Info-ParaNet Newsletters, Number 239 Thursday, June 7th 1990 Today's Topics: Press Release / UFO Spotlight ABDUCT Echo Re: Stealth/Area 51 Re: PROJBETA.UFO Re: Fido UFO SURVEY Re: PROJBETA.UFO Inside Edition Re: Fido Ufo Re: MAG-> UFO UNIVERSE Message Bases ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser Subject: Press Release / UFO Spotlight Date: 3 Jun 90 17:08:00 GMT May 9, 1990 CONTACT: Rick Edwards (619) 320-8577 or (214) 301-6255 * * * FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE * * * Finally, A Weekly Television Program Just About UFOs Palm Springs, CA. The presence of extraterrestrials on this planet is a worldwide phenomenon. The evidence is overwhelming and undeniable. The question is: Who are they and why are they here?, asks Rick Edwards, a spokesman for E.T. Clearinghouse. E.T Clearinghouse, the producers of UFO Spotlight, a weekly news/documentary television program, announced the release of their pilot episode. The program focuses on UFO and extraterrestrial related issues, and they expect to be broadcasting by satellite early this summer. More than 23 million people have seen UFOs, Edwards explains. The public wants to know what is going on, but traditional news media only occasionally offer a brief news clip of a particular event and treat it as entertainment or comic relief, he adds. There is currently no serious national television coverage. According to Mr. Edwards, UFO Spotlight will fill this void in television programming for continuous, in-depth coverage of UFOs and related subjects. The program will explore the impact of the extraterrestrial presence on this planet and our civilization, Edwards explains. UFO Spotlight asks the questions that others shy away from, and it encourages the kind of informed speculation that some programs avoid. Interviews with leading researchers, authors, and UFO investigators were recently video taped at the Ozark UFO Conference in Eureka Springs, Arkansas. Portions of these interviews will be included in the pilot program and in subsequent shows. Anyone who has access to information, photographs, or video tapes that might be of current interest on the UFO/Alien subject, or who would like more information are invited to contact: UFO Spotlight, Airport Park Plaza, 225 N. El Cielo Rd. #693, Palm Springs, CA 92262-6914, (619) 320-8577, or UFO Spotlight, 18484 Preston Rd., Suite 102-131, Dallas, TX 75252, (214) 301-6255. -- Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser Subject: ABDUCT Echo Date: 3 Jun 90 17:23:00 GMT PARANET STRIKES BACK! I've always thought that the best thing to do when your reputation starts getting dragged through the mud, as ours has on the FIDO lately, is to come up with something that shows why the other guy was wrong from the git-go. With that in mind, it is our pleasure to present a brand new ParaNet echomail conference, open to all users, on the subject of UFO Abductions. The Topic Moderator for the Abduction Echo will be Prof. David M. Jacobs of Philadelphia, PA. Dr. Jacobs is the author of the landmark work of UFO history, "The UFO Controversy in America" and a leading abduction researcher. He joins us from our new Philadelphia node, which Mike Corbin will introduce to you shortly. More details will follow when all systems have set up their menu structure to get the ABDUCT echo and when Dr. Jacobs gets up to speed on our operation. Meantime, we're very excited about this new addition to our database, and hope we are once again advancing the cause of common-sense Ufology. Jim Speiser -- Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton Subject: Re: Stealth/Area 51 Date: 3 Jun 90 21:23:00 GMT Aside from all the other imponderables, why would you be willing to accept that the Gvt would fly a secret craft (the Hudson Valley UFO) over a populated and heavily travelled area for so long a period of time? Since even our "proven" technology is purposely keep away from populated areas as much as possible and even that "proven" technology crashes and kills citizens on the ground from time to time, why would the gvt take the risk with the HV UFO?? I think it's a possible explanation but seems almost more unlikely to me then that the HV UFO is a true ET craft. -- Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton Subject: Re: PROJBETA.UFO Date: 3 Jun 90 21:35:00 GMT One of the best ways to judge if something might be true is to ask - Is it reasonable? Is it testable? Is it based on unbiased observation? Is the "claimant" willing to explain, in meaningfull terms, how he arrived at his conclusions? Is it, or has it been, replicated? Using the Bennewitz stuff as an example, and keeping in mind, it's been a while since I read it -- Is it really reasonable to beleive that someone with a home computer, and a not very powerfull one at that, can decrypt alien/US communications from one of the most supersecret projects in the world? Has, or even can, Bennewitz explain how he did it so that anyone else can try and replcate his work? Can anyone else even pick up the signals Bennewitz claims he recieves or does everyone else just percieve it as static? How much ambiguity is there in what he is presenting? -- Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton Subject: Re: Fido UFO Date: 3 Jun 90 21:43:00 GMT Don, can you (OR ANYONE) explain to this poor old country boy how a FIDO echo gets to be one, who appoints the moderator, how does it extend itself, etc, etc. I am a little suprised that a nationwide echo such as FIDO-UFO seems to be without any sort of