          Tyson

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Tyson Mitchiner)
Subject: Mars Observer
Date: 10 Jun 91 03:31:08 GMT


 Do you know if there are any plans to observe Cydonia with the Mars Observer?
  If so, what kind of observation, how long, and what kind of data/revelations
we will be able to make from that kind of close-up resolution?  Will that
enable scientists to speculate with a good degree of certainity if it is a
natural formation or if it appears to be intentionally created?

                                             Tyson

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



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


From: ncar!watson.acc.virginia.edu!JBB
Subject:      bashing Sheldon
Date: 12 Jun 91 21:33:34 GMT

From: [e-mail]


On Date: 5 Jun 91 05:23:00 GMT Sheldon writes:

+     In response to your suggestion that I offer Dr. Maccabee an
+immediate public apology, I would like to take this opportunity to
+state the following:
+     Apparently, in quoting my post out of context, you have
+misinterpreted my opinion. My reference to renumeration was meant
+to be specific to ufology conferences (see message #2998),not the
+international conference of the Society for Scientific Exploration
+(SSE) that you mention.

My reference to SSE was to offer evidence that Dr. Maccabee does not
receive remuneration for scholarly presentations at scientific gather-
ings. Indeed, it is precisely to avoid the likely 'facts-for-fees'
contamination you address that mainstream scientific organizations
limit honoraria, in those cases where it is given at all, to key-note
speakers. Quasi-scientific UFO gatherings of the sort we seem to be
talking about may operate under different customs. Having never been
to one, I don't know. In any case, let's not bash Bruce. He's doing a
fine job and doesn't appear to need the cash. Send your money to me
instead.

+     If my intended meaning was unclear, I do sincerely apologize
+for that. However, I do maintain my opinion that Dr. Maccabee is
+involved in Gulf Breeze at least partially for the continuing
+monetary compensation he receives. If he is sincerely concerned
+about resolving this quagmire, why does he not provide Dr. Nathan
+with the negatives he has requested?

There seems to be some confusion here. First, Dr. Maccabee doesn't
own or control access to the original polaroid photographs made by
Ed Walters and is not responsible for distributing them to various
investigators. I doubt that Bruce has authorization to disclose the
photographs in any form other than to illustrate a scientific presen-
tation. If Dr. Nathan wants to examine the Gulf Breeze photographs,
have him cut his own deal.

Second, there's so many quagmires out there concerning Gulf Breeze
that I'm unsure which one you're addressing. Are we discussing the
base authenticity of the photos themselves, their provenience, the
presumed geometric discrepancies a la Salesberry in the now infamous
'road shot', or what? Finally - and this cuts close to the quick -
what qualifies Dr. Nathan for preferential access to the Gulf Breeze
evidentiary material in the first place? There are a lot of pretty
good people with well equipped laboratories standing in line to get
at those photographs, one would imagine, and there must be a lot of
justifiable squabbling going on. But let's look at it this way: If
by some extraordinary stroke of good luck, I had managed to photo-
graph what I sincerely believed was an alien spacecraft, you'd have
to be bonded three ways from Sunday just to know the location of the
vault containing the originals. Otherwise, you'd work with second-
generation copies just like everyone else. You'd agree, I'd bet, that
Ed Walters would be crazy to send originals to Cal Tech just because
someone with the right-sounding credentials wanted to look at them.

Aside from slamming Sheldon, these considerations bring up a good
point: How can photographic and video evidence be made available to
the public or at least to qualified professionals without destroying
its credibility or minimizing its scientific value or both? The best I
have come up with is an FTP-able database of photographs digitized to
some acceptable resolution level and presented in two formats. First,
I recommend the construction of a research oriented database consisting
of high resolution (1000K lines or better) RGB samplings at a quanti-
zation level of at least 8 bits for each image plane. These digital
images would be stored in FITS format (Flexible Image Transport System,
a standard image format for astronomy data) and made available to the
research community by a peer-moderated request procedure installed to
minimize network traffic and server overhead. Video imagery would also
be stored in FITS format but at a resolution of 512 lines, monochrome
or RGB as appropriate.

In a parallel directory open to the general public, the image database
would contain the research database reformatted as reduced resolution
GIF files compatible with VGA display technologies. Selected video
images, time-averaged over a few frames to reduce noise, would also be
made available in GIF format.

I'm greatly interested in setting up such a database and have access to
the required laboratory environment. Any suggestions?

Joe Burch




********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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 425

                            Saturday, June 15th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                    Re: Ufons
                                  Phobos 2-USSR
                              Re: Hard Copy Booboo!
                              Re: Hard Copy Booboo!
                            Re: "Martian" Chronicles
                              Re: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
                                Hard Copy Booboo!
                                  Re: feeling?
                                 Unreal Articles
                            Re: Statistical Sampling
                               Re: Bashing Sheldon
                                     (none)
                     Now the Russians are Valid sources?????
                                Hard Copy Booboo!
                               Re: Bashing Sheldon
                                     (none)
                               Re: Unreal Articles

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Re: Ufons
Date: 12 Jun 91 14:04:00 GMT

Peggy Noonan said:

 > they contain.  (Of course, Don Ecker's UFO Magazine is good too, but
 > it's a quite different thing--he can take stories into detail there,
 > where in UFONS you'll only get the raw reports.)

Thanks for the plug Peggy, but if Vicki or Sherie saw the above, I am sure
they would wonder when I took over ownership! Grin........

UFO Magazine is Co-Published and owned by Sherie Stark and Vicki Cooper, and
I just do a lot of the work on it........ GRIN

Don

PS.. Which reminds me for any of you that did not see the offer of a couple
of months ago.

UFO Magazine is offering ( only until July 1, 1991 ) a special rate to
ParaNet users. As of July 1, the subscription is raised to $21.00 per year,
with single issues going for $3.95 plus postage. If you mention seeing this
ad on ParaNet, you can get a years subscription for $17.50 which is less that
the present subscription. Time is running out.

Send $17.50 for a one years subscription to;

UFO Magazine
PO Bx 1053
Sunland, CA 91041

Find out what you have been missing.
--
Don Ecker - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Phobos 2-USSR
Date: 12 Jun 91 18:50:00 GMT

Having attended the World UFO Congress in Tucson, Ar. for UFO
Magazine, I had the distinct pleasure of meeting Dr. Marina
Popovich who was one of the Congress speakers. Dr. Popovich is a
Soviet citizen who was here speaking on her UFO research in the
Soviet Union. Marina Popovich, Ph.D., is a graduate of the
University of Leningrad, graduated from the Military Flight School,
is a retired Colonel from the Soviet Air Force, and set over 100
aviation records of which 90 still stand unbroken. Dr. Popovich's
former husband is General Paval Popovich, the first man to
rendezvous with another space craft in orbit during the Vostok 4
flight in August, 1962.

Interviewing Dr. Popovich in Tucson, I learned of a number of
incidents that had allegedly occurred during the 1989 Soviet Phobos
2 probe, and upon returning to LA I contacted a producer that I
know for the NBC television program "Hard Copy". We ended up doing
a segment with Marina that detailed the admittedly fantastic story
of Phobos 2, ( during a JOINT US-USSR-EUROPEAN space mission ) and
what appeared to be a huge and artificial object between Mars and
her moonlet Phobos, that may have either intentionally or
unintentionally destroyed the probe Phobos 2. I can state that
because even the mission control specialists at Glavkosmos claim
that Phobos 2 was probably hit by something ( meteors and debris
dust was ruled out according to the report in the UK publication
NATURE made by the Soviets ) which caused the probe to become a
"spinner" that later completely disappeared. The Soviets then
released a photo that Phobos 2 took of a very long "ellipse"
reflected off of Mars, but the last several photos of the "object"
were never released by the Soviets. Marina then told me that this
was a high topic of discussion between President George Bush and
Secretary General Mikhil Gorbachev at the Malta Conference. She
received the information from a source of hers in the Soviet
Politburo. Still the photo showing this object remained in "limbo"
with the Soviets refusing to release it, and NASA of course, not
mentioning any of these events.

On June 7th Marina returned to the Los Angeles area to be a
featured speaker for the World Harmony Expo in Long Beach. The Hard
Copy producer, Mr. Dean Vallas, Guy Kirkwood, a former US Air Force
fighter pilot who had a UFO experience on duty and myself, met with
Marina over drinks and discussed her last trip, ongoing events in
the USSR, and then much to the surprise of us all, produced one of
the photos from Phobos 2, showing the "object". According to her,
once back in the USSR, she contacted several friends in Glavkosmos,
and they gave her the print of this "thing". It shows an object off
of the moonlet Phobos, that is approx. 25 kilometers long, approx.
1 1/2 kilometers in dia., and is a cylindrical cigar shaped
"craft?". Not being a photo analyst, I can only give my own
impressions. However, I asked for a copy of the said photo, and
upon receiving it, I intend to hand it over to some contacts at JPL
for analysis.

My feelings on the above? There is no doubt that a large degree of
"high strangeness" is present in the above events. That of course
is my own opinion. However until such time as NASA or JPL release
the information that they may have, this will continue to be an
interesting but apocryphal series of stories. I will state that I
do feel there is a basis of fact in the above series of incidents,
and will continue to investigate via my contacts to see what
additional events can be verified.

Don Ecker

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Re: Hard Copy Booboo!
Date: 13 Jun 91 02:14:00 GMT

Don,

I believe the photo the original poster was referring to as being
part of a Soviet rocket explosion was the one that looked like (in
the poster's words) an "octopus". It appeared to be ellipsoid in
shape, with a luminous center, from which radiated approximately
nine luminous streamers. That should help you identify the photo.

What I would like to know is the source of the poster's information
to aid in verifying or repudiating his report.

I'm sorry you seem to feel my complaint about the way Hard Copy
handled that Phobos shadow dramatization sequence was unwarranted,
but I've seen this type of "accident" so often, that I felt
obligated to make a statement. Many people I spoke to after the
show thought those WERE the ACTUAL shadow images...followed by the
camera going dead. After seeing 20/20 do a post-mortem interview
with Buckwheat last year, I've become a bit more skeptical of
programs of this genre.

As far as the information Dr. Popovich imparted, I absolutely agree
that IF verified, it is of great significance.  We have the finest
facilities in the world for analyzing space probe reconnaissance
photos at JPL, so let's get to work! If Marina and/or the Soviets
are hesitant to cooperate in this quest for truth, that's when my
incredulity will kick in. Until then, I shall maintain an open
mind.

               Sheldon

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Hard Copy Booboo!
Date: 12 Jun 91 05:05:00 GMT

Hi Don,

    The picture that Marina held up that looked like an explosion was
(I think) the first one she held up.  It just looked like a lot of
brilliant light, and John (Hicks?) said in a post that it was an
explosion.

    I just bought Sitchin's book "Genesis Revisited" and although I
have not begun to read it yet, I did thumb thru to "look at the
pictures."  Imagine my surprise to see on pg.282  (now quoting) "a
still
from the Soviet television clip" of a thin ellipse with very sharp
rather than rounded points, etc. of "something that is between the
spacedraft and Mars, because we can see the Martian surface below it."
The book goes on to say that the last frame or frames have not been
publicly released and one can only speculate .

    Yes, I am now aware after the Hard Copy report and some others
that Marina is a respected aviator.  I'm hoping she can use her
influence to convince the Soviets to release the remaining film!

Thanks, Don.
Best regards,
              Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: "Martian" Chronicles
Date: 12 Jun 91 22:20:00 GMT


 >
 > So there's actually a newsgroup called "alt.alien.visitors"?  Must have
 > gotten started about the time the big "these phenomena shouldn't be
 > allowed to have a newsgroup" war was raging in sci.skeptic.  (Which was
 > the same time I stopped wasting my money on sci.skeptic!)

There was actually a war raging over whether "these phenomena" should be
allowed to have a newsgroup? That kind of stuff is the ultimate in arrogance.
I think even most skeptics would agree. Right, skeptics?

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: HARD COPY BOOBOO!
Date: 12 Jun 91 07:47:00 GMT


 >     You said:  That photo Marina held up was an explosion of a
 > secret rocket/missle.         I'm assuming it was a Soviet
 > rocket explosion?  Boy, that sure breaks down her credibility,
 > don't you thing??

  Well, it is kinda iffy. She didn't actually say it was a ufo photo,
she just waved it and others.  It'd be interesting to get Antonio
Huneeus' opinion of her, if anyone gets to talk with him.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Hard Copy Booboo!
Date: 12 Jun 91 07:54:01 GMT


 >  the segment showing a shadow crossing
 > the moonlet Phobos was an artists depiction. The photo of Phobos
 > was real, having gotten it from JPL, the shadow was inserted.

  I have no problem with the animation, although I believe it should
have been labeled as such. At least a few people here and on other
related echos thought it was the real thing.
  Not letting the viewers know they were watching an animation was
just shoddy practice that can only damage the show's credibility.
  BTW, I'm not overly excited about this. ;-)

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: feeling?
Date: 12 Jun 91 07:56:02 GMT


 > Intriguing about the coincidences between the solar flares and
 > the supposed sightings on june 17, is that what you were talking
 > about?? what might yor speculations be on that?

  Well, it's odd.
  One person in a northern state said he had a feeling some things
would happen in mid-June. Another person here in central Florida, who
is definitely not active in these echos (or BBS's in general) said
virtually the same thing a few days later. There's no way they could
have been in communication. Coincidence? No idea.
  Then, yet a few days later, came the first major solar flare alert.
  Strange. And it's not even mid-June yet!

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Unreal Articles
Date: 10 Jun 91 20:12:00 GMT


   Yes, nowadays, any homebody with an Amiga and video toaster can create a
superimposure image or splice an object from one frame into another.  The
technology is within reach for a reasonable cost for just anyone to use.  I
forsee pretty soon the U.S. Govt. having to change the paper currency to
somthing a little harder to forge.  All this new top-of-the-line photocopy
equipment is getting to the point that you only need the paper money is
printed on to make replicas that only casual scrutiny will not reveal.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Doug Rogers)
Subject: Re: Statistical Sampling
Date: 14 Jun 91 08:35:50 GMT

I'm not sure what you are trying to do, Mike, but if I can be of help,
I'll be glad to.  Being a college prof type, I have more than a passing
familiarity with statistical methods and the design of questionnaires.
Call me if I can help.


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Re: Bashing Sheldon
Date: 14 Jun 91 13:07:00 GMT

Joseph,

First and foremost, I want to assert that I think you and I are
playing on the same team in this Maccabee vs. Nathan controversy,
that of the truth, so let's start acting more like allies instead
of adversaries, agreed?

I am very much against the "facts for fees" approach so rampant at
many of the pseudo-scientific ufo congregations, where knowledge
and rumors are hawked. I, and others such as yourself and the
people active in this network, are actually willing to expend cash
and time to aid in the dissemination of what we believe to be the
truth. I don't mean to be 'bashing' or 'slamming' Bruce, I am just
stating my personal speculations. From what I have read and heard,
I am convinced that he is an extremely qualified and capable
scientist. I just wish he would attempt to cooperate a bit more
with Nathan.

Why Bob Nathan you ask? Yes, there are many competent people with
well equipped labs anxious to look at Ed's original polaroids, but
Bob was one of the first in line after Bruce. Moreover, Ed
certainly perpetrated a great injustice upon Bob insofar as failing
to EVEN MENTION Bob's 'negative' opinion re: the GB photos. I find
this especially strange since Nathan went public with his analysis
more than 1 1/2 years prior to the publication of Walters' book!
I'm convinced this omission was deliberate. I wonder, what does
Bruce think about that? What I have even more difficulty with is
understanding why Nathan's and Maccabee's opinions are so
disparate. Perhaps the answer lies with the original prints,
perhaps elsewhere. You state that '...Walters would be crazy to
send originals to Cal Tech...', yet apparently he feels comfortable
in sending them to Bruce. Why?

Finally, I think your ideas around the FTP-able digitized
photographic database, accessible to the general research community
is fantastic. I'll try to get some feedback from Nathan on that,
and post his comments and/or suggestions here.

Best regards,

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



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


From: ecn.purdue.edu!lush
Subject: (none)
Date: 14 Jun 91 17:35:28 GMT

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


Subject:  Now the Russians are Valid sources?????

?   From: [e-mail] (Don Allen)
?   Subject: Dr. Marina Popovich
?   Date: 28 May 91 07:52:01 GMT
?
?
?   DE> The interview with Dr. Marina Popovich, Retired Soviet Air
?   DE> Force Colonel and top Soviet UFOlogist will air on Hard
?   DE> Copy on Monday May 27th. This should be of great interest
?   DE> so if you get a chance make sure you do not miss it.
?   DE>
?   DE> Don
?
?
?   I'll say!! That was probably one of the BEST pieces I've ever seen.
?
?   Has anyone mentioned what they think the 'shadow' was, as indicated by the
?   Russian probe before it went ...poof?
?
?   Your comments were excellent and I just wonder what OUR Govt/Military
?   does/reacts to the presentation. It's indeed a shame when the Soviets
?   are forthright about their evidence and their military admits to being
?   'baffled' and *our* military just stonewalls the public.
?

Why would anyone assume that anything this woman says has any validity?
The Russians have never been 'forthright' about anything except their
promises 'bury' us and to eventually take over the world.  I would place
her in the same category of credibility as 'The Woman from Venus.'
She would not be allowed to speak about such things unless given
EXACTLY what to say.  She's no more of a 'source' than Marlin Fitzwater is.

Greg ([e-mail])





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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Hard Copy Booboo!
Date: 15 Jun 91 03:59:00 GMT


 >   I have no problem with the animation, although I believe it should
 > have been labeled as such. At least a few people here and on other
 > related echos thought it was the real thing.
 >   Not letting the viewers know they were watching an animation was just
 > shoddy practice that can only damage the show's credibility.
 >   BTW, I'm not overly excited about this. ;-)

I just wanted to jump in here about this nit-picky business over the Hard Copy
segment.  All this carrying on is wonderful, but what about the *IMPORTANT*
things that are deceiving that we are being fed about Cooper's material,
Lear's material and the Gulf Breeze fiasco.  It is nice to hear that people
are being conscientious about what animation is being used on Hard Copy which
could mislead people observing it, but I don't hear this much debate over the
important issues that are truly a serious problem for ufology.

Just my two cents!

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Bashing Sheldon
Date: 15 Jun 91 04:02:00 GMT


 > Why Bob Nathan you ask? Yes, there are many competent people with
 > well equipped labs anxious to look at Ed's original polaroids, but
 > Bob was one of the first in line after Bruce. Moreover, Ed
 > certainly perpetrated a great injustice upon Bob insofar as failing
 > to EVEN MENTION Bob's 'negative' opinion re: the GB photos. I find
 > this especially strange since Nathan went public with his analysis
 > more than 1 1/2 years prior to the publication of Walters' book!
 > I'm convinced this omission was deliberate. I wonder, what does
 > Bruce think about that? What I have even more difficulty with is
 > understanding why Nathan's and Maccabee's opinions are so
 > disparate. Perhaps the answer lies with the original prints,
 > perhaps elsewhere. You state that '...Walters would be crazy to
 > send originals to Cal Tech...', yet apparently he feels comfortable
 > in sending them to Bruce. Why?

I have known Bob Nathan for quite some time.  Just for information:  Bob is
the father of image photography.  He pioneered the processes that NASA uses in
its mission photography to get pictures of the planets.  He is a very credible
and highly respected physicist with a very sour taste over several of the
events that took place with Gulf Breeze.  I commend you on your interest in
this case and the person that you chose to discuss the rational side of the
issue with, as I feel no one better could be available.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: (none)
Date: 15 Jun 91 04:04:00 GMT


 > From: ncar!ecn.purdue.edu!lush
 > Date: 14 Jun 91 17:35:28 GMT
 > Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
 > Newsgroups: info.paranet
 >
 > From: [e-mail] (Gregory B Lush)

 > Why would anyone assume that anything this woman says has any validity?
 > The Russians have never been 'forthright' about anything except their
 > promises 'bury' us and to eventually take over the world.  I would place
 > her in the same category of credibility as 'The Woman from Venus.'
 > She would not be allowed to speak about such things unless given
 > EXACTLY what to say.  She's no more of a 'source' than Marlin Fitzwater
 > is.

I agree.  Don and I have discussed this, however he has seen the photograph
and is attempting to get a copy of it to have it analyzed for verification.
The photograph at this point, speaks for itself until it can be disproven as a
hoax.

Irregardless, your argument is a very valid one:  Demanding more proof than
just the word of some folks.  That is what I like to see :-)

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Unreal Articles
Date: 14 Jun 91 15:17:00 GMT

In a message to Steve Rose <06-10-91 13:12> David Villa wrote:
->the point that you only need the paper money is printed on
->to make replicas that only casual scrutiny will not reveal.
->

Didn't I just read where they are sewing strands of metal into the bills, to
make them detectable by airport x-ray machines? I'm sure this can also be
used to detect counterfeiting.

