Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume I Number 325 Saturday, November 3rd 1990 Today's Topics: ED WALTERS NEWS ARTICLE ED WALTERS NEWS ARTICLE Ed Walters video Ed Walters video Re: Hard Copy/bel. Ufo Re: Hard Copy/bel. Ufo Re: Belgium Re: Belgium Kecksburg Fire Station The Great Gulf Coast UFO Gathering Public Release Gulf Breeze Report Conclusion - Gulf Breeze Williamsburg Iowa 28 October 90 Ufo Capital Re: Horse-patooties And Sonic Booms ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: ED WALTERS NEWS ARTICLE Date: 30 Oct 90 16:11:00 GMT * Forwarded from "ECKAR1" * Originally from Ray Griffin * Originally dated 10-27-90 14:09 PENSACOLA NEWS JOURNAL SATURDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1990 .............................. INVESTIGATORS DOUBT UFO AUTHOR BY CRAIG MYERS NEWS JOURNAL .............................. Two investigators for the MUTUAL UFO Network said Friday they believe Gulf Breeze author Ed. Walters faked some of the photos of UFOs that appear in his book. " We believe that UFOs exist," said Rex and Carol Salisberry of Navarre of their study of several of Walter's photos. " We entered this investigation with a natural and favorable bias toward the Walter's case, " but " our investigation and analysis lend to the conclusion that several, if not all of the photos are probable hoaxes." Walters, who co-wrote " The Gulf Breeze Sightings" with his wife Frances, maintains the photos are real and that they were taken during numerous encounters between November 1987 and March 1988. Walters has appeared on numerous radio and television shows, including " Unsolved Mysteries " and the Oprah Winfrey Show, to recount his experiences with UFOs. He was reported to be out of town Friday and could not be reached for comment. In July the couple was named " Investigators of the Year " at a MUFON Symposium in Pensacola. Walt Andrus, MUFON's international director, said Friday that his organization is not yet ready to give its stamp of approval to the Salisberry's four month investigation of the photos. " I don't know how they arrived at that decision." Andrus said from his office in Sequin, Texas. " It is certainly premature. He has no business talking to reporters. It has never been cleared through here. He can't make representations for the organizations." Andrus, who has for two years endorsed the Walters case, appointed Salisberry in July to take a second look at the case after questions surfaced about the credibility of Walter's photos. The first question arose after a model was found in the Walter's former residence in Gulf Breeze in March. The Styrofoam and drafting paper model was found in the attic of the home and strongly resembled a drawing Walter's made of one of his UFO sightings. The second question arose when Tommy Smith, formerly of Gulf Breeze, said in July that he witnessed Walter's fake UFO photos. Smith said Walters asked him to take some faked UFO photos to the Gulf Breeze newspaper and claim they were real. But Andrus on Friday said Smith is lying and the UFO model was hidden in the attic by someone who wants to discredit Walters. "Tommy Smith can't prove any of his statements- they are outlandish lies," Andrus said. The Salisberrys said Smith's testimony and the model contributed to their conclusion, but more convincing was an analysis of Walter's so-called " road shot " that shows a UFO hovering over a road. Salisberry said the reflection of the spacecraft, which should be flat, actually is at an angle that does not match the road's surface. The triangular shape of the reflection also does not match the round light source on the bottom of the craft, he said. The Salisberrys said the photo and a second photo probably was created by a double-exposure-- a process by which a model is photographed and the image is exposed again onto the same frame of film. " With these photos reassessed as probable hoaxes, the other photos... should be considered as highly suspect, " Salisberry wrote in the preliminary report. Seven MUFON members investigated the sightings in 1988 and concluded Walter's story was true. The Salisberrys were not among the original investigators, but joined MUFON in November 1988. Andrus said that while the Salisberrys are good investigators, they cannot yet speak for MUFON. " They ( the Salisberrys ) do not have grounds to arrive at that conclusion until it is submitted to us. We will have to look at their facts," Andrus said. The Salisberrys have not yet submitted their report to MUFON. Phil Klass, a contributing editor to Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine and a longtime Walters critic, said Andrus is too " proud and stubborn " to accept the report. " I think the Salisberrys should be commended for being willing to change their earlier opinion," said Klass. But Dr. Bruce Maccabee, a photographic analyst who has defended Walter's photos. said the road reflection does not discredit the photo. Maccabee said his analysis of the photo shows light from beneath the object was projected at an angle-like car headlights shinning ahead of a car on a wet road. Maccabee said Friday he still is open-minded about the Walter's sightings, but said it would take more convincing evidence than Salisberry's report to convince him of a hoax. " Nothing I have seen has changed my mind," Maccabee said. Salisberry said his conclusion on Walters' photo does not shake his own belief in UFOs. And he said his report won't end the Walters' debate. " The problem with Walters' story isn't a UFO problem, it is a human problem". Salisberry said. " If the Walters' case is typical of most UFO cases, the debate will probably go on for years in spite of any evidence pro or con." ****************************************************************************** -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: ED WALTERS NEWS ARTICLE Date: 30 Oct 90 16:17:01 GMT The article as published in the News-Journal contains an error. According to Rex, he submitted the report to Walt on Sept. 9. