Info-ParaNet Newsletters, Number 204 Saturday, April 14th 1990 Today's Topics: Cooper's BBS # Klass Re: Chronocentricity (none) (none) Questions From A Beginner... Roswell Re: 3 Star Interview Chronocentricity Important Info. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Cooper's BBS # Date: 12 Apr 90 15:52:53 GMT In newsletter 198 Clark Matthews writes: -+Jim, care to post the number of Mr. Cooper's BBS? A few of us might want -+to satisfy our curiosity... Sure, here it is: (714)-680-9537. Clark, I hope you're more successful than I was. Jim. ---------------------------------------- GRAHAM@IUCF.BITNET ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chalmers@violet.berkeley.edu (John H. Chalmers Jr.) Subject: Klass Date: 13 Apr 90 03:22:28 GMT Jim: perhaps I misspoke, but Klass and CSICOP have been the target of some pretty serious charges on this conference, yet when I requested documentation, the only reference I received was to this article. On the the Univ. of Nebraska conference case, nobody has presented any confirming evidence and my question on what grounds Klass could threaten UN with legal action has not been answered. Since a later MUFON conference was held at UN, the story is suspect. Secondly the "Endacott" case has been refuted on this conference and denied in SI. finally, in another article by Jerome Clark in "Fringes of Reason," JC speaks of the MJ-12 documents as not having been refuted by Klass despite "frantic" efforts. The status of these documents has been discussed on ParaNet extensively. Given JC's track record, I see no reason to believe any of his charges without further support. Does this answer your question? I have no data beyond what is available to everybody else on PN. Klass has challenged alleged abductees to report their kidnapping to the FBI as the government can impose fairly heavy penalties for false crime reports.($10,000 fine + prison?) Could this be the basis for rumor of his threat of legal action? "Enquiring minds want to know" --- John -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: koreth@ebay.sun.com (Steven Grimm) Subject: Re: Chronocentricity Date: 13 Apr 90 03:28:04 GMT What you call chronocentricity, I call science. Isn't that what science is all about? Forming a theory to explain a phenomenon based on the best currently available data? I'll admit to being a little disturbed by the conversation about the brain as a digital computer in your article; the rest seems not only natural, but healthy, if not downright necessary. (What sort of world do you have when people just assume that everything is beyond explanation?) --- Steven Grimm, Quality Engineering Sun Microsystems Federal, Milpitas, CA "This isn't going to look good at the next Cannibals' Anonymous meeting." koreth@ebay.sun.com uunet!sun!ebay!koreth --"Freddy's Nightmares" -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: isis!well!ddrasin (Dan Drasin) Subject: (none) Date: 13 Apr 90 10:12:39 GMT Billy Goodman I heard a rumor this evening that Billy Goodman (KVEG radio, Las Vegas) has been silenced. Can anyone confirm this? -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: well!ddrasin (Dan Drasin) Subject: (none) Date: 13 Apr 90 10:13:20 GMT Chronocentrism -+ I get very suspicious when reading reports of UFO experiences, -+ encounters, etc., when the report is cast very much in terms of known -+ phenomenon, of known cultural behavior patterns. When aliens are -+ alleged to behave very much like humans, I get very suspicious. I -+ suspect that actual contact with alien intelligence will be of a -+ nature that is so far beyond our comprehension that we might be no -+ more aware it was happening than ants are aware of the finer nuances -+ of high-energy particle physics. -+ Thoughts, anyone? -+ Gary Gary, your "Chronocentricity" posting was marvelous. The only exception I'd take is the following: For a phenomenon (or a range of phenomena) to be perceptible to us in the first place, it must have elements of familiarity, whatever elements of strangeness it may also have. One cannot necessarily rule something out (say, an element of humanness) just because it *is* recognizable. As you so eloquently pointed out, a dogmatically chronocentric or anthropocentric *attitude* is not likely to get us much closer to the undoubtedly complex truth. However, it's just as easy to fall into the opposite trap -- of insisting that "alien" must mean *100%* alien. Your argument seems to be based on the assumption of "accidentalism"- -that evolution isn't likely to occur in the same way in different places. And on the additional assumption that the universe hasn't been around long enough for a good deal of interstellar "commerce" and cross-fertilization to have taken place. Well, there is considerable evidence right on this earth that parallel evolution *does* take place, though scientific chronocentrists generally won't look into the evidence because we can't *presently* account for it. As for interstellar and/or interdimensional "commerce"... well, there seems to be no evidence *against* it. -+ I wonder how, with all our satellites and telescopes, we never really -+ detect any aliens out there? Unless everyone that does detect it is -+ involved in the coverup, of course. -+ Forseti - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 A good question. But satellites and telescopes aren't designed to detect aliens. You wouldn't look for magnetic fields with an air pressure gauge, or x-rays with a microphone, or gravitational anomalies with a metal detector... There is an amazingly widespread phenomenon known as "instrumental blindness." It occurs when scientists try to detect phenomenon "x" with an instrument designed to register only phenomenon "y." That instrument may be a physical one (examples above) but most often it is an inappropriate *attitudinal* instrument, i.e., an attitude based on incorrect presuppositions -- for example, chronocentric ones. In either case, no phenomenon is detected, and, lo and behold, the skeptic seems to be vindicated! The