Jim

--
Jim Speiser - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 426

                             Monday, June 17th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                    Re: Ufons
                                  Miscellaneous
                               Re: Bashing Sheldon
                                  Phobos & USSR
                              Re: Hard Copy Booboo!
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                            Re: "Martian" Chronicles
                         Men in Black Countermeasures...
                            Re: "Martian" Chronicles
                                  Miscellaneous
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                                 bashing Sheldon
                              Re: Hard Copy Booboo!
                                Russian "octopus"
                                Russian "octopus"
                            Roswell & 'A Closer Look'
                                   UFO images redux
                              mib counter measures

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

From: [e-mail] (Peggy Noonan)
Subject: Re: Ufons
Date: 15 Jun 91 14:43:00 GMT

Hi Don,
        [blush from embarrassment!]  You're so right...I should've
taken a moment to pull the copy of UFO Magazine to name the editors or
provide the address -- apologies to the REAL top bananas! -- but I
guess it's BBSitis that's caused your name to be permanently etched
next to UFO Magazine in my mind.
        But it turned out to be a good thing after all as it gave you a
chance to re-post the savings announcement offered to Paranet users.  I
hadn't seen it (must've been posted when I was away for a while) so
maybe others will find it's news to them too and will now be able to
take advantage of such a great savings.
        Thanks for putting the correction in such gentle and humorous
terms!  Very kind of you.
                                ==Peggy==
--
Peggy Noonan - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: ncar!apple.com!well!ddrasin
Subject: Miscellaneous
Date: 15 Jun 91 21:47:17 GMT

From: well![e-mail] (Dan Drasin)

+ From: [e-mail] (Tyson Mitchiner)

+ Do you know if there are any plans to observe Cydonia with the Mars
+ Observer? If so, what kind of observation, how long, and what kind
+ of data/revelations we will be able to make from that kind of close-
+ up resolution?  Will that enable scientists to speculate with a good
+ degree of certainity if it is a natural formation or if it appears
+ to be intentionally created?

Viking's cameras (1976) had a resolution of 50 meters at the surface
of Mars. Mars Observer will have a camera aboard capable of *one*-
meter resolution. NASA has promised Robert A. Roe (past chairman of
the House Science Space and Technology) in writing that the Face will
be re-imaged at high resolution by Mars Observer. Roe had formally
requested that they do so because he was impressed with the work of
the independent investigation that has been going on for more than ten
years now.

However, as of now there are no guarantees that the features in
Cydonia will be re-imaged responsibly or thoroughly, therefore, the
next steps are:

1) to draft and circulate a complete protocol for the PROPER re-
imaging of Cydonia and other areas (we're working on it).

2) to obtain NASA/JPL's written agreement to follow the protocol.

There is the possiblity of a broadly-based petitioning action to
assure the latter. I'll keep you all posted on this.


It is generally understood that one-meter resolution photos will
answer the larger questions about the Martian mysteries.

Plenty has already been learned by doing state-of-the-art enhancements
of the old Viking photos (something NASA never did). I'm presently
collaborating with Dr. Mark Carlotto on a book about his work with the
Viking photos, which should be out by this fall. Title is THE MARTIAN
ENIGMAS: A CLOSER LOOK.


+ Flight 19

It's interesting to me how people jumped on the possible
identification of the Flight 19 planes as if finding them could
somehow erase the rather odd circumstances surroundng their initial
disappearance. Where did people start getting the idea that the many
still-inexplicable events recorded in the Bermuda Triangle over the
years necessarily had to have been caused specificaly by aliens in
order to be inexplicable? C'mon, fellas... finding the planes would
only have disproven *particular* scenarios, not the existence of a
larger mystery.


+ Why would anyone assume that anything this woman says has any
+ validity? The Russians have never been 'forthright' about anything
+ except their promises 'bury' us and to eventually take over the
+ world. I would place her in the same category of credibility as 'The
+ Woman from Venus.' She would not be allowed to speak about such
+ things unless given EXACTLY what to say.  She's no more of a
+ 'source' than Marlin Fitzwater is.
+ Greg ([e-mail])

Greg, this kind of comment presupposes the notion that 'the Russians'
(or any group one can apply a collective label to. How about blacks,
Indians, Jews, or for that matter, Americans?) are a totally
monolithic culture with no individuality. Anyone who has been halfway
awake for the past five years would surely notice that the suppression
of individuality in the Soviet Union has backlashed into a virtual
renaissance of the human spirit (still in progress. Stay tuned.).
Whatever culture one comes from, one still has one's personal
reputation to uphold... which tells me that while Dr. Popvich may be
human (hence prone to error or exaggeration) she is probably not about
to risk her status by being part of some cheap promotional stunt --
although there is always the possiblity, as you say, of her being an
innocent, or not-so-innocent, disinformer.

As for taking over the world, one could argue that the US and the
Soviet Union might now do it together, sooner than they would
separately. Anyone who seriously thinks the USSR in its present pickle
could be thinking about taking over the world (Jeezus -- they're even
talking about changing the name of Leningrad back to St Petersburg!)
has got to be living in a world very different from mine.


+ Re: Bob Nathan

+ I commend you on your interest in this case and the person that you
+ chose to discuss the rational side of the issue with, as I feel no
+ one better could be available.

+ Mike

Mike, isn't it a bit dangerous to say things like 'the rational side
of the issue?' -- as if, in the first place, any issue had only two
sides, and as if rationality itself weren't ultimately a subjective
issue? Remember that the very notion that there is anything at all to
study about UFOs is often considered quite irrational.  To most
people, the word 'rational' means nothing more than "*MY* point of
view!'

=d=


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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Delton)
Subject: Re: Bashing Sheldon
Date: 16 Jun 91 03:29:00 GMT

RE:Bruce v Robert
  Although I don't disagree with the substance of your messages on that
topic I do disagree with the idea that researchers should not be making
money off what they are doing.  Most mainline scientists make their
living thru their trade, science/research.  While many may well go to
some proffessional meetings and speak without charging a fee they are
using having all their expenses underwritten by their empolyer and are
not paying their own way out of pocket.  And the better known
researchers in the mainline fields do get substantial fees for making
presentations at professional semiars.  My brother-in-law, a chemist,
gets invited all over the world with all expenses paid, just to do
seminars a couple of times a year.
  Any material being presented by UFOlogists ought to be judged on it
merits (or more commonly perhaps, lack thereof) rather then on the fee,
if any, being paid.  While I would love to see the field improve, I
don't think anything would be gained by eliminating fees (I'm not sure
anything would be lost either!!)  Proceeding was IMHO only.
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Phobos & USSR
Date: 16 Jun 91 05:29:00 GMT

Greg Lush said in reference to Dr. Marina Popovich:

 > Why would anyone assume that anything this woman says has any validity?

Well, I would imagine because first she has a Ph.D. in aviation, she is a
retired military pilot that set 101 world aviation records, which 90 still
stand unbroken. She is a member of the Soviet Academy of Sciences, equivalent
to the US NASA agency, belongs to the Anomalous Phenomena Division of the
Academy of Sciences, she is the President of the World Association of Women
Scientists, she is a member of the International Association of Pilots-"99",
and she is the President of SACUFON, or the Association of Scientists
conducting research on the UFO phenomenon, poltergeist and other anomalous
phenomena.  Now-- does is answer your first question?

 > The Russians have never been 'forthright' about anything except their
 > promises 'bury' us and to eventually take over the world.

Yea, well back in 1961 that may have been true. However this is 1991, and now
even if they still wanted to, I doubt they have the cash to do it. Have you
been reading the news the last three years by chance?? The Iron Curtain has
fallen, they lost the political race and they know it.  For example, Boris
Yeltsin was elected President of Russia in free elections, the first free ones
in the USSR. The
Politburo legalized free travel for its citizens, people can now emigrate if
they wish. Changes are happening all over, so read the news and catch up on
current events. If we used your logic, we still would be pissed off at the
British for 1776, the Mexicans for 1836 and 1846, the South for 1861, etc.
People do move on.

 > I would place her in the same category of credibility as 'The Woman
 > from Venus.'

Well, what can I say except read my first note. I once had an uncle who gave
me some very good advice which I will pass on to you.

"It is always better to keep ones mouth shut so that the people around you
can only guess at your level of ignorance, than it is to open it and have
their suspicions confirmed."


Don

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: Hard Copy Booboo!
Date: 14 Jun 91 17:08:00 GMT


 > Would you mind stating which photo you refer to?

  It's the photo of what looks like a giant aerial octopus. Antonio
Huneeus has said that he's found that the "object" was actually an
exploding rocket booster from a previously-secret launch site.
  Also, if you compare that photo to the photos of the exploding Delta
from Vandenberg a few years ago, there's a close similarity.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 14 Jun 91 17:12:01 GMT


 > What is his reasoning?

  Ed says that he's afraid his originals won't ever be returned, which
I think is pretty reasonable.
  Bruce has said publicly that sometimes he's "forgotten" to return
original photos to their owners.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Allen)
Subject: Re: "Martian" Chronicles
Date: 15 Jun 91 08:23:04 GMT


 JS> So there's actually a newsgroup called
 JS> "alt.alien.visitors"?  Must have gotten started about the
 JS> time the big "these phenomena shouldn't be allowed to have
 JS> a newsgroup" war was raging in sci.skeptic.  (Which was the

There's always some wag on the "let's rm this newsgrp" kick. And
_then_ you have the infamous "Net Police" who just love to tell you
what you should'nt post and what is 'acceptable'..

The ones that *really* take the cake, are the posters that lay in wait
to flame _anything_ that's different than what _they_ think it should
be.

 JS> How active is it (messages/day would be fine)?  I've got to
 JS> decide whether to waste any money on it :-)

Depending on what your system's expires are and the polling rates..prob
around 10-15 a day is what it seems to average.


Your mileage may vary, depending on message content :-)

I do wish more people from ParaNet would post (if they have the access)..

I also wish someone would *please* post either on the echo here, the
mailing list or in alt.bbs.lists, the current ParaNet BBS listing.

I keep getting email from users who wish to know which BBS in their
area has access to the PN echo and danged if I can help them out.

Perhaps either Mike or Paul Faeder can post such a list?

Regards,
Don

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: Men in Black Countermeasures...
Date: 14 Jun 91 15:13:00 GMT

Hello Linda!

 LB> What do you do if you FAINT first when seeing a MIB, which is what I'd
 LB> do!!  Next, how does one stay so cool to do the things you suggest?

By realizing that the chance of meeting these so-called comic book 'MIB'
characters face-to-face, is about as much as meeting a Grey in person. ;-)


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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: "Martian" Chronicles
Date: 16 Jun 91 02:56:01 GMT


 > I also wish someone would *please* post either on the echo here,
 > the
 > mailing list or in alt.bbs.lists, the current ParaNet BBS
 > listing.

  Download paradir.asc from my general ufo files dir and you'll have a
list of PN nodes.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Miscellaneous
Date: 17 Jun 91 08:02:00 GMT


 > From: well![e-mail] (Dan Drasin)


 > Viking's cameras (1976) had a resolution of 50 meters at the surface
 > of Mars. Mars Observer will have a camera aboard capable of *one*-
 > meter resolution. NASA has promised Robert A. Roe (past chairman of
 > the House Science Space and Technology) in writing that the Face will
 > be re-imaged at high resolution by Mars Observer. Roe had formally
 > requested that they do so because he was impressed with the work of
 > the independent investigation that has been going on for more than ten
 > years now.
 >
 > However, as of now there are no guarantees that the features in
 > Cydonia will be re-imaged responsibly or thoroughly, therefore, the
 > next steps are:
 >
 > 1) to draft and circulate a complete protocol for the PROPER re-
 > imaging of Cydonia and other areas (we're working on it).
 >
 > 2) to obtain NASA/JPL's written agreement to follow the protocol.
 >
 > There is the possiblity of a broadly-based petitioning action to
 > assure the latter. I'll keep you all posted on this.
 >
 >
 > It is generally understood that one-meter resolution photos will
 > answer the larger questions about the Martian mysteries.
 >
 > Plenty has already been learned by doing state-of-the-art enhancements
 > of the old Viking photos (something NASA never did). I'm presently
 > collaborating with Dr. Mark Carlotto on a book about his work with the
 > Viking photos, which should be out by this fall. Title is THE MARTIAN
 > ENIGMAS: A CLOSER LOOK.

Please keep us informed of this.  I like the suggested procedure for handling
this.

 > + Re: Bob Nathan
 >
 > + I commend you on your interest in this case and the person that you
 > + chose to discuss the rational side of the issue with, as I feel no
 > + one better could be available.
 >
 > + Mike
 >
 > Mike, isn't it a bit dangerous to say things like 'the rational side
 > of the issue?' -- as if, in the first place, any issue had only two
 > sides, and as if rationality itself weren't ultimately a subjective
 > issue? Remember that the very notion that there is anything at all to
 > study about UFOs is often considered quite irrational.  To most
 > people, the word 'rational' means nothing more than "*MY* point of
 > view!'

I only meant that in the instance of Gulf Breeze.  There *is* an irrational or
irresponsible side to this whole affair.  That is the past history that has
been demonstrated by the primary investigative organ, MUFON.  I find
dismissing associates from the organization for their divergent positions on
the case to be politically motivated and couched in the fear of exposure of
elements that could discredit the entire case.  I have talked to a lot of
these "victims" of the "ax", and find them to have valid points.  I, myself
and ParaNet, have been a victim of this political movement to squelch those
against the party line.  If MUFON represents a scientific organization, then
let the peers have access to the data for an independent verification.  Of
course, we certainly won't hold our breath on this one...the movie is still
being negotiated.

Further, I have talked to Ed and Dr. Nathan, and know that Nathan did not have
any belief in the case, such as Ed has alluded to in his book.  I find this to
be another example of the problems that lie with the Gulf Breeze case and Ed's
credibility.

Now the question is, "Why won't Ed make the originals available for study by
an independent optical physicist?"

And, on and on....

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 17 Jun 91 08:58:00 GMT


 >  > What is his reasoning?
 >
 >   Ed says that he's afraid his originals won't ever be returned, which I
 > think is pretty reasonable.
 >   Bruce has said publicly that sometimes he's "forgotten" to return
 > original photos to their owners.

That is the farthest thing from reasonable considering Ed told me that he
would take them personally to the photo lab where the tests were to be done.

Sounds very interesting.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: bashing Sheldon
Date: 16 Jun 91 03:01:02 GMT


 > I'm greatly interested in setting up such a database and have
 > access to
 > the required laboratory environment. Any suggestions?

  Sounds like a wonderful idea, but I suspect it'd end up on a
pay-for-it-yourself basis. Might be a good idea to talk with Bruce M.
and FUFOR about it, though.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: Hard Copy Booboo!
Date: 16 Jun 91 03:02:03 GMT


 > What I would like to know is the source of the poster's
 > information
 > to aid in verifying or repudiating his report.

  I'm going from memory here. I believe that was the photo that
Antonio Huneeus said turned out to have been a booster rocket
explosion from a previously-secret launch site. I'll try to find out
more and post it if I find anything.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Russian "octopus"
Date: 16 Jun 91 05:23:00 GMT


  I finally found the reference regarding the "octopus" photo Marina
Popovich flashed on tv.
  It's in _Red Skies: The Great 1989 UFO Wave in the USSR_, by J.
Antonio Huneeus, in the 1990 MUFON Symposium Proceedings.

  "Yet another complicating factor (in USSR UFO reporting) was the
secrecy that permeated most of the Soviet government and society in
the period before Gorbachev. American space expert and UFO skeptic
James Oberg has convincingly demonstrated how famous UFO sightings
like the "jellyfish affair" in Petrozavodsk in September of 1977 and
other sightings in Moscow in June of 1980 were, in fact, caused by the
launching of top secret Cosmos Early Warning satellites from the
northern Plesetsk Cosmodrome. The very existence of this space
facility was then publicly denied by the Kremlin, so UFOs were often
used as a convenient cover to hide secret space and military tests.
According to Oberg, thjis same explanation is applicable to much of
the 1967 UFO wave in teh USSR, which was documented by astronomer
Felix Zigel. It is important to note that since glasnost has revealed
the existence of Plesetsk and many other previously secret facilities
and programs, the USSR Academy of Sciences now recognizes officially
many of Oberg's solutions as "Plesetsk IFOs," giving him credit for
them."

end quote

  I've personally seen one launch vehicle explosion (Challenger) and I
saw many times the film clip of the Delta explosion at VAFB a while
back. The "jellyfish/octopus" photo is very similar.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Russian "octopus"
Date: 16 Jun 91 05:25:01 GMT


  I don't mean to be coming off as a rabid debunker. I just thought it
rather odd that Marina Popovich was waving around that "octopus"
photo.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Roswell & 'A Closer Look'
Date: 17 Jun 91 15:53:22 GMT

I happened to be at home at mid-day on Friday, June 14th, due to an
unusual schedule that day, and turned on the TV at random and ran into
a program I had never heard of before, called 'A Closer Look', on
which they were interviewing witnesses from the 1947 Roswell UFO crash
and gov't cover-up incident. It appeared to be a fairly objective and
straightforward account of the incident and the witnesses were presented
in a fair manner. I joined it in the middle, so do not know how the first
part of the program was structured -- what I saw was a stage set with a
lady interviewing two people who appeared to be investigators of the
incident, coupled with taped interviews of the witnesses (which appeared
to have been conducted on-site in New Mexico).

One exchange sticks in my mind. The investigator was saying something
like 'it is high time the media got into this story', and the lady interviewer
responded with something like 'we have, now, here on this show'. I found
that pretty amusing; these people, on what appears to be a syndicated
'tabloid news' type program that plays to a limited daytime or
off-prime-time audience, characterizing themselves as 'the media'. What
the investigator obviously meant was 'the Real media' -- having this
coverage on 60 Minutes or the NBC Nightly News, not in some
fringe-journalism outlet. I seem to recall 'Unsolved Mysteries' did a
Roswell segment, but that's still not the kind of first-string media
coverage that would reach the widest coverage with the attitude of
legitimacy that is needed.

Anyway, I have no idea how likely it is that this 'A Closer Look'
program will be accessible to readers of this list, or if it is at all
possible that this particular program will be repeated or made available
for later viewing. In what I saw, there was nothing in particular tying
it to June 14 1991, so maybe the same show will be aired at other dates
in other markets. (I saw it here in St. Louis, MO.)

Regards, Will
[e-mail]




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


From: ncar!watson.acc.virginia.edu!JBB
Subject:      UFO images redux
Date: 17 Jun 91 17:37:51 GMT

From: [e-mail]


+From what I have read and heard, I am convinced that he (Dr. Bruce
+Maccabee) is an extremely qualified and capable scientist. I just
+wish he would attempt to cooperate a bit more with Nathan.

Well, I'm not sure what Bruce can do about this - so far as I know,
Ed has the only set of keys to the safe. But there does seem to be a
general appreciation of the need to set these photos or their elec-
tronic equivalents in the public domain so that lack of access will
not heighten the controversy. This of course brings us back to the
database idea. Do you think Bob Nathan would be willing to help de-
fine a set of standards for electronically archiving and accessing
UFO imagery?

To start, I see a need for a draft standard outlining the objectives
of the database archive and some tentative recommendations regarding
pixel quantization level, pixel density, color-separation filter re-
quirements and transport format. I'm now working on this and will be
glad to post a rough draft in a few weeks. I'm adding recommendations
regarding the physical location (internet node) of the archive itself
as well as suggested access modes for various user classes as was
mentioned here earlier. The final version of the draft specification
will be sent to a list of interested parties, Nathan, Maccabee, Swords,
Rodeghier and other researchers here in the U.S. as well as those I'm
able to locate overseas. The key idea here is to elicit agreement
among professionals in the field as to what constitutes an acceptable,
research-oriented image archive, and I would greatly appreciate any
input about this, particularly as to what people should be contacted.

The next step is a little more difficult. Regardless of its technical
sophistication, the database will be useless unless it has something
in it. What procedures should be followed to encourage owners or copy-
right holders of original imagery to make it available to the archive?
What kind of legal protection should be provided for all concerned?
All nice questions for which there are no answers yet.

Once the research is completed and I know (hopefully) a lot more about
what's going to be involved, I plan to draft a formal report and submit
it to the SEE for publication. But this is many months away ...

+Why Bob Nathan you ask? Yes, there are many competent people with
+well equipped labs anxious to look at Ed's original polaroids, but
+Bob was one of the first in line after Bruce. Moreover, Ed
+certainly perpetrated a great injustice upon Bob insofar as failing
+to EVEN MENTION Bob's 'negative' opinion re: the GB photos. I find
+this especially strange since Nathan went public with his analysis
+more than 1 1/2 years prior to the publication of Walters' book!

Can you refer me to a source for Bob's original analysis? I'm new to
this game and obviously need some direction!

+I'm convinced this omission was deliberate. I wonder, what does
+Bruce think about that? What I have even more difficulty with is
+understanding why Nathan's and Maccabee's opinions are so
+disparate. Perhaps the answer lies with the original prints,
+perhaps elsewhere. You state that '...Walters would be crazy to
+send originals to Cal Tech...', yet apparently he feels comfortable
+in sending them to Bruce. Why?