meaningful oversight body and that the various systems carrying it seem to have no say in how it operates other then, I guess, either carrying it or not. Can anyone (or any sysop) simply elect to start an Echo and once having started it be the dictator of the thing? I'm sure there are lots of ways the echos *could* be run and organized but how *are* they run and organized?????????? -- Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton Subject: SURVEY Date: 3 Jun 90 23:35:00 GMT Many thanks to John Hicks - I used his replies as the basis for mine since many of his anwers were similar if not identical to what I was going to say and it saved me the trouble of formating things. > 1. Some flying saucers have tried to communicate with us. Not enough data or of sufficently high quality to answer this question. > 2. All UFO reports can be explained either as well understood > happenings or as hoaxes. Probably false. That's very unlikely, but possible. > 3. The Air Force has done an adequate job of investigation of > UFO reports and UFOs generally. Probably true. I think they have done a thorough job of investigating the ufo phenomenon. However, the problem is that they're not telling anyone else! Their reports are not made available for public consumption. > 4. No actual, physical evidence has ever been obtained from a > UFO. Probably false. Physical evidence has been obtained, but hasn't been conclusively proven to be what it's said to be. Ed Walters' mysterious liquid, some sort of slag mentioned by Vallee, rumored stuff from Roswell, pieces said to have been shot off evading UFOs, the Brazil Mangnesium pieces, the farmers hotcakes. > 5. A government agency maintains a Top Secret file of UFO > reports that are deliberately withheld from the public. Probably true. They'd be absolute fools to not maintain files of UFO reports. Besides, several FOIA request responses point in this direction. > 6. No airline pilots have seen UFOs. Definately false. Many pilots have seen UFO's, doesn't mean they know what it was they saw, that's what makes them UFO's. > 7. Most people would not report seeing a UFO for fear of losing > a job. Probably true. I think the public would avoid a brain surgeon who claims to have seen flying saucers, and he'd be out of a job. > 8. No authentic photographs have ever been taken of UFOs. Definately False. By definition, any photos that weren't hoaxed are authentic. > 9. Persons who believe they have communicated with visitors > from outer space are mentally ill. Probably True if a tad overstated. Proper studies of UFO contactees have never really been done but many of the contactees sound mentally ill to me. > 10. The Air Force was told to explain all UFO sightings > reported to them as natural or man-made happenings or events. Definately true within the context of the last run of Project BlueBook. Current AF policy is more ambiguous. > 18. The government has done a good job of examining UFO > reports. Probably true, although that may be giving them more credit then they deserve. The problem is that they're not telling. > 19. There have never been any UFO sightings in the Soviet > Union. Definatley False. There have been many reports, which, by definition means that they have seen UFO's. > 20. People want to believe that life exists elsewhere than on > Earth. Probably true. > 21. There have been good radar reports of UFOs. Definitely true. Good enough for scrambles. > 22. There is no government secrecy about UFOs. Definitely false. Rolling on floor laughing. The entire government would have to be absolute fools to not keep lots of ufo material secret. > 23. People have seen space ships that have not come from this > planet. Data insufficent and not of high enough quality to say if UFO's are spaceships, or are we seeing something entirely different, as proposed by Vallee or if it is just some strange meteorlogical phenomonon or some other not understood natural event. > 24. Some UFO reports have come from astronomers. Definitely true. I don't think there is any group of people, no matter how you try and group them, that has not had members who reported UFO's. > 25. Even the most unusual UFO report could be explained by the > laws of science if we knew enough about science. Definitely true. There's the kicker, if we knew enough about science. If we knew enough about science, we could say, for instance, that ufos are definitely visitors from another parallel universe, the future etc. Man will never fly, y'know. ;-) > 26. People who do *not* believe in flying saucers must be > stupid. Definitely false. Evidence for UFO's is not good enough to support that contention. Contrast that with the "Flat Earthers". > 27. UFO reports have not been taken seriously by any government > agency. Definitely false. In fact, it's hard to find any agency with any remote connectin to natiional security interests who HASN"T taken the subject seriously enough to at least track reports, "just in case" of something. from the CIA on a FOIA request quite a while ago. That seems pretty serious. > 28. Government secrecy about UFOs is an idea made up by > newspapers. Definitely false. Patently absurd. > 29. Science has established that there are such things as > "Unidentified Flying Objects." Definitely true. If it's not identified, and it flies, it's a unidentified flying object. Science doesn't even have to establish that. > 30. Abduction reports are the result of hallucinations. Not enough data or of high enough quality. *Something* is causing people to believe they have