Battered Child Syndrome (once the object of considerable skepticism) was *absolutely undetectable* as a widespread phenomenon until a certain presupposition (that parents "wouldn't treat their kids that way") was successfully challenged. Michaelson and Morley "disproved" the existence of an "ether" -- but their classic experiment was designed to measure an ether that conformed to *particular* assumptions about what the ether might be. As a result of the dogma that arose around this disproof, there has been no impetus to test *alternative conceptions* of an ether... and science has been the loser. A similar phenomenon occurs in a more deliberate sense in the practice of debunkery, where, say, an astronomer may be trotted out as an expert on something other than astronomy; for example, ufology (very little of which involves astronomy). Or a psychiatrist may be brought in to dispute the value of hypnotic regression in abduction cases that rest not upon hypnosis but upon spontaneous recall. Having said all this, I should add that astronomers *have* seen plenty of unidentified flying objects, and that there seems to be considerable evidence that our astronauts have as well. The recent radio transmissions between the space shuttle Discovery and Houston in which an "alien craft" was evidently "under observance" is one of the more tantalizing bits of unconfirmed (well, stonewalled) evidence to that effect. =d= -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f728.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Michael.Corbin Subject: Questions From A Beginner... Date: 12 Apr 90 21:38:00 GMT -+ > From: A_CRUZ@upr1.upr.cun.edu -+ > - Why the Goverments around the world are so afraid -+ > of -+ > admitting the UFO existence? My big theory is that should UFOs prove to be truly something that even the government does not understand, they would be neglect in their duty to disclose to the public that they exist and that they (the government) are thoroughly in the dark about them. Lets assume that a UFO did crash in Roswell or somewhere else for that matter. And, it did contain bodies totally alien to us. We scoop up the wreckage and scurry it off to the labs for top priority analysis and we are totally unable to determine what it is and where it comes from. This presents the first problem. Now, we know that UFOs have been known to "buzz" military facilities, power generating facilities and so forth. Even some of the most secured facilities seem to be impervious to a UFOs ability to penetrate, survey and then not only leave, but to fly circles around our finest and fastest defense aircraft. It is like they just flip us the bird and giggle all the way back to where they came from. There are plenty of factual reports detailing such a scenario as I have described above. However, consider this one case that took place in Montana at the Malmstrom AFB in the mid-70's. A remote nuclear warhead firing silo was penetrated by an unknown object. When the Air Force equivalent of a metropolitan police department SWAT team arrived, they found a 150-foot diameter object hovering over the silo. When the jets and helicopters arrived, the object began to rise in the air and at various points, it disappeared both visually and off radar. The local airbase (Malmstrom) and NORAD (North American Air Defense Command in Colorado Springs, CO) were tracking it on radar as well as the aircraft in the area. During its ascent, when it reached a safe-from-aircraft altitude it was again visible and was tracked on NORAD's radar to an altitude where it disappeared at approx. 180,000 feet from the radar never to be seen again. During this time, there were also local sighting reports from civilians as well. However, it was not just this that really worried the military. It was determined that the launch codes on the warhead had been tampered with. This case occurred during a great UFO flap in that there were several sightings in a line occurring along states in the country in line with Malmstrom all the way to the east coast. In virtually all of the cases, the UFOs were found to penetrate similar facilities, were chased and left us eating their dust. We know this is true. Can you imagine someone going public with an announcement like: Ladies and gentlemen, UFOs are real, but we don't know what they are. Over the years there have also been cases in which there have been harm brought upon property and people as a direct result of a UFO encounter. Example is the famous Mantell case. So, it stands to reason that the press would first ask, "Are we safe from them?" Logically, since we can't seem to identify them or catch them, we must not know how to deal with them. So, the answer to that simple question would have to be we don't know. And, there goes public confidence in our military and government. A very interesting paradox, indeed. However simplistic my story may sound, all one must do is ponder the implications of this and it appears to be a very valid concern. Recently, there has also been concern raised publicly about the possibility of a World War being triggered by UFOs. It is my understanding only that there may have been concern on the part of the United States government and the Soviet Union about this possibility. Antonio Huneeus, a researcher in New York, has been covering this aspect very heavily. We have a file called RUSSIAN.UFO, I believe, that deals with this. This theory is very interesting. -+ > Let us assume that the U.S. Goverment (to take an example) -+ > admit and show -+ > their proofs. -+ > -+ > - What would be the people's response? -+ > -+ > - Which step will we take next? -+ > -+ > ... and before you reply, remember that -+ > "there are GOOD guys and -+ > BAD guys out there". This is interesting also. And, I believe that this has been at the top of someone's roster of concerns. I would venture to guess that the government think tanks have discussed this subject more than once. However, without more information we cannot assume anything. We don't even have enough information to determine if they are good or bad or even what their agenda might be, if they are even real. Hang around, Angel, I think that things could get very interesting. Mike -- Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@f728.