I really can't say, Sheldon. Bring me up to speed and I'll ask! But
a good reason might involve the differences between their professional
disciplines. Maccabee is an optical physicist, I believe. Nathan is
a specialist in image analysis. As to Ed's feelings, I simply don't
know.

Regards, Joe




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


From: ncar!cwns2.INS.CWRU.Edu!aa245
Subject: mib counter measures
Date: 17 Jun 91 18:00:48 GMT

From: [e-mail] (Robert Parish)


      Counter Measures for Men In Black Encounters
                       PART 1 OF 2
   After reading various reports of people who have had
encounters with Men In Black after a UFO related siting or
happening, It has brought to my attention that common,
average people without any previous military tactical or
planing training are defenseless to the tactics that have
been reported to frighten and intimidate these people to be
silent or change their minds about reporting or turning over
any information or evidence to UFO Investigators. I have
decided that this would be a good application of some of my
U.S. Army (Over Training) that I have acquired in my younger
days. This should not deal with weapons or combat, but more
of a counter physiological warfare approach. Although weapons
training and hand to hand combat training greatly enhance
confidence of an individuals ability to cope with an
abnormal encounter situation. It gives you a power platform
to relate from. The so called (EDGE). But knowledge and
reasoning is a greater power and can and should be used first
to avoid any physical conflict.
   The key to winning any conflict either mental or physical
is to turn the enemies forces exerted against himself or to
use it for your advantage and to exploit his weaknesses.
Remembering and working from some of the Men In Black
document files I have read, I will try to recreate some
reported situations of Men In Black encounters and give the
reader my responses to repel, stop or eliminate the Men In
Black threat.
   First, we will start off with the hypothesis that you have
witnessed an unusual aerial craft and you have reported what
you have seen to the press or radio or television reporters.
That your story was printed or told on radio or television by
reporters. And then a big new black car arrives at your
address with two men dressed in black show up on your front
porch or doorstep. They knock, ring your door bell and you go
to the door and there they are! The Men In Black! You spot
the big knew black car!
END OF PART 1 OF 2 (MEN IN BLACK COUNTERMEASURES)
PART 2 OF 2 in NEXT MESSAGE
WRITTEN BY: ROBERT PARISH, NEOPC BBS
            aa245, FREE NET





********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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 427

                           Wednesday, June 19th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                Re: Crop Circles
                             Hill Abduction: 1 Of 7
                             Hill Abduction: 2 Of 7
                             Hill Abduction: 3 Of 7
                             Hill Abduction: 4 Of 7
                             Hill Abduction: 5 Of 7
                             Hill Abduction: 6 Of 7
                             Hill Abduction: 7 Of 7

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Crop Circles
Date: 18 Jun 91 06:46:00 GMT


 * Originally from Robert Lee
 * Originally dated 06-04-91 11:15

 BL> I follow what you are saying about the stalks in the crop circles being
 BL> bent like cooked asparagus then hardening that way, but I sure would
 BL> like to see it myself!  Thanks for the information.  Becky

I have stood in the center of a crop circle which occurred in a corn field in
an area within reasonable driving distance from my region.  The circle was
23' in radius, perfectly circular, and was about 300 yards from a person's
home. The stalks were not uniformly bent at exactly the same height; but the
average height of bend was about 1 foot.  All stalks were swirled clockwise.
While I could find no apparent evidence of placement of a center from which
to circumscribe a perfect circle, the lack of uniform depression of the
height of stalks suggested that the depresser was not a solid object.  The
stalks were each bent in an arc circumscribing a small portion of the radius
of the complete rotation.  Stalks just outside the circle were complete
undisturbed and gave no indication of turbulence to their leaves.  There
appeared to be no indication of heat damage to any of the stalks within the
diameter of the circle itself.  The farmer who originally found the circle
reported finding no evidence of footprints in or about the circle when it was
found.  He reported that about 2 weeks prior to his beginning his harvest
that his cattle and dogs were disturbed about 2 A.M. but he saw nothing.  The
resident living some 300 yards away from the circle reported seeing nothing
and noticing no unsual events 2 weeks prior.  Unsubstantiated rumors of
sighting of some "beautifully lighted ship" circulated for a time as being
seen by some teens in the area but none of these were ever named; the farmer
said that he wished he had never reported his find as his phone was ringing
off the hook at all hours of the day and night and that calls were from what
he described as "kooks" or reporters.

Because the lack of uniformity of height of the depression of the stalks it
is my conclusion that whatever it was that caused the depression was not a
solid 46' diameter object; rather it was either not solid or was not 46' in
diameter. It is my conclusion that whatever it was possessed some single
uniform angular velocity originating at the center of the circle.  It is my
conclusion, due to the arcing of each individual stalk, that there was,
indeed, a center from which emanated the angular velocity.  That the spin was
clockwise could possible be due to 1)chance, 2)design, or 3)the Coriollis
effect.  The local university investigated the site and found no indication
of radiation of any type.

To have set a rod and used rope to create such a circle with the average bend
at about 1 foot above the ground and a 23' radius would have required some
tremendous angular momentum (which could be calculated, but I have not done
so).  Neither have I attempted to reproduce such a circle using a rod and a
rope (although this would be a good thing to do for empirical testing).  A
few of the stalks stood sheered off at about 2 feet above the ground.

In placing the circle in relation to local topography, some 100 feet
immediately to the west was an earthen dyke some 12 feet high running north-
south containing a small drainage creek.  To the north, some 220 feet away
was a state highway ridge about 15 feet high running east-west.  To the
south, some 1/4 mile was a high river bluff, and to the east was flat
farmland for miles. There was no industrial site nearby; no high tension
lines nearby.  There appeared to be no particular oddities about the area of
the placement.

Net conclusion: ?

Hypotheses: 1) It was made with a rod and a rope.
            2) It was made by something not solid possessing angular
               velocity which was not radioactive and was not heated.

I am going to visit the site a few more times and observe new corn growth.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Hill Abduction: 1 Of 7
Date: 18 Jun 91 06:29:00 GMT

This information should be attributed to Barbara Becker.  The file is named
HILL.LTR and is in seven parts.  This is part one of an examination of the
book Interrupted Journey by Fuller. -+---------------------------------------------------------------
----------
--

Name: Barb Becker #106 @3466
Date: Sat Jun 02 02:10:39 1990

   Sometime ago I received a paper form a researcher in Columbia Missouri on
the Hill case. I found the paper very interesting but wondered if his conclu-
sions were accurate. I decided to contact Mrs. Hill. I told her about the BBS
and that I wanted to put the paper on the board, but wanted to let her know
what was being said and offer her a chance for rebuttal/corrections. She ac-
cepted. What follows is the paper, and then two letters from her. I have used
[brackets] to show her corrections.

                  ******************************************

                 INTELLIGENCE, MEDIA CONNECTIONS IN UFO CASES
                UFOsearch / Val Germann / Columbia, Mo. / 1990

#2  The Hill Abduction Case, 1961, source: Interrupted Journey

SEPT. 18-19  [Sept. 19-20] Barney and Betty Hill abducted in the White Moun-
tains of New Hampshire. They remember part of the experience but have over 2
hours of "missing time," of which they are totally unaware at first. Barney
remembers seeing huge object with "fins with red lights on the ends" and
"crew members behind glass" panels at very short range. This object was more
than 100 feet across and hovered 50 feet above the ground only 300 feet away
for several minutes Barney watched through binoculars.

SEPT. 20  Betty Hill calls her sister and tells her part of the story. Sister
then calls a local physicist who suggested they check for radiation. Sister
also calls local police chief who suggests they call Pease AFB, Portsmouth,
N.H. Betty calls the Air Force Base, worried about radiation. The officer who
answers was at first "cynical and unresponsive" but finally did ask to talk
to Barney. After Barney mentioned the "fins with lights" the officer perked
up and said the call was being "monitored". Barney felt that the officer was
definitely interested. Barney did not mention the figures he had seen behind
the glass through binoculars.

SEPT. 21  Major Paul Anderson, Intelligence Officer for the 100th Bomb Group,
Pease AFB, calls back, says he has stayed up all night working on a report of
this incident. Asked Barney for the size of the object. Barney says it
appeared as big as a dinner plate held at arms length. Major Anderson filed a
report with Blue Book, #100-1-61.

SEPT. 23  Betty [Barney] Hill Goes to the local Library and finds one of
Major Donald Keyhoe's books on UFOs. Takes down his address.

SEPT. 26  Betty Hill writes to Keyhoe in Washington, D.C., describing the
incident as she remembers it. Fuller reports that NICAP (Keyhoe's
organization) was getting 40,000 letters a year.

SEPT. 30  Ten days after the sighting Betty Hill begins to have a series of
vivid and awesome dreams, which Fuller does not tell us about. They continue
for five days and then stop.

OCT. 4  Keyhoe is asked to lunch by Robert Hohman and someone named C.D.
Jackson, "senior engineer" for a "notable electronics company", name
withheld. They are supposedly working on a paper about extra-terrestrial
contacts that Nikola Tesla, David Todd and Marconi were alleged to have
experienced in the early part of the century. Keyhoe tells them about the
Hills.

OCT. 21  Walter Webb, investigtaor for Keyhoe's NICAP and an astronomer [lec-
turer] with the Hayden Planetarium, New York, N.Y., comes to interview the
Hills. He is there several hours. Betty does not tell him about her dreams.
Barney tells of the "captain" and others he saw through the glass.

OCT. 25?  Betty begins to have a series of dreams following an experience in
the car. She had panicked as she and Barney had come upon a stalled auto in
the road with some people standing around it. That night she dreamed of being
taken into a UFO and given some sort of examination.

OCT. 26  Webb's report goes to NICAP in Washington. He had not been contacted
by Keyhoe directly but through the mail by Richard Hall, NICAP's secretary.
He had been skeptical. He was very much impressed by the Hills, however.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Hill Abduction: 2 Of 7
Date: 18 Jun 91 06:30:00 GMT

This is part two of an examination of the book Interrupted Journey by Fuller.
-+---------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOV. 3  Hohman and Jackson write the Hills asking for an interview. They tell
the Hills that they are serious minded men whose interest is in "verifying
the origin of these vehicles according to existing scientific theory
maintained by Hermann Oberth." Oberth was of V-2 rocket fame. They did not
reveal their place of employment but permission was granted.

NOV. 25  Hohman and Jackson come to the house to interview the Hills. "Also
visiting that day" is Major James McDonald, a long-time friend of the Hills
and an Air Force intelligence officer. It appears he asks no questions about
who Homan and Jackson are. The Hills had "discussed the case many times with
Maj. McDonald." The three of them spend 12 hours talking to the Hills about
their experience, including the "men" behind the glass. Major McDonald
suggests hypnosis but does not know any therapists. The matter rests here for
some time. Both Hills begin to be concerned about the incident and the chance
they may have been hallucinating.

MAR., 1962  Betty Hill writes to a doctor recommended by a colleague. The
Hills see him and tell their stories. The doctor recommends they wait and see
if the problem subsides on its own. No therapy is attempted.

SUMMER, 1962  Barney begins to see a psychiatrist about his anxiety but only
briefly mentions the UFO incident.

SEPT., 1962  The Hills are invited to a "UFO Study Group" to informally talk
about their experience. That meeting is taped, by whom Fuller does not say,
unknown to the Hills. Betty talked of her dreams, the dream of the physical
examination.

SEPT., 1963  The Hills tell their church discussion group about the UFO inci-
dent. That same day Captain Ben Swett, from Pease AFB, was to talk about hyp-
nosis, which he had made a personal hobby of his. The Hills are encouraged by
Major McDonald to talk to their church friends about their experience and en-
couraged by Capt. Swett to undergo hypnosis. Barney is experiencing extreme
psychological disturbances as a result of the UFO sighting and abduction. He
would die in the late 1960's at the age of 46.


Television movie THE UFO INCIDENT with James Earl Jones and Estelle Parsons.
Dr. Simon had been technical advisor on a WWII movie made by John Huston
called LET THERE BE LIGHT.

JUNE, 1964  Sessions with Dr. Simon end.

FALL [Oct.], 1965  Sensational articles run in Boston newspaper about the
Hills experience. Information taken from tape made at the Sept., 1962 "UFO
Study Group" meeting, provenance unknown.

NOV., 1965  Unitarian Church in Dover, N.H., invites the Hills to talk. Hills
meet with Admiral Knowles, NICAP, before they speak. Also on program is a
Public Information Officer from Pease, AFB, who is a member of the Church
[not a church member] and has helped set up the event. He does not attack the
Hills. At this time a huge UFO flap was underway in the area and hundreds of
people were turned away from the church on a cold and raw evening. The usual
attendance for the weekly Unitarian sessions: 40 people.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Hill Abduction: 3 Of 7
Date: 18 Jun 91 06:30:00 GMT

This is part 3 of an examination of the book Interrupted Journey by Fuller.
-+---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AS YOU CAN SEE from the simple chronology above (assembled from John Fuller's
book with difficulty) there is more going on in the Hill case than meets the
eye.

WHO WERE "HOMANN and C.D. Jackson?" Who were they really working for? Why was
a "major electronics firm" paying them to investigate 60-year-old fairy tales
about Nikola Tesla? What "scientific theories" held by Hermann Oberth could
be of interest to an "electronics firm."  What we actually have here is a
"cover" for intelligence activity.

IN ALIENS FROM SPACE, 1973, Keyhoe says that these two "engineers" were
"aiding NICAP."  That is not the impression that is given in Fuller's book.
In INTERRUPTED JOURNEY the strong impression is that these two gentlemen
simply had an independent interest due to a strange research assignment from
their company. This could be accepted in 1966. In 1990 we know better.

YOU SEE, by the fall of 1963 a gentleman named C.D. Jackson was working for
Time/Life Corporation in an executive position. In fact, he was helping to
arrange a $25,000 payment to the widow of Lee Harvey Oswald.

IN CASE YOU HAVE forgotten, Time/Life bought the Zapruder Film for $150,000
and then made sure it was not shown as a film for many years. Then, when it
was shown, it had been obviously altered. David Lifton in BEST EVIDENCE says
that the film was at the CIA's photo interpretation lab the day Time/Life
bought it.

DOES THE FACT THAT Donald Keyhoe had lunch with C.D. Jackson just after
getting Betty Hill's letter "resonate" with you? It does with this author.
Donald Keyhoe was, in UFOsearch's opinion, running a two-track operation. In
the public and with his organization he was not interested in "contactee"
stories. But on deep background he was involved with another investigation,
one connected with the intelligence community. Were they running him?

CONSIDER THIS. In ALIENS FROM SPACE Keyhoe says that "A well-known
journalist, John Fuller, had learned of the case in a confidential talk at
NICAP. It was arranged that he should prepare the record using Dr. Simon's
taped questions and the Hill's answers." Then Keyhoe says: INTERRUPTED
JOURNEY received a surprising amount of serious attention compared to the
usual treatment of "contactee stories." How interesting.

YES--AND THE "abduction story" has become a staple of the UFO investigator.
Indeed, the sanitized Hill story became the ONLY abduction movie ever made
screen, it never ran in theaters. The same could almost be said for COMMUNION
which was not widely distributed and died a very quick death. It will be in
video stores by mid-1990 which, I think, is the idea.

OTHER QUESTIONS: How did it happen that one of the Hill's best friends was an
Air Force Intelligence Officer who just happened to be visiting the day that
Hohman and Jackson showed up? Isn't it interesting that they were the ones
who first made the Hills aware of their "missing time?" Isn't it interesting
that they were the ones who suggested hypnosis?

ISN'T IT INTERESTING that the man finally called in to do the regressions on
the Hills was the Executive officer of the Army's main psychiatric hospital
during World War II, who did his undergraduate work at Johns Hopkins
University whose wartime president was a member of MAJESTIC-12 and who was
the technical advisor on the major WWII propaganda film made by the famous
director John Huston? The Hills went through two other therapists before
going to Simon. Did they have the money to pay this gentlemen, who must have
been very, very expensive? This is something Fuller does not talk about. Did
NICAP pay their way?

UNPLEASANT POSSIBILITY  The Hills were "set up" by the people dealing with
the so-called "Greys" out in New Mexico. The Hill case was either a
deep-cover check on what the "Greys" were doing under the "agreement" or it
was an even deeper-cover attempt at "disinformation" to get "abductions" in
play--safely.

END HILL CASE

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Hill Abduction: 4 Of 7
Date: 18 Jun 91 06:30:00 GMT

This is a letter from Betty Hill to Barb Becker which speaks to the previous
examination of the book Interrupted Journey by Fuller, (previous 3 messages).
-+---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Letter from Betty Hill:

  Scientists, working at top level government jobs. Their HOBBY was ufos. As
a job protection for them, we agreed not to release their employment, altho
it was well known to us. C D Jackson was never associated with Time/Life. We
had continuing contacts with them. Jackson, in 1966, was still working in
Alabama, at the same employment. Most of our friends were officers at Pease
AFB. Usually, we all met at the Officers Club every Friday night. Barney's
best friend was a Lt. Col. in Intelligence. Jim McDonald was a Major; also a
friend who dated one of my best friends. Later they married. We visited each
other regularly. Jim McDonald suggested hypnosis because our mutual friend,
Capt. Ben Swett, officer at Pease, did this. Ben felt his type of hypnosis
was not adequate, as he used only a light stage, which is the stage of
suggestibility. Dr Ben Simon had left military service years before we met
him and he was in private practice. Dr Stephans referred us to him because he
knew he used medical hypnosis, taught in medical school, when Dr. Stephans
had been one of his students. As for the movie, "Let Their Be Light" dealt
with medical hypnosis used by Dr Simon to treat servicemen returning from
WW2, and restoring them to good health. A wonderful movie - it should be
released to the public. As for two therapists; we consulted one, one
appointment. Barney was seen be Dr Duncan Stephans, but I was not. As for the
cost of our appointments with Dr Simon, it is true he was very expensive. Our
health insurance paid one-half of this. Bill was submitted for "therapy
following ufo capture".  We paid the remaining half, which was in the
thousands of dollars. John Fuller did not learn of our experience from NICAP,
or Donald Keyhoe. From them, he learned the information which resulted in his
book, INCIDENT IN EXETER. He was in this area, gathering information for
this, when the Boston newspaper articles were published. As for "Unpleasant
Possibility" - Pure Paranoia! Nothing "sinister" about our experience or our
friends. And the UFO definitely had nothing to do with New Mexico. It would
be appreciated if you would send me a corrected copy for your computer. Nice
to hear from you -

                                            Sincerely,
                                            Betty  (signed)
                                            Betty Hill

P.S. How I know those who captured us were not from New Mexico -- No alien-
government base exists there. Apparently this story began when a woman in a
light trance of hypnosis told of being taken there.
   Ed Conroy, a writer, and a friend Dora Ruffner did an investigation of
this. They learned the locations of these so-called bases were located on the
reservation of the Jicarilla Apache Tribe, a restricted area. So they met
with the tribal leaders and obtained permission to research the areas, with
guides and without them. They explored the areas. All they found was an
abondoned water tower that had been used in the past when a railroad ran thru
this area; also a house habited by an Apache family. No gravel roads, no
towers, no government or any other kind of installations. Ed Conroy was the
first person to research this report - He is a reporter on arts and
electronic media for the San Antonio Express News. He should be included on
your computer network.

                                            Betty Hill

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Hill Abduction: 5 Of 7
Date: 18 Jun 91 06:31:00 GMT

The following is BBS correspondence between Barb Becker and Betty Hill.
-+---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Betty Hill part 4
Name: Barb Becker #106 @3466
Date: Sat Jun 02 02:14:30 1990

I wrote to Mrs. Hill again and thanked her for her comments and asked if she
would like to make a statement for the BBS regarding her experience, the fol-
lowing is her response.