been abducted but there is not enough data to establish the cause as hallucinations, delusiion, mental illness, wishfull thinking, true abduction or ????. In todays world of instant communications it is not terribly supriseing to me that many people worldwide would have similar stories, especially when the "researchers" advertise for "victims" and selectively choose from amoung the applicants. > Finally, what do you believe UFOs to be? I beleive UFO's are Unidentified Flying Objects for which we have no satisfactory way of identifying no matter how hard we try. -- Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser Subject: Re: PROJBETA.UFO Date: 4 Jun 90 05:02:00 GMT Daniel: I believe I sent a file to our hub system called COOPER.ZIP (if not, I shall). While this file does not contain every tid-bit that has dripped from Cooper's lugubrious tongue, it does contain enough of his own rope that it hangs him quite handily. Specifically, therein you will find several files of Cooper's own writing, in which he directly contradicts himself over and over and over and over again. He'll make obvious factual errors in one text, and correct it in the next with some left-field excuse. Have your ParaNet system file request COOPER.ZIP for you, you'll find it an education in itself. Jim -- Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser Subject: Inside Edition Date: 4 Jun 90 05:07:00 GMT > Well, bemused or not, I wasn't really impressed with Bob Lazar's > approach to this. Maybe the guv is hiding something, but the > chances are that they aren't much more "in the know" than > anyone on Paranet.... I tend to agree with you, especially on Lazar. I've never been impressed with the man. Again, there is this tendency for people to think that they can spot a liar, even a good one. I just don't think it can be done. I've seen some very convincing liars in my life, and been convinced by them. So often, in fact, that I just can't take ANYONE at face value anymore. I don't care if Lazar wept openly on camera, and took 50 lie detector tests. A person's behavior and demeanor in relating a story is absolutely no indication one way or the other of truthfulness. (You hear that, Ed Walters?) Jim -- Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f0.n9.z9.FIDONET.ORG!Michael.Corbin Subject: Re: Fido Ufo Date: 4 Jun 90 15:06:00 GMT > Don, can you (OR ANYONE) explain to this poor old country > boy how a FIDO echo gets to be one, who appoints the > moderator, how does it extend itself, etc, etc. I am a > little suprised that a nationwide echo such as FIDO-UFO > seems to be without any sort of meaningful oversight body > and that the various systems carrying it seem to have no > say in how it operates other then, I guess, either carrying > it or not. Can anyone (or any sysop) simply elect to start > an Echo and once having started it be the dictator of the > thing? I'm sure there are lots of ways the echos *could* > be run and organized but how *are* they run and > organized?????????? Although I do not know all the technicalities of the Fidonet stuff, I do know that once an echo hits the backbone it no longer truly belongs to the originator. It just depends upon how much the owner can BS everyone about it and through the use of political power maintain control over it. Fidonet is not the world's greatest political structure. Their rules are highly ambiguous and worded to protect a certain few in the upper echelon of its structure. For example, the rules state that no one shall be excessively annoying and that no one shall be easily annoyed. Pretty much covers the gamut of circumstances. Actually, I am sure that if this kind of thing is ever challenged in court, Fidonet might find itself in some hurting shape. You can bet that as this stuff grows and gets more sophisticated, that will eventually happen. This is chiefly why ParaNet is a private network. It can maintain the necessary control over the echo to keep it from turning into a circus. We also believe in doing things quite a bit differently here, as can be seen. I believe that our process of moderation and echo control allows for all different belief systems to operate here in a civilized manner without the need for flames and things that make a conference unpleasant. Mike -- Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@f0.n9.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f17.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Don.Allen Subject: Re: MAG-> UFO UNIVERSE Date: 3 Jun 90 18:17:00 GMT PP>Last address I have. It's a little town just outside Atlanta for anyone who cares. (very nice place) Thanks Pete..It's ironic..about 1978 or so I was living in Marietta (where Martin Marietta/Lockheed is) and commuting to work in Stone Mountain,so I know the area well..Never knew about this book service tho. -Don Allen- -- Don Allen - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Don.Allen@f17.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: paranet!f912.n273.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Joe.Mollica Subject: Message Bases Date: 4 Jun 90 23:27:28 GMT Please Provide me with a Message Base name for the areas that you have already sent to me. Also I will need info on Dr. Jacobs so I can add him to the user's list so he will not have to go thru the lenghthy Logon for new User's Procedures. -- Joe Mollica - via FidoNet node 1:209/722 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Joe.Mollica@f912.n273.z1.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************************