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f728.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Michael.Corbin Subject: Roswell Date: 12 Apr 90 21:41:00 GMT -+ > From: James Ghofulpo -+ > -+ > Regarding the Roswell crash, I remember hearing -+ > something about -+ > a resident owning a piece of the crashed "craft". Is -+ > this true, -+ > and, if so, is he still alive? As the story goes, Matt Brazel owned the ranch where the crash allegedly occurred. His son, Bill, found pieces of the object after the AF finished in the area. He kept these in a cigar box. After talking at a local tavern to friends about his find, he was approached by some AF people who compelled him to turn over anything that he had in his possession. He complied and the case was closed. As far as I know, Bill Brazel did turn everything over to them and to this day, he has none in his possession. Mike -- Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@f728.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f728.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Michael.Corbin Subject: Re: 3 Star Interview Date: 12 Apr 90 21:54:00 GMT -+ > My biggest question(s) on all of this stuff is how and -+ > where do we get proof. I am willing to believe, but I would also, -+ > at the same time, like to not make a fool of myself and others. -+ > Which, in fact, is a PLUS for those not wanting anyone to find out -+ > about our governments dealings with UFOS. After all who wants to -+ > make a public fool of oneself? I think that is partly why so much -+ > of this UFO information is so unbelievable. Because we don't want -+ > to take a stand and say "I really believe this stuff is happening -+ > and am going to take steps to uncover the truth." There is definitely a problem with this that goes back to the Robertson Panel in 1952. Supposedly, the Robertson Panel was to be a scientific evaluation of the UFO problem, however it was organized and controlled by the CIA. Instead of focusing on the scientific problem, the Robertson Panel decided that the subject of UFOs had to be "debunked" at all cost. The plan was to utilize the services of highly known and respected people in the movie industry. Arthur Godfrey, Walt Disney and others were specifically mentioned as sources of such propoganda to dispell the UFO problem to the general public. This could have spilled over into the scientific community as well. We all know that scientists are motivated by popular peer opinion. Thus, if you have a Carl Sagan, for instance, tell the scientific community that there are no such things as UFOs and list all the reasons why it could be so, and sprinkle that with the possibility of excommunication that one might experience for even pursuing such a worthless pursuit, you get a negative attitude in the community and no one wants to deal with it. Lets face it, crashed saucers are only rumors at this point. We have nothing solid to study aside from landing traces and the like. To go a step further in the public debunking of UFOs, it is generally believed that persons (contactees of old) such as George Adamski was in essence a government disinformant who was being paid by the British government via the US intelligence community. The powers that be also attempted to undermine NICAP (National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomenon) and Donald Keyhoe by slipping in some kook contactees to make it look like NICAP fell into that belief system. It is rumored that they actually paid Keyhoe's secretary to slip them into the group. The contactee movement really polluted the study of UFOs in the early days as people always equated the contactees with the kooks and crackpots who were not to be taken seriously as they were generally exposed as frauds after getting so much public attention. What happened as a result of this is that the general public felt that the only persons involved in the study of UFOs were the kooks and crackpots. This also keeps the scientific community at bay because UFOlogy is viewed as a fringe science today, although this could change. We must approach this with critical thinking in order to gain the respect of the public. Mike -- Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@f728.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f728.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Michael.Corbin Subject: Chronocentricity Date: 12 Apr 90 22:05:00 GMT -+ > From: Gary Knight Kudos! I couldn't agree more with this although I feel that chronocentricity could also be a step in the process of discovery which should occur. Hynek believed that we should also consider this problem in terms that we don't or can't understand too. BTW, if there is an expanded version of your paper, please send it to me via netmail. It would make a nice library file. Mike -- Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@f728.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!Bill.English Subject: Important Info. Date: 13 Apr 90 03:13:00 GMT Don, if you are still talking to me please give me a call immediately. I believe that I have come accross one of the hotest bits of information to every hit Ufology. This is extremely important and I need you advice before pursuing it. I cannot discuss it openly at this point, but beleive that you will agree with me on this... Bill -- Bill English - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Bill.English@paranet.FIDONET.ORG ********To have your comments in the next issue, send electronic mail to******** 'infopara' at the following address: UUCP {ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara DOMAIN infopara@scicom.alphacdc.com ADMIN Address infopara-request@scicom.alphacdc.com {ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara-request ******************The**End**of**Info-ParaNet**Newsletter************************