April  2, 1990

Dear Barbara Becker,

   I think probably the easiest way to answer your questions is to list the
events as they occured.
   Let me say first, that in a case like ours, our conscious mind did not re-
member all, but our subconscious mind did.
   We considered the beginning of our capture was the time when Barney was
standing in the field, watching the craft, when one of the humanoids said
something to him, resulting in his panic and running back to the car, yelling
they were trying to capture us. As we went speeding along the highway to
avoid capture, we heard the beeping sounds, and the car vibrated. When Barney
turned into a secondary road, I thought we knew a short cut on our way home,
and did not question this. Then we saw what we called the moon setting on the
ground. We assumed the moon was setting, and we could see the trees in front
of this. The next, Barney turned onto a dirt road, in the direction of the
setting moon. Before I could question him about this, we saw the men standing
in the road, blocking our way - and we could not remember beyond this point.
We remembered looking for the highway, but before we reached this, we saw the
craft again as it passed over the secondary road in front of us. When we
entered onto the main highway, we heard a second series of beeping sounds.
And we came home, looking for the craft all the way and not seeing it. At
home, Barney's first remark was "It is 5 o'clock, We should have been home by
3 AM at the latest." This time was from our kitchen clock, for both our
watches had stopped running - this puzzled us, that both stopped about the
same time. Barney began to unload our belongings from the car. We agreed they
should not be brought into the house, so they were left on the back porch for
a couple of days. Then we took long showers, shampoos for we felt "very
dirty". We agreed that something had happened, we did not know what it was,
but we could not talk about it. We would forget about it as quickly as
possible. The next day I went out to my car, and found highly polished spots
on the trunk in a circular pattern. I became very upset, saying maybe we had
been exposed to something dangerous - the spots should be checked out. So I
called my sister who called a physist who suggested checking the spots with a
compass, which I did. When the compass was very erratic, I called my sister
again to tell her of this. At that time a police officer was at her home, and
I talked with him - told him about the night before. He said they had orders
to tell witnesses to call Pease Air Force Base and report this sighting. So
we called Pease and told them about the sighting, but ommitted about Barney
seeing the humanoids. Our next step was to return to the Mountains, looking
for a secondary road, the dirt road, thinking if we could find these, we
could remember what happened after we saw the "men in the road". We went back
regularly, in all kinds of weather, looking but not finding the dirt road.
While we were there, we asked everyone we saw, if they ever saw any strange
lights in the sky, received hundreds of reports - meeting with groups of 50
or more at a time, who told of their sightings, but none with an experience
similar to ours, which we did not discuss.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Hill Abduction: 6 Of 7
Date: 18 Jun 91 06:31:00 GMT


   About six to eight weeks after this experience, we came home one night, and
found on the kitchen table a pile of dried leaves. Our first response
was - someone has been in our home! When I began to clean up the leaves, I
found my blue ear rings I was wearing that night. That was panic - how did I
lose them and who returned them? And how did they get into our home? Next was
my dress. The second time I had worn this, and now it was covered with a pink
powdery substance. I put it outside, and the powdery substance blew away, but
it left pink stains all over my dress. Also the hem and some seams were torn
- it had a built in lining - badly torn. To go back, to ten nights after this
experience, I had a series of dreams, for five nights, of being captured,
taken on board, given a physical exam. At that time, Barney worked midnight
to 8 AM, so he was not here. I typed out these dreams and hid them, never
discussed them until the time of our hypnosis with Dr. Simon. As for Hohman
and Jackson, they had attended some kind of Geological Conference in
Washington DC and met Donald Keyhoe there. After the Conference they told him
they had a hobby, and interest in flying saucers (the term at that time) He
let them read Walt Webb's report of his meeting with us. Hohman wrote to us,
asking to meet with us. We agreed for at than time, we knew nothing about
ufos, and we were quietly seeking some explanation for our expereince. Hohman
was from New York, and Jackson was from Alabama, so we needed to wait until
these two were together. When they were here, Barney told them about the
humanoid saying something to him, which he could not remember - this was very
upsetting to him. We told them about the setting moon just before we turned
on to the dirt road. They said we could not have seen the moon, for it had
already set. Panic by both of us. So they suggested we take a road map, and
pinpoint our location at different times. We knew we had left Colebrook about
10 PM, the restaurant there. We were able to pinpoint the locations and times
most of the way, but at one point between Plymouth and Ashland was a blank.
So they suggested we go back to this general area. Then we talked about time
- we could drive to Canada in seven hours, and it had taken us seven hours to
come home from Colebrook. There had to be an explanation. Later this was
called a missing time period. But right from the beginning Barney and I knew
the trip home was much longer then it should have been. We continued to go
back to the mountains, looking for the dirt road, asking people about their
sightings. Then we began asking if anyone had ever seen the people aboard the
crafts. No. No one knew Barney had seen them and remembered this. As for a
hallucination, I was and am a trained social worker. I know the conditions
which must exist for a hallucination to occur - for both people to have the
same one, at the same time, does not happen. Dr. Simon confirmed this
impossibility. As for the car incident, we both became upset at the same
time, but I had already had my dreams. We were puzzled as to the reasons we
responded the way we did. If we had not had all these upsetting events
happen, without explanation, we would had never have spent thousands of
dollars going to Dr. Simon. We went to him, to get rid of our anxieties, not
for a ufo capture. He worked with us for seven months, every week. But I
learned during these sessions when he was putting our amnesia back so we
could not remember, that we must see him every week for him to reinforce the
amnesia. If we did not do this, we would remember in about ten days - the
same length of time, after this experience, that I had my dreams. Now I know
I recalled these events, in my dreams, as a result of the lessening of their
control of my memory.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Hill Abduction: 7 Of 7
Date: 18 Jun 91 06:31:00 GMT


   After our hypnosis, we went back to the area, and went directly to the
secondary road, to the dirt road. Found the cleared area in the woods where
the craft was down. Since that time, three labs have tried to analyze the
pink stains on my dress without success. I agree with you the field of
UFOlogy is filled with disinformation. They have done more to cover real
activities by ufos than any other group. As for my social worker background,
I know that insecure people have a terrible time with things they do not
understand, and must develop an explanation, satisfactory to themselves,
which usually is a fantasy. I dislike the term "missing time" for everyone
has missing time. The human brain is incapable of remembering every little
detail of our lives, every moment. No one can remember everything that
happened yesterday. I have worked with those who have been captured, and with
those who would like to think they were. Five were real captures, reported
almost immediately to the police, and in three cases, they were at the
emergency room at the hospital within three hours.  Then for the others -
five were beginning to be mentally ill, were committed, diagnosed, and
treated. Later, one became a suicide. Then there are the hoaxes - I walked
right thru the wall - how much did it cost for repairs? They call back in a
few days, and tell me how they fooled the hypnotist by telling weird tales,
which were believed. Finally, there are those who are led astray by
auto-suggestion, called hypnosis, by those using it. I can take anyone, and
in fifteen minutes, thru a simple exercise can give them a ufo capture. But I
am sure that they know it is only a "Flight of Fantasy". But it is the same
kind of "hypnosis" others are using. It is not the hypnosis we had. We had
the kind that is used in surgery. I would like to see all those who use the
wrong kind, try to do some simple medical procedures. So many try to copy my
experiences, so Dr. Simon wrote a segment about hypnosis, the types, testing
and characteristics. No one apparently read or understood this section, pages
82 thru 85, for they ignore this. Unfortunately it is ruining the field of
hypnosis, which does have good medical uses. I went to a conference of
so-called abductees. One told of her experiences, right out of Star Trek. She
took on the part played by Capt. Kirk. Used the same names as in the tv
program. Later we told her this, so she went back and had "hypnosis" again
and came up with a different capture. Such success. Such fairy tales they
tell. Thanks for letting me set the record straight. Some times I have heard
my experiences told in such a way, I did not recognize it.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                       Betty  (signed)
                                                       Betty  Hill
-+--- End of File -----------------------------------------------------------

--
Michael Corbin - 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************************

                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 428

                            Thursday, June 20th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                  Flying Saucer
                            Roswell & 'a Closer Look'
                         Alien Abduction Countermeasures
                                Randle & Schmitt
                            Re: Communion, the movie.
                                  Re: feeling?
                                   Abductions
                                   Abductions
                                Russian "octopus"
                                     Roswell
                                Debunk Stops here
                              Re: Ufo Images Redux
                                Re: Crop Circles
                          Cufos Roswell Special Report
                                Randle & Schmitt
                                   Abductions
                                   Abductions
                                Russian "octopus"
                                Debunk Stops here
                                   Copyrights

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Flying Saucer
Date: 18 Jun 91 06:34:00 GMT


 * Originally from Nancy Ward
 * Originally dated 06-16-91 22:27

In my mailbox today was:
Randall's Times
A Commemorative Newspaper in Celebration of Randall's Silver Anniversary
June 12, 1966
This paper was included with a mailout section of the Houston Chronicle.
I thought the following article would be of interest:

FLYING SAUCER OVER FREEPORT REPORTED

A flying saucer was reported seen in Freeport early last Sunday morning.
The sighting was coincident with the repeated sightings in Michigan
witnessed by several dozen people.
  At 11:00 PM last Saturday, Paul Leonard, a radioman third class aboard
the Coast Guard Cutter Legare, reported there was a power failure in at
least part of Freeport (Texas), which affected the Coast Guard station
and the Legare.  On occasion, flying saucers have been reported to have
stalled automobiles temporarily, presumably by affecting in some way
their electrical systems.
  Two hours later, at 1:25 AM Sunday, Leonard was standing watch and his
attention was attracted by the lights in two homes nearby blinking on
and off rapidly, the report said.  Leonard took out his binocculars to
get a better look and spotted a very large and oval shaped unidentified
flying object overhead.
  Leonard claimed, "I could make it out very clearly.  It had its
windows open and I ccould see inside of it, but it was hazy inside and I
thought I ccould see something moving around.  It was an orange objecct
or something fiving off an orange glow.
  Then it started to move up slowly.  After it got about 1000 feed up,
it gav off a blue gglow and then disappeared," he said.
  Leonard also stated that, "Shortly afterwards, two very bright objects
shot up from the ground, and in a matter of seconds they were out of
sight."
  Another unconfirmed sighting by a crew member on the Legare was said
to have seen the same two objects shoot up into the sky and disappear.

End of article.

It's not often we see an old article on a UFO printed, so I thought you
all might be interested.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Roswell & 'a Closer Look'
Date: 18 Jun 91 06:43:00 GMT


 > From: [e-mail] (Will Martin)
 > Date: 17 Jun 91 15:53:22 GMT
 > Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
 > Newsgroups: info.paranet
 >
The program, in my estimation, was a travesty.  The part that you missed
featured Faith Daniels, the moderator, questioning Kevin Randle.  When he was
describing the results of the investigation, she almost laughed at Randle's
statement about the government having a crashed saucer and alien bodies.
Randle did recover the ground, however and the rest of the program went fairly
well.  The problem is that any type of major media coverage (ABC, NBC, CBS,
etc.) seems to be the same old thing.  Faith was way out of her league on this
one, and one cannot help but feel that it was made to be this way.  She should
stick to feminine hygiene spray and reading the news on Good Morning America,
not serious UFO research.

Mike

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



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


From: ncar!cwns2.INS.CWRU.Edu!aa245
Subject: Alien Abduction Countermeasures
Date: 19 Jun 91 01:34:08 GMT

From: [e-mail] (Robert Parish)


              Alien Abduction Countermeasures
                          Part 1
   They come in the middle of the night with stealth. They pray
on the frailties of human kind, our need for sleep and rest.
Using technology light years ahead of us and mental intellects
of Intelligent Quotas to our standards would read in the
hundreds, they think they have card blanch, a blank check to do
whatever to whom ever they want. It is time to put a kink in
their male of chain (their use of technology and our lack of use
of it) and a dent in their smug armor of intellectual
superiority (their planning abilities and our lack of
forethought).
   We as a whole, We the People of the American Public depend on
our government and our military to protect us from an Alien
Hostile Threat. That has meant, from invasion of our country by
a
foreign power and that has meant people of earth who are from
another country on earth who cross our borders to do us harm.
But what about Aliens not from another country on earth but from
another planet in another solar system many light years away or
as some think are from another space time continuum that invade
our space, (our placing of being at) at will? Now we may have
another definition of Alien Threat, Aliens that cross our space,
not our borders!
   Some people who have spent years in the new field of Ufology,
the study of UFO's and UFO reports, speak of government cover up
and that our space (place of being) our earth, country and even
our homes where we live have been invaded by Aliens not of this
earth. Some reports have been made by people who say that our
government is well aware of not of earth Alien Abductions of our
fellow citizens of our country and of people abroad. Their are
some reports circulating in Ufology Files on Electronic Bulletin
Board Systems that not only that our government knows that this
going on, but a deal of some kind has been struck between our
government and the Aliens to not interfere as long as they
provide a list of who they have abducted. Their are also reports
that the Aliens have not kept their word with reporting who has
been abducted and that our government is really powerless to
make them keep it! If there is something of this nature going
on, you can trust our government not to let it out.
   Many of these reports of abduction state that the victim
person/s taken are only taken for a short time. Sometimes only
minutes or for few short hours. All memory the (EVENT) is erased
from the subject victims memory to the point that they are not
aware that anything out of normal ever happened to them. Some by
chance of some quirk, have nagging strange nightmares that begin
to trigger flash back memory recall of the terrifying (EVENT) of
abduction by Aliens. Some after hypnotic regression, report that
they have had many of these (EVENTS) of abduction by Aliens and
others only a few or only once that they are now aware of. There
are some Ufology Researchers that state that as many as 1 out
every 10 of the American Public may have been abducted or will
be abducted at some point of time.
   The only way to prove or to disprove these claims is to by
scientific means install Alien Abduction Countermeasures. Now,
if we are powerless to stop them, we might at least be able to
install methods of apparatus to record or to indicate that the
(EVENT) of Alien Abduction has occurred. We can devise
scientific methods of detection of an Alien presence and
incorporate into that design a method of recording that (EVENT)
as to the date and time of the (EVENT). By doing so, we will at
least be able to ascertain that at such and such date, time, an
unusual out the ordinary, not normal (EVENT) has occurred.
   We can not depend on our government to take effective
countermeasures against Alien Abductions. First we must prove or
disprove that what we think is happening is a reality. To do
that, we must conduct a scientific study. For the Aliens to
physically be here to cause any physical effect we can only
assume that they must obey the laws of physics as we know them.
Based on that primes, we can devise methods of detection and
recording (EVENTS) of abnormality and attribute them to an Alien
presence because an alien or abnormal (EVENT) has occurred.
   To do this we can utilize existing electronic apparatus,
namely, common off the self devices modified slightly to suit
our purpose. These items do not have be very complexed or
expensive. For one as an example, a magnetic disturbance (EVENT)
indicator/recorder can be constructed using simple normally open
switch doorlight switch auto alarm with the negative ground of
the switching connector wire ran to a series of small diameter
wire loops. Then run the positive connector of the switching
wire to an equal number small bare wires suspending strong
magnets with the bare wire passing up thru the small loops. Then
connect the alarm relay to an electric date time alarm clock so
that it switch it off when the bare wire suspending a magnet
thru any one of the loops, touches a loop, will set of the alarm
circuit and stop the clock. This will give you the date and time
of a magnetic field disturbance. Power should be supplied of an
AC to DC converter with a DC back up switch over supply.
   Similar ideas and concepts can be used utilizing very low
frequency receivers, infrared detectors and various other
detection devices that don't require and electronics engineering
degree to hook up. More ideas coming in future parts of this
title file Work on your own concepts of (EVENT) logging
recorders.
Written by: Robert Parish aa245 Freenet

--
[e-mail]  A Sinclair Computer owner/operator
A part time Ufologist and Electronic Gadget tinker..........
Film at eleven..........




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


From: [e-mail] (John Burke)
Subject: Randle & Schmitt
Date: 19 Jun 91 07:36:00 GMT

Today I picked up the long-awaited _UFO Crash At Roswell_ by
Kevin Randle & Don Schmitt.  I found it at Waldenbooks.  It's a
paperback (Avon) that costs only $4.95.  The ISBN # is:
0-380-76196-3.  Phil Klass is going to lose some more hair trying
to debunk this one!
                              --  John

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: Communion, the movie.
Date: 13 Jun 91 17:20:00 GMT

Yes, I found that there appeared to be a lot of things that were not
portrayed nearly as well as they were in the book, but still very
interesting graphical presentation of what Streiber had seen. That was one
of the main reason that I wanted to see the movie, (to see what the events
might have actually looked like according to Streiber.)

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: feeling?
Date: 13 Jun 91 17:25:00 GMT

Wow that is strange, well I will be keeping my eyes peeled for weird things!

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Ed Ngai)
Subject: Abductions
Date: 16 Jun 91 04:03:00 GMT

Does anyone know if any ESP'ers, Clairvoiant's, have ever been
abducted?  Seems that all the Earthlings that have been abducted were
normal Human Beings. Why don't Extra-Terrestials ever abduct Humans with
special powers, if there really are such Humans as
Clairvoiant's.


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Ed Ngai)
Subject: Abductions
Date: 17 Jun 91 00:06:00 GMT

I was also wondering why is it that female human beings are the majority of
UFO abductions for what appears to be sexual reporductive means?  It's
clinically proven that male human beings can carry a human baby in his
stomach cavity and supply all of the nutrients necessary to sustain a numan
baby to it's birth.  Why can't Alien Females inject Human Males with thier
eggs?  Also it appears to me that beings from other planets center their
abductions toward White/Caucasian Females for Sexual reproduction. ( I luv
blondes with nice tomatoes, but I never thought that aliens had a taste
like mine).  Why havn't there been abductions of females from other races
of this planet Earth?  Don't Aliens like dark meat?



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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Russian "octopus"
Date: 18 Jun 91 13:55:00 GMT

John Hicks stated:

 >   I don't mean to be coming off as a rabid debunker. I just thought it
 > rather odd that Marina Popovich was waving around that "octopus" photo.

Ok John, thanks for the information. Popovich had that photo with a large
number of others, and that happened to be one that the Hard Copy people used.
Although I honestly do not recall Marina placing any great emphasis on that
picture, I imagine that it garnered the interest because of how spectacular it
looked.

Don

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Roswell
Date: 18 Jun 91 13:58:00 GMT

I was just informed that on July 1st, the Roswell case will be discussed on
the Larry King TV program on CNN. Kevin Randell will be interviewed from what
I was told.

Keep your eyes open.

Don

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Moen)
Subject: Debunk Stops here
Date: 10 Jun 91 17:57:16 GMT

> I perceive a debunker as much like a fanatic -- he talks of something
> he knows nothing about.

Mike --

A debunker is someone who dispels _bunk_.  If what he's trying to dispel
isn't bunk, then he's not a debunker.  Quod erad demonstrandum <grin>.

I can't imagine any reasonable objection to the attempted exposure of
bunk, but, if anyone does object, that's fine with me, too.

Best Regards,
Rick M.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Re: Ufo Images Redux
Date: 20 Jun 91 04:59:00 GMT

Joe,

The earliest _public_ statement that I'm aware of Bob Nathan making
re: Gulf Breeze photos was on 10/14/88, on a rather theatrical
syndicated television production called _UFO Cover-Up?_. (* Note *
this is prior to Ed Walters' even identifying himself as the
photographer.) Bruce Maccabee also made a statement rebutting
Nathan's opinion.

I have already forwarded your ideas re: photographic database to
Nathan, and will post his response when received.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Re: Crop Circles
Date: 20 Jun 91 05:00:00 GMT

Mike and Robert,

I think of key importance in this crop circle report is the
topography described, particularly the "high river bluff" 1/4 mile
away from the circle.

Dr. G. Terence Meaden of England has, from the data collected,
observed that many, but not all circles, and therefore their parent
vortices, form in the lee (downwind) of hills or escarpments.
Sometimes circles appear as much as several miles downwind of the
obstacles, especially when beyond upslope escarpments or massive
isolated hills.

Approximately 90% of circles considered to be "bonafide", are
located near a region of higher elevation.

If Robert has taken any photos of the circle and surroundings, I
would be most interested in obtaining copies.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Cufos Roswell Special Report
Date: 20 Jun 91 06:56:00 GMT

A message from Mark Rodeghier, Scientific Director for CUFOS.

I don't normally send a note to everyone, but this message seems an appropriate
subject.

To supplement the new book on Roswell ("UFO Crash at Roswell") by Randle and
Schmitt, CUFOS has produced a special report that includes original articles
on the intelligence community of that era, a revised timeline of events,
additional photos, and explanations of why the Roswell object cannot be a V-2
test, a Skyhook balloon, a Japanese balloon bomb, etc., etc., Also included
is an article on why Gerald Anderson's testimony is extremely suspect.

I can highly recommend this monograph, even if I did write the introduction,
an article or two, and helped to edit it.  It is available from CUFOS for
$12.00, postage paid.  No overseas price available yet, but I suspect it will
be about $15.00, postage paid, printed matter, air.

If you have any questions, feel free to send them along.  Thanks.
Mark Rodeghier

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Randle & Schmitt
Date: 19 Jun 91 23:34:00 GMT


 > Today I picked up the long-awaited _UFO Crash At Roswell_ by Kevin
 > Randle & Don Schmitt.  I found it at Waldenbooks.  It's a paperback
 > (Avon) that costs only $4.95.  The ISBN # is: 0-380-76196-3.  Phil Klass
 > is going to lose some more hair trying to debunk this one!


John:


Do they depend heavily on the testimony of Gen. DuBose? If so, he has already
taken it on....I can send you a copy of the latest SUN (Skeptics UFO
Newsletter) if you wish.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Abductions
Date: 19 Jun 91 23:37:00 GMT


 > Does anyone know if any ESP'ers, Clairvoiant's, have ever been
 > abducted?  Seems that all the Earthlings that have been abducted were
 > normal Human Beings. Why don't Extra-Terrestials ever abduct Humans with
 > special powers, if there really are such Humans as
 > Clairvoiant's.
 >

Ed, I'm not aware of any abduction percipients having claimed to be
"clairvoyants" or other kinds of "sensitives" prior to their abduction
(although I'm fairly certain there are a few, only because the phenomenon
seems to affect people from all walks of life). However, many abduction
percipients claim to have experienced random PSI episodes subsequent to their
major abduction episode. I will be discussing this in my next LYDIA file
update, which will be posted to the ABDUCTIONS echo.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Abductions
Date: 19 Jun 91 23:39:00 GMT


 > I was also wondering why is it that female human beings are the majority
 > of UFO abductions for what appears to be sexual reporductive means?
 > It's clinically proven that male human beings can carry a human baby in
 > his stomach cavity and supply all of the nutrients necessary to sustain
 > a numan baby to it's birth.  Why can't Alien Females inject Human Males
 > with thier eggs?  Also it appears to me that beings from other planets
 > center their abductions toward White/Caucasian Females for Sexual
 > reproduction. ( I luv blondes with nice tomatoes, but I never thought
 > that aliens had a taste like mine).  Why havn't there been abductions of
 > females from other races of this planet Earth?  Don't Aliens like dark
 > meat?

Ed:

You raise a good point: I, too, would like to see a demographic breakdown of
abduction percipients, including gender, race and age. I think the gender
ration is 60/40 female/male, but frankly I don't know for sure.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Russian "octopus"
Date: 19 Jun 91 23:41:00 GMT


 > John Hicks stated:
 >
 >  >   I don't mean to be coming off as a rabid debunker. I just thought it
 >  > rather odd that Marina Popovich was waving around that "octopus" photo.
 >
 > Ok John, thanks for the information. Popovich had that photo with a
 > large number of others, and that happened to be one that the Hard Copy
 > people used. Although I honestly do not recall Marina placing any great
 > emphasis on that picture, I imagine that it garnered the interest
 > because of how spectacular it looked.


I think I've lost track of this conversation. Are we talking about the photo
that PHOBOS sent back of the shadow on Mars? If so, that photo appears on page
282 of "Genesis Revisited" by Zechariah Sitchin. If not, could someone please
clarify?

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Debunk Stops here
Date: 19 Jun 91 23:43:00 GMT


 > A debunker is someone who dispels _bunk_.  If what he's trying to dispel
 >
 > isn't bunk, then he's not a debunker.  Quod erad demonstrandum <grin>.
 >


Rick, what do you call someone who tries to dispel bunk, but its not really
bunk, but he "appears" (to some people's eyes) to succeed anyway? Just
curious.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Copyrights
Date: 20 Jun 91 06:29:00 GMT

To all members and sysops;

As the Director of Research for UFO Magazine, it has come to my
attention that certain other groups ( not ParaNet ) and individuals
have been violating copyright laws by taking and using articles and
stories from UFO Magazine, reprinting them and not asking
permission to do so. THIS IS ILLEGAL AND WILL *NOT* BE TOLERATED.
I have already begun to document these violations, and the
attorneys for UFO Magazine have been advised. The groups and
individuals are known, and will be contacted so as to provide
redress. This warning will not be repeated. Copyright violations
are a very serious matter, so a word to the wise is "Do not
continue, this can become very expensive".

Don Ecker
Director of Research
UFO Magazine

--
Don Ecker - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 429

                             Sunday, June 23rd 1991

Today's Topics:

                              UFO Crash at Roswell
                                 UFO Cover-Up? video
                                 June 10, AW&ST
                                Randle & Schmitt
                                 Gerald Anderson
                            Re: UFO Crash at Roswell
                                     (none)
                           Re: Paranet Newsletter 428
                         Alternative hypothesis for UFOs?
            Hey, could someone post the most recent Paranet BBS list?
                             Re: Ufo Cover-up? Video
                              Re: Randle & Schmitt
                               Re: June 10, AW&ST
                               Re: June 10, Aw&st
                                   "N" Machine
                                   Abductions
                                Randle & Schmitt
                                 Gerald Anderson
                           Re: Paranet Newsletter 428
                                Crash at Roswell

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: UFO Crash at Roswell
Date: 20 Jun 91 06:55:00 GMT

Just to let you know...

The book of great importance to Ufology is now on the stands.  UFO Crash at
Roswell by Kevin D. Randle and Don Schmitt is a must read.  It is available in
paperback only for $4.95.  ParaNet will be doing a review in the next few
days.

From what I have read so far, Randle and Schmitt have done an excellent job at
bringing forth evidence to substantiate that Roswell is a true event, complete
with alien bodies.

Kudos to Randle and Schmitt!

Mike

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



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


From: ncar!watson.acc.virginia.edu!JBB
Subject:      UFO Cover-Up? video
Date: 20 Jun 91 21:49:20 GMT

From: Joe <[e-mail]>

Sheldon writes:
+
+The earliest _public_ statement that I'm aware of Bob Nathan making
+re: Gulf Breeze photos was on 10/14/88, on a rather theatrical
+syndicated television production called _UFO Cover-Up?_. (* Note *
+this is prior to Ed Walters' even identifying himself as the
+photographer.) Bruce Maccabee also made a statement rebutting
+Nathan's opinion.

Does anyone know if a video of this production is commercially available
and, if so, where it may be located?

Thanks, Joe




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


From: ncar!compuserve.com!70142.2426
Subject: June 10, AW&ST
Date: 20 Jun 91 21:52:26 GMT

From: Ted Goranson <[e-mail]>

I came across a page and a half article in the June 10th Aviation Week &
Space Technology magazine yesterday.  It describes secret, triangular
aircraft which have been developed by the U.S. to provide support for the
Stealth fighter.  It appears a majority of them are based at 'Holloman' AFB
and 'Tonopah' in Nevada.


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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Randle & Schmitt
Date: 20 Jun 91 22:43:00 GMT


 > Do they depend heavily on the testimony of Gen. DuBose? If so, he has
 > already taken it on....I can send you a copy of the latest SUN (Skeptics
 > UFO Newsletter) if you wish.

The book thus far has been very interesting.  Randle & Schmitt have really
done their homework in tracking new leads, talking to everyone they can and
putting the pieces of this puzzle together.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Gerald Anderson
Date: 20 Jun 91 22:47:00 GMT

Recently, I heard that Gerald Anderson, the alleged witness to have seen the
alien bodies in the Roswell crash, had been disproved.  According to Randle
and Schmitt in their book "UFO Crash at Roswell," Stan Friedman did an
analysis of the diary that Anderson produced to substantiate his claims, and
the results were that the paper was pre-1947, but the ink was post-1970.
Additionally, R&S could never substantiate his story.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: UFO Crash at Roswell
Date: 20 Jun 91 14:21:00 GMT

IS that the actual title? "UFO Crash at Roswell"? I hope people don't think
its part of a continuing series beginning with Steinman's book....

Do you know if the book is available at the usual places, Waldenbooks, etc.?

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: (none)
Date: 19 Jun 91 16:06:02 GMT

In a message to All <14 Jun 91 12:10> ncar!ecn.purdue.edu!lush@ wrote:

 nc> Why would anyone assume that anything this woman says has any validity?
 nc> The Russians have never been 'forthright' about anything except their
 nc> promises 'bury' us and to eventually take over the world.  I would place
 nc> her in the same category of credibility as 'The Woman from Venus.'

Still seeing that "Phoenix" view of the world?  Where have you been since the
sixties?  Things have gone through a sort of change in the USSR and Europe as
of late, and one can no longer find Russians hiding under every American bed.
Today we have more of a problem of finding Greys under everyone's wheat field!

So why do people assume that this woman's report is NOT valid, based only on
its point of origin?  Her credentials are supposed to be fairly impressive, to
say the least.  Not doing this soley to make a buck is another plus in my book.
 She could be a willing puppet...or speaking completely independent from her
government sponsors...or somewhere in between.  They ARE allowed to do that,
ya know!  :-)


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



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


From: ncar!presto.ig.com!stuczyns
Subject: Re: Paranet Newsletter 428
Date: 21 Jun 91 17:12:24 GMT

From: Martin Stuczynski <[e-mail]>

I feel compelled to respond to Ed Ngai's comments in the last Newsletter
(a lot of bunk about human males having been clinically proven to carry
fetuses [feti?] to term in their stomachs!!!) I liked to see proof of this!
Was this post a joke? If so I think it was inappropriate to include it in a
newsletter that strives to report bonafide phenomena worthy of serious
investigation. If it was'nt a joke I feel the newsletter is in need of some
editorial control.

-Marty S.





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


From: stl-06sima.army.mil!wmartin
Subject:  Alternative hypothesis for UFOs?
Date: 21 Jun 91 17:31:06 GMT

From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>

After reading the Vallee Interview postings, I began to think a bit
about alternative sources for UFO phenomena; ones that do not involve
aliens from space. I'm not very well-read in UFOlogy, so maybe this is
old-hat and a tired refrain to many of the experts out there, but I
thought it was worth a post and maybe some subsequent discussion. If
this has been discussed in published books or articles, I'd appreciate
seeing references to them.

It's always seemed to me that the reported behavior of UFOs never
appeared to be consistent with what one would expect of beings who have
travelled interstellar distances to get here. (Of course, I'm applying
human reasoning to alien behavior, so this is dangerous, but it's all I
have to go on... :-) Why would creatures expend the vast resources in
time and energy to travel between the stars to come *here*, for a start?
We are not all that interesting [except maybe to serve as a bad example! :-)]
if the universe is truly populated with many life-bearing planets. The areas
that many UFOs are reported in are not the most interesting regions on the
planet. Why travel light-years to hang around some country road in an area
of not-particularly-significant-or-unique flora and fauna?

If animal mutilations are UFO-caused, why bother with these selective
samplings of ordinary common domestic animals? If crop circles are
UFO-caused, why should these happen just where they do, and why would
they be repeated over time? After you've seen one what field, you've
seen them all, after all... Hardly a sight worth an interstellar flight
to view. Why abduct individuals for what seem to be long-term biological
experiments? Surely this place isn't worth hanging about for decades or
centuries; there are far more interesting places in the universe to see.
And many people wonder why true aliens should have a human-like
appearance, or be able to breathe our air.

All in all, then, UFO's reported behavior is inconsistent with what one
would expect interstellar explorers, colonizers, or sightseers to do.

But the behavior CAN be explained if one thinks of the UFOs as
time-travel phenomena. Why come here? Because we are the place the
travellers are; we are just their past. Why appear where they do?
Because the sites UFOs appear here and now are the counterparts of where
the labs or take-off sites are in the future(s) they come from. Why are
behaviors inconsistent between various UFOs? Because time travel, by its
very nature, means that the travellers appearing here can have come from
many different periods of the future. Some phenomena we see could be the
results of early experiments in time travel, or botched attempts, even.
Maybe crop circles are caused by vortices made by unsuccessful
time-travel attempts, or the initial tries to set up force fields linking
future and past, and they appear where they do because that is the place
where the lab will be located 400 years from now.

Maybe the UFOs we see around Gulf Breeze and various rural areas are
there because they are early attempts at time travel from labs or sites
at the equivalent places in the future, and these early attempts don't
have much spatial-travel capability, or they want to hang around the
home base for easy retrieval. Other, far-ranging UFOs could be later,
more-developed versions who just came back to the same timeframe as the
early versions.

[I admit I am ignoring all the many paradoxes and traditional arguments
against the possibility of time travel, and am also ignoring the fact
that physical location varies over time; the planet and solar system and
galaxy are all moving through space and spinning, so the exact *place* you
were a few minutes ago is now out in space somewhere. But SF writers have
long ignored these details in writing time-travel stories, so I feel free
to do so also. :-) Perhaps one could postulate that the time travel is
somehow tied into the gravitational field of the planet, so you stay in
the same relative place on its surface. Who knows? I'm speculating...]

Animal mutilations could be explained by future-people taking samples of
genetic material for experiments or comparison or renewal of the
highly-mutated and -changed equivalents they now have in their world.
(Many people have predicted that only domestic animals will survive due
to man's destruction of natural habitat. So that would explain why they
sample domestic animals -- the descendents of those are all they have!)
If they collect wild animals for restoring the species in their time, it
would be far more likely that they'd do that in pre-human times when
such animals would be easier to collect and far more numerous.

Human biological experiments make a lot more sense if we speculate that
they are people working on their own ancestors for whatever arcane
purpose you may imagine. The bipedal/two-eyed/generally-hominoid
appearance of the 'aliens' is more easily explained if you say they are
highly-mutated humans, and so is their apparent ability to adapt to or
endure our atmosphere. (But changes over time in that atmosphere can
also explain why some need their own version of breathing air, either
all the time or at intervals.)

Craft travelling at high apparent speeds without sonic booms could be
explained by a combination of time and spatial propulsion occurring
simultaneously -- if a flying machine is proceeding at an ordinary
airspeed but at the same time making jumps through time, perhaps tiny
quantum jumps an observer cannot detect, could not the resulting
appearance be that of a craft flying at many thousands of miles per hour
through the air? But since it actually *isn't there* during the time
jumps, it isn't pushing the air molecules into a coherent boom-producing
shockwave. Again, who knows? Might be an explanation...

The fact that many UFOs just disappear instead of flying off into space
is easily explained if they are time-travel craft 'winking out' of local
existence as they move into time-travel mode. The various sizes and
configurations can be explained by some being robot probes or simple
experiments, while others are fancier or creature-carrying versions.

Why have we seen them here and now, over the last 50 years more than
before? Well, maybe we have and maybe we haven't -- it is likely that
earlier UFOs just were not reported as such, and there are the records
of 'mystery airships' from the 1800's and mystical phenomena like
Ezekiel's wheel over the centuries. So maybe time-travelling UFOs have
appeared throughout history and back into geologic time. But also maybe
there is some sort of limitation in the distance one can travel through
time, or that energy requirements go up as one travels further. We may
be at the point furthest back that the time travellers can reasonably
go. Or maybe we are getting all the first wave of trials and attempts,
because of the limits in the technology or theory of the first time
travellers, and the later, more sophisticated and more-capable versions are
skipping over us because we are too well-known already, or too disgusting,
or just too boring.

Maybe other phenomena, like mystery disappearances (the bicyclists, the
farmer in the field, 'The Man Who Walked Around The Horses,' etc.), or
simple things, like that set of car keys that vanished from the end
table, or Fortean phenomena like rains of frogs, etc., are the results of
time travel experiments.  (Or, much more frighteningly, the result of some
3-year-old in the year 3768 playing with his Junior Time-Travel
Experimenter Kit...  :-)

Are there any UFO phenomena that CANNOT be explained by time travel?
Maybe this is a more rewarding area of investigation than concentrating
on an outer-space source alone.

What do y'all think of this?

Regards, Will
[e-mail] OR [e-mail]




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


From: ncar!cmcl2.NYU.EDU!panix!upaya!tbetz
Subject: Hey, could someone post the most recent Paranet BBS list?
Date: 22 Jun 91 05:36:47 GMT

From: Tom Betz <panix!upaya![e-mail]>


 Some folks on the PC Board echo conferences are asking for a list
 of the current Paranet BBS ssystems and their phone numbers.

 Could someone please post it to the mailing list, say, once a
 month?

 Thanks.

--
--------------           'Hels' og industri, de gaar haand i haand.'
Tom Betz     | -----------------------------------------------------------------
914-375-1510 | [e-mail]   |  [e-mail]%phri.nyu.edu
GBS          | {att,philabs,rutgers,cmcl2}!phri!marob!upaya!tbetz





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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Re: Ufo Cover-up? Video
Date: 22 Jun 91 06:11:00 GMT

Joe,

I don't think you'll have too much difficulty in obtaining a copy
of _UFO COVER-UP?_ from any major tape rental outlet. If you are
unable to locate, just let me know and I'd be happy to loan you my
copy. Just let me know where to ship via U.P.S.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Randle & Schmitt
Date: 21 Jun 91 06:06:00 GMT

I talked to Mark Rodeghier last night, and he set me straight on the DuBose
thing.  I somehow had it in my mind that it was Randle/Schmidt who
introduced the DuBose testimony, but it was Moore/Shandera. It was
Friedman/Berliner, on the other hand, who brought us Gerald Anderson, which
Mark told me was basically an unreliable report. Can't tell your players
without a scorecard....

Is this book basically available now? If I walk into Waldenbooks right now,
I'll probably find it?

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: June 10, AW&ST
Date: 21 Jun 91 06:09:00 GMT

In a message to All <06-20-91 18:08> ncar!compuserve.com!70142.242

->Space Technology magazine yesterday.  It describes secret, triangular
->aircraft which have been developed by the U.S. to provide support for the
->Stealth fighter.  It appears a majority of them are based at 'Holloman' AFB
->and 'Tonopah' in Nevada.

Any clue as to whether this might be related to the craft reported in AvWeek
last October?

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Sudduth)
Subject: Re: June 10, Aw&st
Date: 22 Jun 91 17:21:00 GMT

Could these triangular craft also be the ones reported in Northern
Minnesota last summer??  (See UFO mag Vol 6, No 3 p 7).
--
Don Sudduth - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Sudduth)
Subject: "N" Machine
Date: 22 Jun 91 17:28:00 GMT

The last issue of UFO mag had some acticles concerning free energy
inventions.  There were some interesting facts but no theories behind
these machines.  Does anyone know the operational theory behind the "N"
machine or the the Swiss M-L converter??
--
Don Sudduth - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Burke)
Subject: Abductions
Date: 22 Jun 91 05:39:00 GMT

The following reply is from Lisa here at ParaNet Tau Ceti:

Ed Ngai writes:

 > It's clinically proven that
 > male human beings can carry a human baby in his stomach
 > cavity and supply all of the nutrients necessary to sustain
 > a numan baby to it's birth.

 Ed, where did you read this clinical study?  In some tabloid?

 > Why can't Alien Females inject
 > Human Males with thier eggs?  Also it appears to me that
 > beings from other planets center their abductions toward
 > White/Caucasian Females for Sexual reproduction. ( I luv
 > blondes with nice tomatoes, but I never thought that aliens
 > had a taste like mine).  Why havn't there been abductions
 > of females from other races of this planet Earth?  Don't
 > Aliens like dark meat?

Ed, in case you haven't noticed, it's the '90's, a day and age
in which feminism is an inevitable reality. Your choice of words
is poor--"blondes with nice TOMATOES" "aliens with a TASTE like
mine" "Don't aliens like dark MEAT".  These kinds of expressions
are used by kids on playgrounds.  Your question is an interesting
one--why specifically caucasian women that have been the victims
of abductions. Yet the way you pose this question suggests
sexism on your part. Please be aware of the phrases you use.
Lisa

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Burke)
Subject: Randle & Schmitt
Date: 22 Jun 91 22:25:00 GMT


 > Do they depend heavily on the testimony of Gen. DuBose? If
 > so, he has already taken it on....

I'm only on pg. 51 and he hasn't been mentioned yet.  Could be a
"straw man" approach.

 > I can send you a copy of the latest SUN (Skeptics UFO
 > Newsletter) if you wish.
 >
 > Jim

Yeah, that would be interesting!  Do you have my address?
The *SUN* huh?  The tabloid people must be mad!  :-)
Better yet, imagine a straight-faced skeptic saying:
    "Well, I read in the SUN that the so-called UFO was ..."
With the name confusion, would he be taken seriously?

                                              --  John

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Burke)
Subject: Gerald Anderson
Date: 22 Jun 91 23:15:00 GMT

"Old M.C." writes:

 > According to Randle and Schmitt in their
 > book "UFO Crash at Roswell," Stan Friedman did an analysis
 > of the diary that Anderson produced to substantiate his
 > claims, and the results were that the paper was pre-1947,
 > but the ink was post-1970. Additionally, R&S could never
 > substantiate his story.
 >
 > Mike

Nevertheless, Friedman is still hawking the Anderson story and
can be expected to do so ad nauseam at the MUFON conference.  I'm
sure he'll be doing the same for the MJ-12 documents.  The moral
we can all learn is:  "Don't ever let a document examiner spoil
the party!"
                                      --  John

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Paranet Newsletter 428
Date: 22 Jun 91 07:32:00 GMT

In a message to All <06-21-91 12:12> [e-mail] wrote:

->proven to carry fetuses [feti?] to term in their stomachs!!!) I liked to
->see proof of this!

I hate to say this, Marty, but I seem to recall that it has been done
experimentally. I can't cite a reference right now, but if I'm right, I'm
sure someone else here will.

I think Ed's main point is well taken: It takes two to tango, so why the
emphasis on females in the abduction demographics?

As to editorial control, this is not a refereed science journal. If Ed is
wrong aboutt something, you simply tell him so, and patiently explain why.
If Ed is reasonable, he will correct himself and go from there, or he will
patiently explain why he thinks you are wrong. Personally I find this method
of discourse a lot more refreshing and a lot more open and honest than
refereed science journals - as long as everything is done politely.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Crash at Roswell
Date: 23 Jun 91 13:06:00 GMT

Can anyone identify the UFO photograph on the front cover of Randle
and Schmitt's new book _ UFO CRASH AT ROSWELL_? I know I've seen
that shot before, and I don't think it has anything to do with
Roswell. Please correct me if I am wrong. It's odd, but there
doesn't seem to be any reference to the photo in the book.

              Sheldon
--
Sheldon Wernikoff - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 430

                            Tuesday, June 25th 1991

Today's Topics:

                            Roswell & 'A Closer Look'
                              mib counter measures
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                            Re: UFO Crash at Roswell
                                  Crop Circles?
                               Undeniable evidence
                                Re: Crop Circles?
                                     Roswell
            Hey, Could Someone Post The Most Recent Paranet Bbs List?
                                Crash At Roswell
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                               Undeniable Evidence
                   Canadian Abductee Specimen Retrieval Update
                               Re: June 10, Aw&st
                              Re: Randle & Schmitt
                                  Hoax Document
                      Re: Alternative hypothesis for UFOs?
                                Foo Fighter Story
                              Re: Crash at Roswell
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: Roswell & 'A Closer Look'
Date: 21 Jun 91 14:52:00 GMT


 WM> Anyway, I have no idea how likely it is that this 'A Closer Look'
 WM> program will be accessible to readers of this list, or if it is at all
 WM> possible that this particular program will be repeated or made
 WM> available for later viewing. In what I saw, there was nothing in
 WM> particular tying it to June 14 1991, so maybe the same show will be
 WM> aired at other dates in other markets. (I saw it here in St. Louis,


From what you describe...I am surprise you did not find the show flashing any
1-800 number while promoting a new $59.95 'UFO-Shaped Food Processor."



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



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


From: [e-mail] (Steve Rose)
Subject: mib counter measures
Date: 21 Jun 91 15:01:00 GMT


 nICE> That your story was printed or told on radio or television by
 nICE> reporters. And then a big new black car arrives at your
 nICE> address with two men dressed in black show up on your front
 nICE> porch or doorstep. They knock, ring your door bell and you go
 nICE> to the door and there they are! The Men In Black! You spot
 nICE> the big knew black car!
 nICE> END OF PART 1 OF 2 (MEN IN BLACK COUNTERMEASURES)


With (thankfully) no part 2 to follow.  Next you'll tell us you lunch with
James Bond on weekends.  Maybe HE drives the 'big knew black car!'  :-)




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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Greenen)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 21 Jun 91 14:19:00 GMT


 * Replying to a message originally to Michael Corbin
 JH>  > What is his reasoning?
 JH>
 JH>   Ed says that he's afraid his originals won't ever be
 JH> returned, which I think is pretty reasonable.
 JH>   Bruce has said publicly that sometimes he's "forgotten"
 JH> to return original photos to their owners.
 JH>
 JH>                                            jbh
 JH>

John; and who said that Ed wasn't smart. If it was I that had taken
those photo's, there would be a clod day in hell before I would turn
them over to the JPL lab or to anyone else connected to the
government. And that wouldn't have anything to do with the notion
that thay are fake or not. Turning these photos over to JPL is like
having Phillip Klass the final word on the GB case. Ed did the right
thing on this and if people don't want to believe these phots are
real because JPL didn't analyze them, then that their problem. And
goes along with all other photos that come from Russia or other
places in the world. This is just like handing a gun to the accused
and asking him if this is the gun that he used in the crime. One
must check to see who funds the JPL and other places. We must all
look before we leap and Ed has looked and he ain't leaping.
                73's     ---JIm---
--
Jim Greenen - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 21 Jun 91 17:05:00 GMT


 JG> John; and who said that Ed wasn't smart.

  I do agree with you. If nothing else, originals have a tendency to vanish.

                                                jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 21 Jun 91 17:08:01 GMT


 MC> That is the farthest thing from reasonable considering Ed
 MC> told me that he would take them personally to the photo lab
 MC> where the tests were to be done.

  If his intent is keeping his originals from disappearing, I do think it's
reasonable. However, I do think it would be unreasonable to refuse if he
could personally hang around and keep an eye on them.
  I don't know whether or not it would be possible for him to do that.

                                                jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: UFO Crash at Roswell
Date: 21 Jun 91 22:48:00 GMT


 >The book of great importance to Ufology is now on the stands.  UFO Crash at
 >Roswell by Kevin D. Randle and Don Schmitt is a must read.  It is available
 >in paperback only for $4.95.  ParaNet will be doing a review in the next
 >few days.

   I just picked it up from the local 'metaphysical' book store along with
_Missing Time_, by Hopkins.  Thanks for the info.  As soon as I get through
_Night Seige_, I will start on it..  Busy, busy, busy...  :)

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Crop Circles?
Date: 21 Jun 91 22:52:00 GMT


   Does anyone know if that weird chain of symbols in the crops on the cover
of the Led Zepplin collection is a crop circle?  If so, that sure is a weird
'circle'.  Looks more like artwork to me.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Undeniable evidence
Date: 22 Jun 91 06:11:00 GMT


   What really clences the whole UFO phenomenon as fact for me, without
having truly seen what I can say, true to myself, to be a craft of alien
origin or a being, are a few things.
   1.  The *GREAT* volume of sighting evidence and first-hand accounts which
seem to varigy each other and support each other as a whole.
   2.  The way the Govt. handles the UFO phenomena in that there is such a
MASSIVE outpouring of eye-whitness accounts of sightings and abductions.  A
Govt. so 'responsible' for the welfare of it's people and even as a purely
scientific interest, should take the phenomenon more seriousy.  Because of
the volume of sightings and reports, the Govt. should be forced to respond
with it's own hardcore investigative measures no matter how outlandish the
outcome may yeild.  All the Govt. has stated on the phenomenon is that it is
'inconclusive'.  This, in itself, proves to me the Govt. knows somthing we
do not.  Our Govt. has never acted this way in the past with more 'up-front'
measures.  Look at the 'Red Scare'.
   I do not, myself, know if we are being visited and observed, having
little clue ourselves as to what the nature of these visits can be
(Although, I must say, Bud Hopkins and other researchers do a *DAMN* good
job of serving the public 'need to know', and my hat goes off to ALL these
honorable people who contribute in even the smallest way to this research),
or if the Govt. is aware of the 'true' picture as to what these beings want
and are doing, or any other combination of the above, but I do know that
SOMTHING is going on.  It IS a definate phenomenon and should be
investigated to it's fullest.
   Again, I would like to express my extreme thanks and fondness of the
investigators and contributors of the Ufology field.  This is true human
daring and generosity in action.  I truly hope the UFO research
organizations (ParaNet and MUFON in specific) can co-exist without strife or
competition which serves to slow research and cause unnecessary tension in
the field.  Ufology is a risky business and the researchers need to be
united and gain strength from one another if it is to enlighten us all.
   Thanks to everyone reading this message, as well, for being there.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Paul Mcavoy)
Subject: Re: Crop Circles?
Date: 22 Jun 91 06:53:00 GMT


 >   Does anyone know if that weird chain of symbols in the crops on the cover
 >of the Led Zepplin collection is a crop circle?  If so, that sure is a weird
 >'circle'.  Looks more like artwork to me.

I am not sure, but I think that there have been many other types of designes
that have appeared in crops, not just circles.  Also there are a few other
types of designes such as human figures and various animals that are
'engraved' in the earth which are very large, that are possibly in nevada or
other places, but I am not sure where exactly.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Bryce Eckstein)
Subject: Roswell
Date: 21 Jun 91 16:49:00 GMT

Hello Don!

In a msg of <18 Jun 91>, Don Ecker writes to All:

 DE> I was just informed that on July 1st, the Roswell case will be
 DE> discussed on the Larry King TV program on CNN. Kevin Randell will be
 DE> interviewed from what I was told.

Halleluiah!! Thanks for that information Don.

 DE> Keep your eyes open.

 .. and VCR at the ready  {grin}.

Bryce

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Hey, Could Someone Post The Most Recent Paranet Bbs List?
Date: 25 Jun 91 01:03:00 GMT


 > From: ncar!cmcl2.NYU.EDU!panix!upaya!tbetz
 >
 >  Some folks on the PC Board echo conferences are asking for a list
 >  of the current Paranet BBS ssystems and their phone numbers.
 >
 >  Could someone please post it to the mailing list, say, once a
 >  month?

It is being updated and will be sent to you post haste.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Crash At Roswell
Date: 25 Jun 91 01:12:00 GMT


 > Can anyone identify the UFO photograph on the front cover of Randle
 > and Schmitt's new book _ UFO CRASH AT ROSWELL_? I know I've seen
 > that shot before, and I don't think it has anything to do with
 > Roswell. Please correct me if I am wrong. It's odd, but there
 > doesn't seem to be any reference to the photo in the book.

The photograph was shot by Daniel Fry.  This according to the copyright page
listed in the front of the book.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 25 Jun 91 01:27:00 GMT


 > John; and who said that Ed wasn't smart. If it was I that had taken
 > those photo's, there would be a clod day in hell before I would turn
 > them over to the JPL lab or to anyone else connected to the government.
 > And that wouldn't have anything to do with the notion that thay are fake
 > or not. Turning these photos over to JPL is like having Phillip Klass
 > the final word on the GB case. Ed did the right thing on this and if
 > people don't want to believe these phots are real because JPL didn't
 > analyze them, then that their problem. And goes along with all other
 > photos that come from Russia or other places in the world. This is just
 > like handing a gun to the accused and asking him if this is the gun that
 > he used in the crime. One must check to see who funds the JPL and other
 > places. We must all look before we leap and Ed has looked and he ain't
 > leaping.

With all respect, this is a very weak argument for failing to turn over
alleged photographs of a true anomaly.  What about Bruce being connected to
the U.S. Navy?  They have more of a provable connection to the UFO phenomenon
than JPL does.  Yes, Bruce is a Navy Optical Physicist.  In my opinion, that
puts Ed's photos closer to the government than JPL, which is a
quasi-governmental agency.  In your argument, this would be akin to putting
the fox in charge of the chicken coop.  In all fairness to Bruce, I don't feel
that your argument, and if this is Ed's, is not valid.  What is important is
that qualified people, with the proper instrumentation perform the necessary
scientific tests to determine just what is on the film.  On another similar
note, would you buy a used car without having it tested by a qualified
mechanic?  Hence, the UFO community is entitled to judge the evidence and test
it before being expected to accept someone's word that the photos are
authentic.  A second opinion, in this case, is well in order.  If Ed refuses
to cooperate, then I see it to be to his detriment, and should weigh heavy on
our minds as a deliberate attempt to conceal the truth.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Undeniable Evidence
Date: 25 Jun 91 01:31:00 GMT


 >    Again, I would like to express my extreme thanks and fondness of the
 > investigators and contributors of the Ufology field.  This is true human
 > daring and generosity in action.  I truly hope the UFO research
 > organizations (ParaNet and MUFON in specific) can co-exist without
 > strife or competition which serves to slow research and cause
 > unnecessary tension in the field.  Ufology is a risky business and the
 > researchers need to be united and gain strength from one another if it
 > is to enlighten us all.

Your message is well received.  However, it should be pointed out that
progress is solely contingent upon all trustees of this deposit of truth acting
prudently in keeping people informed of all aspects of the results of investi-
gations irregardless of the outcome.  For one group to arbitrarily remove its
high ranking officials for holding an opposing viewpoint is not scientific
investigation, but political manipulation.  This, in my opinion, is detrimental
to all those who look to these depositories for truth and find something far
short of it.

Mike

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Canadian Abductee Specimen Retrieval Update
Date: 25 Jun 91 01:36:00 GMT

From Lorne Goldfader/Director
The UFO Research Institute of Canada
Vancouver, British Columbia

The UFO Research Institute of Canada wishes to announce the initial results of
pathology work on the tissue sample from Alvina Scott, which was expelled
during menstruation.

Samples taken from the specimen cannot be identified as the products of an
aborted pregnancy.  The "desquamated keratin material" referred to is simply
epithelial cells, the type which line the uterus and vagina.

We will continue to work with the abductees in this fashion searching for
anything of a biological nature which may suggest or indicate possible
evidence of the phenomenon.  Our goal of having physicians look more seriously
into the subject remains.

We must respect the wishes of the physicians in not releasing their names
publicly at this time due to current social & scientific attitudes.

[Signed]

Lorne Goldfader

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: June 10, Aw&st
Date: 23 Jun 91 16:23:00 GMT

In a message to Jim Speiser <06-22-91 10:21> Don Sudduth wrote:

->Could these triangular craft also be the ones reported in
->Northern Minne{_sota last summer??  (See UFO mag Vol 6, No
->3 p 7).

Could be that all the reports of triangular craft are related - the ones
cropping up in UFO reports AND the ones that AvWeek is writing about. But
are they military experiments being mistaken for spaceships, or are they
spaceships being mistakenly reported by AvWeek as military experiments?
Whatever the cause, I think we have a real good excuse for saying to the
press, Look, FORGET flying saucers, forget all the nonsense you associated
with them, we got a new and completely different problem here.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Randle & Schmitt
Date: 23 Jun 91 16:28:00 GMT

In a message to Jim Speiser <06-22-91 15:25> John Burke wrote:
->I'm only on pg. 51 and he hasn't been mentioned yet.  Could
->be a "straw man" approach.

My fault, that wasn't Randle/Schmitt's witness, it was Moore/Shandera's.

->Yeah, that would be interesting!  Do you have my address?


Nope. Do send.

->The *SUN* huh?  The tabloid people must be mad!  :-)

->With the name confusion, would he be taken seriously?

Is he ever? :-)

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Hoax Document
Date: 25 Jun 91 05:36:00 GMT

THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT IS A HOAX. IT IS NOT TO BE CIRCULATED WITHOUT THIS
PREAMBLE.

This document was received by a noted abduction researcher, along with an
anonymous letter. My cursory investigation shows that there is no Maj. Thomas
Shively at the Pentagon. The only Thomas Shively in the Pentagon Personnel
Index is a civilian computer programmer for the Dept. of the Army. Efforts to
contact him thus far have been fruitless. Nevertheless, it is our considered
opinion that this document is a hoax, and we provide the transcription of it
here for information and cautionary purposes only. If you circulate this
document, either in print or electronically, please include this preamble.

Jim Speiser
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEGIN DOCUMENT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
                           WASHINGTON, DC 20330

      [Seal]
Office of the Secretary

                                                19 December, 1990

[Name and address Deleted]

Dear Mr. [Deleted]

        LtCol. Cox requested that I write you, as you know the situation in
the Gulf has been occupying us round the clock. LtCol. Cox sends his
regrets, but as the situation stabilizes, he will be in touch.

        First, there are still some concerns over the October issue of
Av-Week. We could not understand why they would run the Edwards story
without review. This is still under review. What are your ideas?

        The Belgium situation has been corrected to all our satisfaction. I
understand that another show will air on the tabloid program that will show
that the sightings could be a mis-identification of terrestrial objects, say
a street light. This should air in January.

        The Nevada situation has been brought under control by the inclusion
of the "porno" queen along with the Nellis allegations. That was a brilliant
coup. This entire issue is under constant monitoring. Anything else you may
hear will be of great interest.

        The last area to be addressed concerns our "friend" Mr. Cooper. As
you can see by the attachment included, the reason for Mr. Cooper leaving
Naval service, I believe back in the old days, the phrase would be keel
hauling. Cooper has worked out beyond our expectations. With his paranoid
personality, and alcohol abuse not to mention the crowds he draws, we feel
that the field has been covered. Cooper, as expected, will self-destruct at
some point, and with that, a large part and parcel of this field will go
with him. We were concerned last year when he drew police interest in the
vandalism case, but no charges were ever filed. We still have assets that feed
him bits and pieces that he weaves into an ever more elaborate scenario. We are
watching him closely, and if you hear anything of interest we will look to
hear from you. Thank you very much, and the happiest of the Holiday Season
to you and your family.


                                        Sincerely

                                        Thomas Shively
                                        Maj. USAF
                                        S. & T. Group

1 Atch
1. Copy DD 214
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
END DOCUMENT

I'd like to request that at least two people not connected with ParaNet
Administration reply to this message and quote the preamble in its entirety.
At least one person should be on InterNet.


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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Alternative hypothesis for UFOs?
Date: 25 Jun 91 05:59:00 GMT

In a message to All <06-21-91 12:12> stl-06sima.army.mil!wmartin

->have to go on... :-) Why would creatures expend the vast resources in
->time and energy to travel between the stars to come *here*, for a start?
->We are not all that interesting [except maybe to serve as a bad example! :-)]

This is one assumption that has always bothered me. We now seem to have
"human bashing." It seems to be the intellectually chic thing to do to say
that we're just not all that interesting, that we're a backwater planet,
that we're barbaric, that we-can't-live-in-harmony-so-who-would-want-to
study-us? I don't buy it, at least not as an argument against
extra-terrestrial visitation. You seem to base your argument on the
assumption that if life exists Elsewhere, that the Galaxy must be teeming
with life. Going along with that for just a moment (and ONLY a moment, mind
you, as I don't think its a valid assumption), take a look at this planet,
which we KNOW to be absolutely saturated with millions of different life
forms, from the microbial to the majestic (you should pardon the term). Look
at the effort we humans have gone to to localize, categorize, collect,
dissect, and study every last blessed one of them we can identify. Hell,
we've gone to ANTARCTICA to study BACTERIA! So I don't think the argument
that "they wouldn't bother with us" holds much water.

More important, I can see at least one thing about us that would be of
considerable interest to any sufficiently advanced race. We might hold a key
to their historic past. We might represent a self-contained history lesson,
one that is turned to a very crucial page, with the heading of "Post-Nuclear
Era." The number of civilizations that survive their own nuclear era is a
prominent factor in many permutations of the Drake Equation. Some hold it to
be the most limiting factor therein. So far, we seem to be a prime candidate
(we ain't out of the woods yet, but things are looking much better, you must
admit.) I'd say that might just tag us for special importance.

As far as time travel is concerned, nothing is impossible, but looking at
relative likelyhoods, I'd have to go with the ETH, the UTH
(ulra-terrestrials, as proposed by Vallee and others), and even Kenneth
Ring's "Imaginals" long before I turned to the Extra-Temporal Hypothesis.
The possibility of paradoxes seem just a touch too overwhelming to me.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Foo Fighter Story
Date: 25 Jun 91 07:13:00 GMT


 * Forwarded from "Fido UFO Echo"
 * Originally from Jim Sanders
 * Originally dated 06-18-91 22:48

This message was in the Aviation Conference. It is similar to The "Foo
Fighters" that were reported over Europe near the end of World War II. Thought
I would post it so that you may want to question Paul further. Jim
-------------------------------

From: PAUL ELSHOFF                    Read: (N/A) Subj: FOO FIGHTERS
Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE Conf: AVIATION (9)               Read Type: GENERAL (+)

Anyone else out there ever run into one of these animals?  I had my "close
encounter" in the early 70's while flying in the area of Windsor Ontario. It
was a small (about basketball sized) ball of light that seemed to fly formation
with me for a while off my starboard wingtip, then cirled the plane a couple of
times before leaving VERY rapidly for parts unknown in a nearly vertical climb.
During the time it was near me, my radios went out, my nav and cabin lights
dimmed, my compass decided it wanted to be a top, and the engine got really
rough.  One it left, everything came back to normal. ATC showed nothing but
yours truly in the area on radar, and the weather boys said it was unlikely to
have been an atmospheric phenomenon. Nobody has ever come up with a logical
explanation, and I'm starting to believe in haunted Cessna 172's!

I've heard some of the WW II bomber jockeys had similar sightings, and since it
seems some of the guys on here are of "the class of '45", I figured just
maybe......

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Crash at Roswell
Date: 25 Jun 91 06:14:00 GMT

In a message to All <06-23-91 06:06> Sheldon Wernikoff wrote:

->Can anyone identify the UFO photograph on the front cover of Randle
->and Schmitt's new book _ UFO CRASH AT ROSWELL_? I know I've seen
->that shot before, and I don't think it has anything to do with
->Roswell. Please correct me if I am wrong. It's odd, but there
->doesn't seem to be any reference to the photo in the book.
->

According to Mark Rodeghier, its a hoax photo from the collection of
contactee Daniel Fry. Shmitt and Randle had absolutely no control over the
cover artwork, and typical of publishers, Avon simply said, "Oh, yeah, OK, a
UFO book. Let's use....uh....THIS one."

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 25 Jun 91 06:17:00 GMT

In a message to John Hicks <06-21-91 07:19> Jim Greenen wrote:

->funds the JPL and other places. We must all look before we
->leap and Ed has looked and he ain't leaping.

That is, as you say, his prerogative. And we ain't buyin'. That's ours.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 25 Jun 91 06:21:00 GMT

Hear, Hear!

Jim

--
Jim Speiser - 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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 431

                            Thursday, June 27th 1991

Today's Topics:

                                    Re: UFONS
                                Re: Crop Circles?
                                Russian "octopus"
                                     Roswell
                              UFO Crash at Roswell
                          Cufos Roswell Special Report
                                Russian "octopus"
                                 June 10, AW&ST
                            Re: UFO Crash at Roswell
                                Re: CROP CIRCLES?
                                Russian "octopus"
                               Undeniable evidence
                                  Crop Circles?
                                  Hoax Document
                            Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
                              Re: Crash at Roswell
                            Re: UFO Crash at Roswell
                           UFO Crash at Roswell Review
                              CUFOS Roswell Report

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Trevithick)
Subject: Re: UFONS
Date: 25 Jun 91 22:10:00 GMT

Hi Peggy,

I got your CIS note, and remembered that I hadn't been back here for a
long time!  I keep meaning to send in my $$$ but keep getting wrapped
up in other things and forgeting.  The rare times I remember I usually
procrastinate.  Is it hopeless??  :-)

I am at work, waiting for the VAX backup run to complete, so this is a
good time to write a check and address an envelope!

Thanks for the note.  No, don't have that Silver Express thing, but
will look for it.  In the meantime, I will go back to TapCis and send
you a longer note while meter is on pause...

Talk to you soon,
   -Bob
--
Bob Trevithick - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Crop Circles?
Date: 22 Jun 91 17:58:00 GMT


 >I am not sure, but I think that there have been many other types of designes
 >that have appeared in crops, not just circles.  Also there are a few other
 >types of designes such as human figures and various animals that are
 >'engraved' in the earth which are very large, that are possibly in nevada or
 >other places, but I am not sure where exactly.

   True, I remember seeing pictures of a giant stick-figure horse and snake
somewhere in Europe or thereabouts which can be seen from the sky.  Being
built so long ago, why would it's constructors direct the field of view to
the skies, having no flying instruments of their own.
   Also, what about those huge shapes in the desert that can be seen from
the sky.  People claim they are 'landing marks'.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Russian "octopus"
Date: 24 Jun 91 07:47:00 GMT


 DE> do not recall Marina placing any great emphasis on that
 DE> picture, I imagine that it garnered the interest because of
 DE> how spectacular it looked.

  Yes, I noticed she had an assortment of photos, and didn't place any
emphasis on that one.  It sure is spectacular.

                                        jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Roswell
Date: 25 Jun 91 04:52:08 GMT


 > I was just informed that on July 1st, the Roswell case will be
 > discussed on the Larry King TV program on CNN.

  Thanks. Marked it on my calendar.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: UFO Crash at Roswell
Date: 25 Jun 91 04:54:09 GMT


 > Kudos to Randle and Schmitt!

  If they were prosecutors, a conviction would be almost certain. Great
job.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Cufos Roswell Special Report
Date: 25 Jun 91 04:56:10 GMT


  How about posting CUFOS mailing address.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Russian "octopus"
Date: 25 Jun 91 04:58:11 GMT


 > I think I've lost track of this conversation.

  No, it was a still photo of what looks like an aerial octopus.
Marina Popovich waved a handful of photos, and that one was visible.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: June 10, AW&ST
Date: 25 Jun 91 05:00:12 GMT


 > triangular aircraft which have been developed by the U.S. to provide
 > support for the Stealth fighter.

  That's mighty interesting. Did the article mention the role
(specifically) of these aircraft?

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: UFO Crash at Roswell
Date: 25 Jun 91 05:01:13 GMT


 > Do you know if the book is available at the usual places,
 > Waldenbooks, etc.?

  That's the title, and I found my copy at a Walden's.

                                           jbh

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: CROP CIRCLES?
Date: 24 Jun 91 20:34:12 GMT

If it's the cover I'm thinking of, the circles are irrigation arms
photographed from the air. Notice how none overlap, and there are long lines
leading into each circle into the center. (the pivot point) I think it's the
back of Coda right? Since I'm at work I don't have it hand to observe
specifics.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Don Ecker)
Subject: Russian "octopus"
Date: 24 Jun 91 19:53:00 GMT

Jim Speiser said:

 > I think I've lost track of this conversation. Are we talking about the
 > photo that PHOBOS sent back of the shadow on Mars? If so, that photo
 > appears on page 282 of "Genesis Revisited" by Zechariah Sitchin. If not,
 > could someone please clarify?

Jim the photo referred to was a type of "light flash" that resembled what
looked like a surrealistic octopus. This photo was included in the bundle that
Marina had with her.

Don

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



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


From: vanth!jms
Subject: Undeniable evidence
Date: 27 Jun 91 07:39:22 GMT

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

To: David Villa

+   2. The way the Govt. handles the UFO phenomena in that there is such a
+MASSIVE outpouring of eye-whitness accounts of sightings and abductions.  A
+Govt. so 'responsible' for the welfare of it's people and even as a purely
+scientific interest, should take the phenomenon more seriousy.  Because of
+the volume of sightings and reports, the Govt. should be forced to respond
+with it's own hardcore investigative measures no matter how outlandish the
+outcome may yeild.  All the Govt. has stated on the phenomenon is that it is
+'inconclusive'.  This, in itself, proves to me the Govt. knows somthing we
+do not.  Our Govt. has never acted this way in the past with more 'up-front'
+measures.  Look at the 'Red Scare'.

Although the government professes to have no interest in the phenomenon,
there's evidence that that simply isn't true.  Have you read 'Above Top
Secret' by Tim Good yet?  It's a huge book, covering not only the American
government but the Canadian, British, and Russian as well.  Waldenbooks is
selling it for about $13, and it's a bargain!

--
  *  From the disk of: |  [e-mail]   |  'Let's become
  Jim Shaffer, Jr. |  amix.commodore.com!vanth!jms  |   alive again.'
  37 Brook Street |  uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms  |
  Montgomery, PA 17752 |  [e-mail]  |    --Yes




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


From: vanth!jms
Subject: Crop Circles?
Date: 27 Jun 91 07:40:19 GMT

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

To: David Villa

+   Does anyone know if that weird chain of symbols in the crops on the cover
+of the Led Zepplin collection is a crop circle?  If so, that sure is a weird
+'circle'.  Looks more like artwork to me.

'Artwork' or not  :-) , it's an actual formation found in England.  They
*have* been getting stranger lately.  (When I say 'lately' I mean as of
last season.  I haven't heard much this year.)

--
  *  From the disk of: |  [e-mail]   |  'Let's become
  Jim Shaffer, Jr. |  amix.commodore.com!vanth!jms  |   alive again.'
  37 Brook Street |  uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms  |
  Montgomery, PA 17752 |  [e-mail]  |    --Yes




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


From: vanth!jms
Subject: Hoax Document
Date: 27 Jun 91 07:41:14 GMT

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

To: Jim Speiser

+THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT IS A HOAX. IT IS NOT TO BE CIRCULATED WITHOUT THIS
+PREAMBLE.
+
+This document was received by a noted abduction researcher, along with an
+anonymous letter. My cursory investigation shows that there is no Maj. Thomas
+Shively at the Pentagon. The only Thomas Shively in the Pentagon Personnel
+Index is a civilian computer programmer for the Dept. of the Army. Efforts to
+contact him thus far have been fruitless. Nevertheless, it is our considered
+opinion that this document is a hoax, and we provide the transcription of it
+here for information and cautionary purposes only. If you circulate this
+document, either in print or electronically, please include this preamble.
+
+Jim Speiser
+[...]
+  First, there are still some concerns over the October issue of
+Av-Week. We could not understand why they would run the Edwards story
+without review. This is still under review. What are your ideas?

Does the government usually review AvWeek stories?  I've never seen the
magazine, so I don't know what its policies are.

+  The Belgium situation has been corrected to all our satisfaction. I
+understand that another show will air on the tabloid program that will show
+that the sightings could be a mis-identification of terrestrial objects, say
+a street light. This should air in January.

Huh?  A street light?  Are they talking about the same Belgium situation?

Did this show air?  We don't get it around here.

+  The Nevada situation has been brought under control by the inclusion
+of the 'porno' queen along with the Nellis allegations. That was a brilliant
+coup. This entire issue is under constant monitoring. Anything else you may
+hear will be of great interest.

Oh please!  How is Marilyn Chambers with *one* sighting which
doesn't even match the others supposed to discredit the entire story?

+  The last area to be addressed concerns our 'friend' Mr. Cooper. As
+you can see by the attachment included, the reason for Mr. Cooper leaving
+Naval service, I believe back in the old days, the phrase would be keel
+hauling. Cooper has worked out beyond our expectations. With his paranoid
+personality, and alcohol abuse not to mention the crowds he draws, we feel
+that the field has been covered. Cooper, as expected, will self-destruct at
+some point, and with that, a large part and parcel of this field will go
+with him. We were concerned last year when he drew police interest in the

Again, who does this author take us for?  Seeing as how a lot of sincere
dedicated researchers have already rejected Cooper, how does he figure that
his 'self-destruction' will take out "a large part and parcel of this
field'?  Only that part which gets in all the other parts' way!


My conclusion (in case it hasn't been obvious):

This document was written by a fool.  I have difficulty believing that the
government could fall to this level of illogic, regardless of what else you
might say about them.


+[...]
+END DOCUMENT
+
+I'd like to request that at least two people not connected with ParaNet
+Administration reply to this message and quote the preamble in its entirety.
+At least one person should be on InterNet.

OK...

--
  *  From the disk of: |  [e-mail]   |  'Let's become
  Jim Shaffer, Jr. |  amix.commodore.com!vanth!jms  |   alive again.'
  37 Brook Street |  uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms  |
  Montgomery, PA 17752 |  [e-mail]  |    --Yes




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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee
Date: 27 Jun 91 01:25:00 GMT

Jim Greenen writes:

>"John; and who said that Ed wasn't smart. If it was I that had
>taken those photo's, there would be a clod day in hell before I
>would turn them over to the JPL lab or to anyone else connected to
>the government. And that wouldn't have anything to do with the
>notion that thay are fake or not. Turning these photos over to JPL
>is like having Phillip Klass the final word on the GB case. Ed did
>the right thing on this and if people don't want to believe these
>phots are real because JPL didn't analyze them, then that their
>problem. And goes along with all other photos that come from
>Russia or other places in the world. This is just like handing a
>gun to the accused and asking him if this is the gun that he used
>in the crime. One must check to see who funds the JPL and other
>places. We must all look before we leap and Ed has looked and he
>ain't leaping." <<< Jim Greenen

Jim, JPL is one of the most highly esteemed laboratories for
photographic analysis in the world. I am confident you will agree
that an affirmative response from Nathan re: the GB polaroids,
videotape, and Nimslo shots, would boost Ed Walters' credibility
significantly. If Walters is apprehensive about his originals
vanishing, why does he entrust them to Maccabee, who is employed by
the government? How does he know for sure that the "originals" he
now retains, are not copies? Obviously, there has to be some degree
of trust. If not JPL, what scientific body would you personally
endorse to do further evaluation of the available material? Proper
scientific method stipulates that all elements of doubt in any
experimental situation be controlled, with results being
reproducible by others. It is irresponsible of you to state that
"...if people don't want to believe these photos are real because
JPL didn't analyze them, then that (sic) their problem..." I think
we all want these photos to be "real", but we must not let our
desires cloud our objectivity.

Sheldon Wernikoff, N9EHL

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Crash at Roswell
Date: 26 Jun 91 00:28:00 GMT

Sheldon,
    The cover photo on "UFO Crash at Roswell" looks like a hoax photo
I saw in another book.  I probably have it and will look further in
this room I call my "office."   :-)
    Will let ya know.
                  Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: UFO Crash at Roswell
Date: 26 Jun 91 00:34:00 GMT

Hi David,
     I, too, just picked up the LAST copy of "UFO Crash at Roswell" and
can't wait to read it.
 See ya,
         Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (sm)
Subject: UFO Crash at Roswell Review
Date: 27 Jun 91 07:53:00 GMT


Book Review: "UFO Crash at Roswell" by Kevin D. Randle and Donald
R. Schmitt (Avon Books, 1991), 327 pages.

(Reviewed   by  Michael  Corbin  and  James  R.  Black,   ParaNet
Information  Service. Copyright 1991 by Michael Corbin and  James
R. Black. All Rights Reserved.)

There  are  some  books that everyone with an  interest  in  UFOs
should own. "UFO Crash at Roswell" is one of them. Here, for  the
first time, is a definitive answer to the long-standing question,
"Has the U.S. government ever recovered a crashed flying saucer?"
The answer is a resounding "Yes!"

The Story and the Evidence
-------------------------
In brief, "UFO Crash at Roswell" tells how an unidentified flying
object  struck the earth on July 2, 1947 near Corona, New  Mexico
during  a violent thunderstorm; how the wreckage was found  by  a
local  rancher  and reported to the 509th Bomb Group  at  Roswell
Army  Air  Field;  how the soldiers of  the  509th  gathered  the
wreckage,  discovered a second (and possibly a third)  associated
crash site, took possession of four alien bodies, and transported
their finds to Los Alamos and Wright Field for analysis; and  how
the  military  brass  in the Eighth Air Force  and  the  Pentagon
squelched  the  facts,  disinformed the  public,  and  suppressed
almost all discussion of the events for decades afterwards.

Such  a  story could easily be dismissed as the rankest  sort  of
sci-fi nonsense, and in its previous incarnations it has been  so
dismissed  by  UFO believers and debunkers  alike.  When  Charles
Berlitz  and William L. Moore's "The Roswell Incident"  made  the
first  tentative  steps  to cover this ground  in  1980,  it  was
mercilessly  derided  and  picked to  pieces  for  its  intrinsic
unbelievability and its lapses of both fact and logic. But Randle
and  Schmitt know their history, and they were determined not  to
repeat  the mistakes of the past. Randle is a  former  helicopter
pilot and Air Force intelligence officer; Schmitt is Director  of
Special Investigations for the Center for UFO Studies, one of the
oldest  and  most  respectable  of  today's  UFO   organizations.
Together, over the course of almost three years, they interviewed
more  than  200 witnesses, reviewed hundreds  of  documents,  and
conducted the first scientific site visit by private citizens  to
the  crash site itself. The result is a mountain of  proof  which
will  delight  the true believer, astound  the  open-minded,  and
hopefully give the debunkers a real run for their money.

Inevitably, much of the book is concerned with sometimes confused
tales  of  unearthly  materials  and alien  bodies.  But  in  our
estimation  this  is  not  the  most  important  and   convincing
evidence; much more telling is the downright strange behavior  of
the government itself, both then and now. Witnesses can easily be
mistaken  about esoteric technical issues outside their  everyday
experience; it's much harder to misinterpret being threatened  by
uniformed  men  carrying guns. The U.S. military has  buried  the
Roswell event under all the trappings of a full-blown  government
coverup:  the  intimidation  of  witnesses,  the  destruction  or
suppression  of evidence, and a systematic campaign of  lies  and
disinformation  to prevent the truth from becoming widely  known.
The  indisputable  fact  of  the  coverup  itself  is  enough  to
establish that Roswell is truly the tip of the "Cosmic Watergate"
iceberg.

The authors have anticipated the inevitable assault by  debunkers
who  "know"  that  the  Roswell event  cannot  have  happened  as
described.  They  consider  whether  the  Roswell  crash  can  be
explained  as  nothing more than a downed weather balloon,  or  a
stray  V-2 rocket nose cone, or a late-breaking Japanese  balloon
bomb--and  then  firmly  reject them all. In the  end,  only  one
explanation  remains:  that in 1947 the  New  Mexico  countryside
witnessed the crash of a vehicle that was "not of this world".

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
------------------------------
"UFO Crash at Roswell" is not without its flaws. It was published
as  a paperback original rather than in hardcover,  which  almost
inevitably means it will appear in few libraries and will  garner
few serious reviews. The cover art (against the authors'  wishes)
is  a  classic  "daylight  disk"  photo  which  has  been  widely
denounced  as  a  hoax and has nothing whatever to  do  with  the
Roswell crash. The text is replete with typographical errors  and
grammatical slips that even casual editing should have caught and
corrected.  There are mangled and  self-contradictory  quotations
(some of which can be repaired by reference to repetitions of the
same  material  elsewhere in the book), and there  are  "backward
glances"  to  facts that have not yet been discussed.  But  these
represent a failure by the publisher to take the book  seriously,
rather  than  a  failure by the authors to  write  a  book  worth
reading.

Perhaps more disconcerting is the authors' decision to cover  the
same  ground  four times from different perspectives: once  in  a
brief historical overview, once in a "just the facts" account  of
the  event  itself, once in a blow-by-blow description  of  their
investigation,  and finally once more in a day-by-day time  line.
This  occasionally  gives the reader an annoying sense  of  "deja
vu",  as  well as making it difficult to know which part  of  the
book to search through for any particular detail.

On the positive side, the authors have taken a very  professional
and  forthright  approach  to their work.  The  contributions  of
previous  researchers  are  acknowleged  (and,  where  necessary,
gently  corrected);  shortcomings  in  the  evidence  are  freely
admitted; witnesses are named, and sources are documented.  There
are detailed lists of interviewees and participants, a  glossary,
a  bibliography, extensive footnotes, and an index--all of  which
will greatly assist anyone who wishes to verify their information
or  to  build  on  their  efforts.  One  senses  no  "proprietary
interests"  at  work here, which is a welcome relief in  a  field
where  information  is often jealously  guarded  and  cooperation
among researchers is all too rare.

Where  Do We Go From Here?
------------------------
"UFO  Crash  at Roswell" does not mark the  end  of  crashed-disk
research;   indeed,  it  is  only  the  beginning.   A   moment's
consideration yields any number of avenues for further  research,
some of which Randle and Schmitt are no doubt already pursuing:

(1)  The material relating to the second and third  crash  sites,
the discovery of the alien bodies, and their final disposition at
the  hands  of the military is still sketchy and full  of  holes;
further  research  is definitely needed here, both to  find  more
witnesses and to establish precisely what happened and how it  is
related to the primary site.

(2) Roswell is not the only rumored UFO crash; Randle and Schmitt
list  a  number  of  them in an  appendix.  These  other  alleged
incidents  need  to be investigated with the same  vigor  as  the
Roswell crash, and conclusively verified or disproved.

(3) The role of Kirtland Air Force Base, not only in the  Roswell
recovery and its coverup but in other landmark UFO events,  needs
to  be thoroughly investigated and documented. Kirtland crops  up
over and over again in Randle and Schmitt's story--as a source of
orders  and  machinations outside the normal  military  chain  of
command,  as a transshipment point for material destined for  the
labs at Los Alamos, as the place where secret scientific  reports
on the crash were filed, and as the possible source of a military
mapping  expedition near the crash site years  afterwards.  Given
the  prominence of Kirtland in the infamous Bennewitz affair  and
other  disinformation  operations which are known  to  have  been
carried  out  by  personnel of the Air Force  Office  of  Special
Investigations, it seems highly significant that Kirtland appears
so early and so prominently in the Roswell case.

(4)  As far as we know now, Roswell was the first recovery  of  a
crashed  UFO;  but  there  is reason to  believe  that  the  U.S.
government  had, to say the least, already given the matter  some
thought.  The  speed  with which the military  responded  to  the
initial  report,  the forethought shown by the  arrangements  for
transporting  the wreckage, and the thoroughness with  which  the
witnesses  were hushed up and the evidence  eliminated,  indicate
that  the  Roswell  coverup  was not an  ad-hoc  response  to  an
unexpected  event  but rather the outworking  of  a  pre-arranged
plan.  It remains to be seen whether this plan was formulated  as
the  result of prior experience in crashed-saucer  retrievals  or
was merely a contingency plan provoked by earlier encounters with
"foo  fighters",  "ghost rockets", and "green fireballs"  in  the
postwar years.

(5)  The revelation by General Arthur Exon of the existence of  a
UFO control group outside official channels once again raises the
spectre  of  MJ-12.  Exon referred to the group  as  "the  Unholy
Thirteen"  for  lack of a better name, but of course  this  could
easily mean nothing more than the twelve principals of MJ-12 plus
the  President  himself, to whom the  control  group  undoubtedly
reported.  While the controversy surrounding the  MJ-12  briefing
paper  should not be allowed to sully the Roswell  event  itself,
the  semi-official acknowledgment that such a group once  existed
(and  presumably still exists) should add new fuel to  the  MJ-12
fire.

(6)  There  is a crying need to re-evaluate  postwar  history  in
light  of  the  now-established fact of  the  Roswell  crash  and
retrieval. If the U.S. government successfully recovered an alien
spacecraft,  alien  technology,  and alien corpses  in  1947,  it
should have had a profound impact on high-tech research  (several
witnesses  described a material similar to modern fiber  optics),
on  foreign policy, and on the aerospace industry and  the  space
program--not  to mention its effect on the government's  attitude
toward  the  UFO problem itself. Just as the  revelation  of  the
ultra-secret  Enigma machine and the allies' successful  cracking
of  Axis  codes  has  required  a  complete  rethinking  of   the
historiography of World War II, so the Roswell event necessitates
a  reinvestigation of almost everything that has happened in  the
last 44 years.

(7)  Finally,  a host of questions remain  unanswered  about  the
relationship  between the Roswell crash and the "other  half"  of
the   UFO   equation:  abductions,   occult   phenomena,   cattle
mutilations, and all the rest. Roswell *looks* like the crash  of
an  extraterrestrial  spacecraft; but that could be  because  the
event has been shaped to look that way, either by the government,
by the researchers, or by the forces behind the event itself.  It
would  be  a grave error to conclude at this point  that  Roswell
establishes the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis as the only  solution
to  the  UFO mystery. That something  extraordinary  happened  at
Roswell  is  astonishingly clear. Its  ultimate  explanation  and
significance are yet to be determined.

Conclusion
---------
If  you have any interest in UFOs, go out and get a copy of  this
book.  Better yet, get two copies--one for yourself, and  one  to
loan out to your friends. You'll be glad you did.

END
PARANET FILE NAME: ROSREV.TXT

--
ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: ParaNet(sm)[e-mail]



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


From: ncar!ASTRO.dnet.ge.com!CARR
Subject: CUFOS Roswell Report
Date: 27 Jun 91 21:32:17 GMT

From: Paul Carr <[e-mail]>

I don't have CUFOS mailing address for the purpose of obtaining their
Roswell report.  Can anyone post this?




********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************************


                Info-ParaNet Newsletters   Volume I  Number 432

                             Monday, July 1st 1991

Today's Topics:

                                Martian Anomalies
            Any relationship between Randles ........................
                                Re: CROP CIRCLES?
                                 Re: "N" Machine
                                Re: Crop Circles?
                           object moving towards earth
          Re: Any relationship between Randles ........................
                                 STRIEBER LETTER
            Any relationship between Randles ........................
                     Your book review in Skeptical Inquirer
                                     (none)
                       Trilater Commission, CFR references
                                     (none)
                              World War II and UFOs
                               Re: STRIEBER LETTER
                               Re: STRIEBER LETTER
                              Roswell on Phx Radio
                                    Re:panel
                           Re: Paranet Newsletter 428
                              Re: Crash at Roswell

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

From: ncar!dg-rtp.dg.com!grossg
Subject: Martian Anomalies
Date: 27 Jun 91 23:23:33 GMT

From: [e-mail] (Gene Gross)

Hi Ya'll:

Has anyone heard anything about Hoagland, et al, of late?  Things seem
to have quieted down -- well, I've been downright busy so what do I
know.

If there has been anything going on with the Martian anomalies, could
somebody who knows please post an update.

Hey, Clark, I'm finally able to post again.  How's the BBS going?
Once my PC at home gets up and running again, I've got a piece that I
want to upload.  I've been having severe hard disk problems with the
new hard disk.  So the PC is back in the shop.

Later--

Gene



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


From: ncar!bamboo.cax.tek.com!doughe
Subject: Any relationship between Randles ........................
Date: 28 Jun 91 01:13:01 GMT

From: Doug Helbling <[e-mail]>


 Pardon a possible redundancy here, but is there any relation
 between Kevin Randle, coauthor of 'UFO Crash at Roswell', and
 Jenny Randle of the UK, coauthor of a number of books on the
 crop circle phenomena?
     Doug H.

INTERNET: [e-mail]  (Doug Helbling)





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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: CROP CIRCLES?
Date: 27 Jun 91 14:35:00 GMT

In a message to David Villa <06-24-91 13:34> Pete Porro wrote:

->If it's the cover I'm thinking of, the circles are
->irrigation arms photographed from the air. Notice how none

Irrigation arms? Why has no one else come up with such a routine
explanation?

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (James Nugent)
Subject: Re: "N" Machine
Date: 27 Jun 91 02:22:00 GMT

Hi,

Well first of all what exactly does the 'N' machine do?  Where may I find
information about it?

James.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (John Feilke)
Subject: Re: Crop Circles?
Date: 27 Jun 91 04:01:00 GMT

In a message to All <06-21-91 15:52> David Villa wrote:

DV=>   Does anyone know if that weird chain of symbols in the
DV=>crops on the cover of the Led Zepplin collection is a crop
DV=>circle?  If so, that sure is a weird 'circle'.  Looks more
DV=>like artwork to me.

crop circle....

John

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Dane Lancaster)
Subject: object moving towards earth
Date: 28 Jun 91 17:29:00 GMT

Has anyone heard any news about an object detected just crossing
the orbit of pluto
I recently heard a number of people on a locaradio talk show
say that JPL may be aware of this object. It is said that this object
has apparently made 3 course corrections have taken place while
observing this object. Earth orbit arrival time is said to be
sometime in 92. anyone have info on this.
--
Dane Lancaster - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: ncar!bamboo.cax.tek.com!doughe
Subject: Re: Any relationship between Randles ........................
Date: 28 Jun 91 21:36:37 GMT

From: Doug Helbling <[e-mail]>


 Oops .... poor research on my part.  A closer review of the
 source references says that Jenny is a Ranles, with an 'S'.
 Sorry for the fodder.

      Doug H





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


From: [e-mail] (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: STRIEBER LETTER
Date: 29 Jun 91 05:10:00 GMT

THE FOLLOWING OPEN LETTER FROM WHITLEY STRIEBER WAS RECEIVED ON
28/JUNE/1991:

I would like to thank you for your patronage of the Communion
Letter. Your subscription ends with this issue, and we are not
taking new subscriptions or renewals. A list of available back
issues is printed on the reverse of this letter for those who may
{be interested in collecting.

I had always intended to run the newsletter about two years, and
{that amount of time has now passed. During this period the
Communion Letter has gained a large circulation and, I believe,
published some remarkable articles.

But all good things must come to an end. I am not a UFO researcher
and do not wish to endure the continued media attack that is
associated with being involved in this field. In addition, the
so-called "UFO-ologists" are probably the cruellest, nastiest and
craziest people I have ever encountered. Their interpretation of
the visitor experience is rubbish from beginning to end. The
"abduction reports" that they generate are not real. They are
artifacts of hypnosis and cultural conditioning.

What we are experiencing is a perceptual anomaly that is
sufficiently ambiguous and intense that it demands explanation. It
is something that human beings have been experiencing for a long
time. It is the cause of religion, of mythology, of folklore.
Presently it is the cause of the "alien abduction" belief.

What is really (italicized) behind our experiences? We are. This is
a human thing. However, I would also say that it indicates that we
- and our world - are vastly different, and far more strange, than
we have ever dreamed, or dared imagine.

With that I leave you.

                               Whitley Streiber

>SW Any comments folks?
--
Sheldon Wernikoff - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Any relationship between Randles ........................
Date: 28 Jun 91 23:44:00 GMT


 > From: Doug Helbling <[e-mail]>
 >
 >
 >         Pardon a possible redundancy here, but is there any relation
 >         between Kevin Randle, coauthor of 'UFO Crash at Roswell', and
 >         Jenny Randle of the UK, coauthor of a number of books on the
 >         crop circle phenomena?
 >                                         Doug H.

Nope. The British authoress' name is "Randles", not Randle.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Linda Bird)
Subject: Your book review in Skeptical Inquirer
Date: 29 Jun 91 05:35:00 GMT

Hi James,
    That was an excellent book review you wrote for the summer '91 S.I.
on Jerome Clark's new book, "UFOs in the 1980s: The UFO Encyclopedia,
Vol.1."
    Your review pretty much falls in line with another review I read,
in UFO Magazine, I think.  The outrageous price of the book for just
a meager 234 pages escapes me!  No pictures?  The book is supposed to
be an Encyclopedia, for crying out loud!
    I appreciate your comparison to the other encyclopedia-type book
by Ronald D. Story.  Perhaps that one is worth reading rather than
Clark's.  We all held our breath waiting for Clark's book, and it seems
be asore diappointment.
    Was your impression that Clark just wrote the book in a hurry
between other projects?  Was he too anxious to get a jump on the
subject now that we are in the 90's?  I am dismayed that, according to
your review, he only reviewedm - 8 - cases!!
   Your review makes me think I'll just buy this book someday when I
see it for sale at a garage sale or library sale someday.

Best regards,

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



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


From: ncar!ecn.purdue.edu!lush
Subject: (none)
Date: 29 Jun 91 21:32:49 GMT

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



Subject:  Trilater Commission, CFR references

?   From: [e-mail]
?   Subject: Trilateral Commision.
?   Date: 28 May 91 11:32:26 GMT
?
?   From: andy cobley <[e-mail]>
?
?   I have seen mention of the Trilateral Commision on this digest
?   for some time, along with the Bildeborg (sp?).  My question is
?   this, What are these two groups.  What is there cover purpose,
?   and what is their real purpose ?
?
?   Andy
?
?   [e-mail]
?

The following quotes are from a book about the Council on Foreign Relations,
called 'Imperial Brain Trust,' by Shoup and Minter.  I have inserted some
other information (and opinions/comments) as parenthetical paragraphs to
supplement their info.  I consider this book and any other like it to be
MUST reading if one is to unravel what is going on--especially in UFO
investigations.  There is much speculation over things such as MJ-12 and
other doings attributed to the Council, and it is hard to discern truth from
'others' because everything is so secretive and authors are
contradictory--sometimes in their own writings.

In this book the authors review some major events in US history--WW II,
Korean and Vietnam wars for instance--and show the influence of the
Council in how the US foreign and domestic policies were shaped.
It is a factual book. It is not about conspiracy theory (the Council's
influence is neither a conspiracy nor a theory as it is easily found out and
is undeniably true); the writings are not based on some 'secret friend'
within the Council.  Rather, it is based on documents published by the Council
itself.  These are well footnoted.  After reading this book, I realized that
the possibility of a study group like MJ-12 being created, whether it is
called Majority or Majestic, was a very likely enterprise of the Council
rather than an unlikely one.  With its vast resources and interconnections,
its domination of foreign and domestic policy, one can easily conclude that
the description of the scenario of aliens/CFR/Kissinger fits well with the
Council's capabilities and track record.

The book goes through a lot of statistics of how many major U.S. figures,
from presidents to cabinet members to representatives, are members of the
Council.  It also shows all the media, educational (all presidents of Ivy
Leagues schools), and corporate membership.  Also, there are the foundations
like Ford and Carnegie, or the Brookings Institute.  It is quite an elite
group of powerful people.  (Although outdated since it is 15 years old, it
still provides an excellent starting point for you.)  It also juxtaposes
statements by presidents with opinions formed by Council studies.  The
similarities are striking.  It indicates who is pulling the strings.
The most interesting part of the book is the last chapter,
'Towards the 1980s:  The Council's Plans for a New World Order.'
                                                   (Oops!)

And I thought that was Bush's idea!  Well, actually I didn't.  This book was
written in 1976.  This last chapter is most instructive since it allows you
to see that which two writers deduced to be plans for the changing of the world
economic scene in the future, and then you can compare it with what is going
on and with what is coming out of Bush's mouth and the mouths of his advisers
today.  Bush is a member of CFR and the Trilateral Comission.  The Trilateral
Commission is a section of the CFR--the elite of the elite, one could say.
It was founded and all original funding privided for by John D. Rockefeller.
One writer once said that the Trilateral Commission was formed to make the
world safe for international banking.  But that is speculation so I won't
mention that.

Why is this a MUST reading?  Because all people in control of major media
outlets (including Ted Turner and CNN) are members of the Council.  Your
information comes largely from that media so you must know who is telling
you what you are hearing.  You may even sense the possibility of hidden intent!
Also, people are always complaining
in this newsletter about how the media covers the 'Woman from Venus' better
than it covers scientific study of the UFO phenomenon.  If indeed the Council
decided, for whatever reason, that Americans should not hear about alien
contacts, the members who control media outlets will act accordingly.
That includes publishing houses.
It makes the sorting on your behalf so much more difficult--yet still not
impossible if you start with the right clues such as who controls what
you are hearing.

FROM THE BOOK IMPERIAL BRAIN TRUST

Over fifty years ago, in the wake of the First World War, a group of wealthy
and influential Americans decided to form an organization.  The Council on
Foreign Relations, as it was subsequently named, was designed to equip the
United States of America for an imperial role on the world scene.

The British version is called the Royal Institute of International Affairs, or
more informally, Chatham House...

(GBL:  There is one of these in every major country, including
Russia, and they answer to the Bilderbergers.)

The Council can be seen, in part, as an attempt to reestablish unity amont the
internationalist forces that were split by the League (of Nations) ratification
controversy, and to organize a solid bipartisan base for educating American
elite opinion as to the proper role the United States should play in the world.

There was general agreement among the Council members that the United States had
to have a large, even dominant, global role.  As early as 1898, (Edwin F.) Gay
had written:  'When I think of the British Empire as our inheritance I think simply
of the natural right of succession.'

(GBL: 1898 is in the wake of our first taste
of imperialism in the Spanish-American war)

In 1927, with 'Foreign Affairs' well established, more systematic attention was
given to the study and research program of the Council.  This aspect of the
Council's work became its most important activity as the years went by.  The
goal of the study and research activities was, and still is, to provide advance
planning to solve the long-range problems facing America's rulers.  As such,
the Council's work was often theoretical, putting scholarship at the service
of corporate and financial interests.

It is not difficult to find the reason for the Council's interest in the world
and in an expansionist American foreign policy.  The Council, dominated by
corporate leaders, saw expansion of American trade, investment, and population
as the preservation of the status quo at home, and this involved overseas
expansion.  As (Geographer Isaiah) Bowman put it in 1928, foreign raw materials,
imports, and exports were necessary 'if we are to avoid crises in our constantly
expanding industries.'...Bowman and the CFR concluded that a more activist
American foreign policy was necessary.

The assumptions, perspectives, and framework for the policymaking which led to
United States entry into World War II were based on the Council's
Grand Area planning.  (GBL: The Grand Area was just about everything that was
left and worth having after subtracting the land controlled by Japan and Germany.)
Council memoranda to the Department of State during 1940 and 1941 often emphasized
that Southeast Asia, including the Netherlands Indies, was a
key world area of great strategic and economic importance.

President Roosevelt agreed (GBL: surprise!) with the State Department-Council on
Foreign Relations view, stressing the danger to British and American raw
material supplies which Japanese expansion posed.  The President stated during
the second half of 1941 that a Japanese attack on British and Dutch possessions
in the Far East would immediately threaten the vital interests of the nation
and 'should result in war with Japan.'

END QUOTING

I stopped because I could go on forever short of copying the whole book.  I
don't agree with everything they say/believe/conclude, but that is because I
live 15 years later than this book.  I just wanted to give a taste,
but I don't know if I selected appropriate sections.

After reading this book, I remembered how people usually refer to our foreign
policy decisions regarding Russia, China, Korea, Vietnam, Israel, and now Iraq
as mistakes.  'We underestimated this, or overestimated that.  We have stupid
people working in the State Department.'  I don't know how many people I have
talked to truly believe this.  This argument becomes untenable when you
understand the brain power (or 'Brain Trust') which is advising our officials.
I can only conclude that such actions are calculated.  You can also read books
by John Toland ( a Pulizter Prize-winning historian) and by Charles Tansil
called 'Infamy: Pearl Harbor and its Aftermath' and "Back Door to War,"
respectively.  These document how we (all the way to President Roosevelt)
knew the Japanese were about to attack Pearl Harbor and yet did nothing about
it.  We had both their military codes and diplomatic codes broken at that
time.  We also put such economic pressure on Japan that its only choice was
to go to war with us.  Sacrificing a few ships and men in Pearl Harbor would
not in any way spell doom for us, but would get us into the war as FDR and
Churchill wished.  I don't remove blame from the aggressive Japanese.  Rather,
I see how Council members guided the events using their positions in the
State department and our Presidency.  That situation is strikingly similar
to the events leading to the Persian Gulf War.

Does this mean that all members of the Council or all actions of the Council
are bad?  No.  The members do lots of philanthropic work and studies that
benefit people.  I mentions this because I feel you need to know what is
behind what people say and who are the people who are saying it.  If you are
listening to CBS or NPR, issues always come up so that they need to interview
an 'expert' to explain to you how you should feel about the situation.  That
person is usually from the Ford Foundation, from Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, or from the Brookings Institute.  You can bet that that
person belongs to the Council on Foreign Relations.

I hope this helps answer Andy's question and peaks some interest.  It is
worthwhile reading and the information, when applied to aid in discernment,
can be infinitely helpful.  I just hope people don't disregard it.

Greg ([e-mail])



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


From: ncar!ecn.purdue.edu!lush
Subject: (none)
Date: 30 Jun 91 01:21:32 GMT

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


Subject:  World War II and UFOs

There were a couple posts recently which referred to sightings
of UFOs by World War II pilots.  I believe there is a book called
'UFOs:  Nazi Secret Weapon?' out there somewhere.  Has anyone seen
this or know where it can be obtained?

Thanks

Greg ([e-mail])





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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: STRIEBER LETTER
Date: 29 Jun 91 19:14:00 GMT

In a message to All <06-28-91 22:10> Sheldon Wernikoff wrote:

->THE FOLLOWING OPEN LETTER FROM WHITLEY STRIEBER WAS
->RECEIVED ON 28/JUNE/1991:
->The "abduction reports" that they generate are not real. They are
->artifacts of hypnosis and cultural conditioning.
->
->>SW Any comments folks?

I'm not the least bit surprised. Anyone who has read between the lines of
what Streiber has been saying would know that he's been leading up to this.
He has never claimed that the aliens were real. This is why I have never
completely written him off, although I do feel his behavior at times is
aberrant. I've always felt that Streiber's writings on the field were
thought-provoking, and actually some of the best stuff I've read, though he
can be JUST as nasty and crazy as the rest of us.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Delton)
Subject: Re: STRIEBER LETTER
Date: 29 Jun 91 21:18:00 GMT

I have to say that WHitley seems to be one of the few people deeply
immersed in one of the stranger areas of UFOLOGY who seems to have
retained much rationality and perspective on the whole thing.
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: [e-mail]



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


From: [e-mail] (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Roswell on Phx Radio
Date: 30 Jun 91 06:42:00 GMT

A local programming note (those of you unfortunate enough not to live in the
Valley of the Sun, please indulge us for a moment).

On Thursday, the Fourth of July, at 6AM (yawn!), KFYI's Mary Ann Watkins
will be speaking with Don Schmitt, co-author of UFO Crash At Roswell. Lt.
Walter Haut, who wrote the famous press release that later had to be
retracted, will be on the air as well, and possibly Dr. Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
one of the few people still living who actually handled the wreckage. Also
on hand will be Mike Stackpole, head of the Phoenix Skeptics, with his own
theory of what happened, and I will be in the studio for "local color," I
guess. KFYI has promised us two hours, so we will probably branch off into
discussion of Belgium as well.

Set your alarms or your tape recorders for 6AM, and set your radio to 910
AM. Should be a very interesting show.

Jim

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



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


From: [e-mail] (Deane Ward)
Subject: Re:panel
Date: 30 Jun 91 19:30:43 GMT

Thanks Jim for the  boot in the sponge (my Mind) as to the Keyhoe Book.  I knew
I had seen a reference to other work being done that was associated to P. B.
Book and the Colorado fiasco.
Lt. Col. Lou Corbin referenced two projects that were a continuation of the
Investigations as late as 1972; (Old New Moon and Blue Paper.)  These
revelations were made at a meeting of the Retired Military Officers Association
in Baltimore.  Several officers in attendance confirmed the continuing
investigations.  Dr. J. Allen Hynek's book The UFO Experience: A Scientific
Inquiry revealed some* of the deception that had been done deliberately to the
public and the Press.
Excuse the delay in answering you but my *Better-Half* had emergency surgery
and there was no time for the Computer.
I got my hands on a series of four books by Yves Naud --UFOs and
Extraterrestrials in History--printed in Spain and published by Ferni.  Will
get started today and hope for NEWS that could be factual.  I read UFO Crash at
Roswell and when we see you next month will bring some info on Pappy Henderson
who was in Cadets with Bob who was also at Roswell. Thanks again for your time
and aid.
Don't know about the amount but guess we could go for a grant.  I know they
are giving money for dirty pictures for struggling artists.  We are struggling,
so we should qualify.
Deane Ward

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Paranet Newsletter 428
Date: 24 Jun 91 18:20:00 GMT


   Jim, I too remember hearing somthing a while back about human males being
able to carry a fetus until it must be removed by Cessarian at the end of
it's development.  I don't recall hearing anything about the male being able
to provide nutrients, just that males have an unused cavity in their belly
that a baby could easily fit.  I don't recall where I heard this though.
   As for abductions, it would seem for the reproduction process, the aliens
would not want to bother with this added surgery and mess.  The female
already has the aparati, not to mention the 'mothering instinct' which males
do not.  It is easy to kidnap a male, take a sperm sample and keep it for a
while until you are ready to implant it.  Joint abductions where the male is
used to fertilize the female is not necessary.  Heh, also, I highly doubt a
suddenly mysterious pregnant male would not attract attention and, probably,
the pregnant male would have less a fondness for keeping the baby.

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



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


From: [e-mail] (David Villa)
Subject: Re: Crash at Roswell
Date: 24 Jun 91 18:27:00 GMT


 >Can anyone identify the UFO photograph on the front cover of Randle
 >and Schmitt's new book _ UFO CRASH AT ROSWELL_? I know I've seen
 >that shot before, and I don't think it has anything to do with
 >Roswell. Please correct me if I am wrong. It's odd, but there
 >doesn't seem to be any reference to the photo in the book.

   Yes, I too wanted to know the origin of that photograph.  I looked at the
UFO section in my local book store and one or two other books have that same
picture on the cover but no indentification on the inside.  Due to the
clarity and shape of the craft, my guess would be a 'Beamship' photo from
Meier?

--
David Villa - 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************************