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Ed Walters video Date: 31 Oct 90 05:56:00 GMT I believe I've found a workable method Ed Walters' videotape may have been hoaxed, plus evidence that points to it. The important points are the the object movement must be as close to perfectly smooth as possible, and no extraneous sounds can be recorded. I'll walk through it as if I was doing it. I'm going to use front projection with no special gear. Front projection is a method in which the camera "sees" through a semi-reflective surface. This surface can be a semisilvered mirror or, for instance, ordinary plate glass. Think of a sliding glass door. The camera sees a background through the glass, and a foreground image is projected onto the glass. The camera sees both the foreground image and the background at the same time. The forground (projected) image should be brighter than the background image. Actually, the background ideally should be very dark. For my plate glass I'm going to use a sliding glass door. But I'm going to make sure it appears that I'm shooting from out in the yard rather than inside the house, so I take the sliding glass door off its tracks and take it out into the yard. I prop it up vertically or have someone hold it. I'll prop it up since it won't move that way. So now I have what amounts to a huge front projection screen set up in the yard. I set up my camcorder so it sees the background through the glass. I set up the camcorder so it'll see as much of the glass as possible; sort of a wide canvas. For my image (object) to project, I'm going to use a slide I shot of a model ufo. The model is internally illuminated, supported from behind and shot against a black background, so nothing is visible except the object. To project the slide, I'm going to use an ordinary slide projector, which resides in most everyone's closet. They can otherwise be readily borrowed or rented. Now, I need to move the projected image side-to-side across the glass, and that movement needs to be smooth. I'm going to put the slide projector on an ordinary swivel chair or stool. The slide projector is set up rather far from the glass, so that depth of field (depth of focus) will permit the reflected image and the background to appear in focus together, as if they were the same distance from the camera. Now, where am I?............. The glass is set up, the camera is set up, the slide projector is set up. Only two people are involved; one to operate the camera and one to operate the projector. My assistant turns on the projector and starts slowly swiveling it. I start the tape. The object image slowly moves across the frame, and I can pan the camera to make it appear as if I'm tracking it. **continued** -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Ed Walters video Date: 31 Oct 90 06:16:01 GMT Now, let's pick it apart. Because the image projected is so bright, and my camcorder sees all that dark sky, the auto-iris has opened all the way up and the object is far too bright. I close down the iris a little and the object is just right. Because I manually closed the iris, there's less video noise (snow). *Ed's video has rather low video noise.* Much less than should be expected from *any* consumer video equipment recording those light levels. Bruce Maccabee found that although the although the horizontal movement of the object was very smooth, and the apparent altitude was constant, the object subtly changed shape. In his analysis of the video tape, he found (by actually counting pixels) that the object got slightly longer, then slightly shorter, or slightly taller, then slightly shorter as it moved. This "wavering" is not visible when just watching the tape. Maccabee said the object changed shape, but I believe the *projected image* of the object changed shape. I think the image changed shape because it was projected onto ordinary plate glass, which is far from smooth. Look closely at an object through a large plate glass window while you walk about, and you'll most likely see the object appear to jump or waver. Same effect for the same reason. Want to make it go behind a tree? Stick a raggedy-cut piece of black velvet onto the glass on a direct line-of-sight from the camera to a real tree. When the projected image passes onto the velvet, it vanishes. The ragged edge makes it appear as if the object is going behind branches etc. Remember, it's black velvet against a black background. Want to make the object disappear in one frame? Pause the camcorder, turn off the projector and restart the camcorder. Gone in one frame and no editing glitch. BTW, it's perfectly ok to handhold the camcorder so long as I don't see the edges of the door. Also, by using front projection, I've avoided the problems of walking around the yard in the dark with an illuminated model on top of a stick. I think it flies. Comments? jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Frank.Cox@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Frank Cox) Subject: Re: Hard Copy/bel. Ufo Date: 31 Oct 90 21:22:00 GMT This may sound ridiculous, but with current world tensions and WWIII literally at the door, do you suppose the powers that be may decide to let a lot of this stuff out to cover the fact that we're all in deep S*** ! I mean this could be the ultimate disinformation campaign of all time. "Everyone look up while we blow the Earth to hell!" I realize this sounds absolutely stupid, but I'm certain somebody has thought if it already. UFO's would be the most perfect distraction. I mean we could be burying 10,000 US soldiers a day, and nobody would even be aware as long as Brokaw and Jennings and Rather had the Greys to interview!! -- Frank Cox - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Frank.Cox@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael.Corbin@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Michael Corbin) Subject: Re: Hard Copy/bel. Ufo Date: 1 Nov 90 00:27:00 GMT In a message to Michael Corbin <10-31-90 14:22> Frank Cox wrote: > This may sound ridiculous, but with current world tensions > and WWIII literally at the door, do you suppose the powers > that be may decide to let a lot of this stuff out to cover > the fact that we're all in deep S*** ! I mean this could be > the ultimate disinformation campaign of all time. > "Everyone look up while we blow the Earth to hell!" I > realize this sounds absolutely stupid, but I'm certain > somebody has thought if it already. UFO's would be the most > perfect distraction. I mean we could be burying 10,000 US > soldiers a day, and nobody would even be aware as long as > Brokaw and Jennings and Rather had the Greys to interview!! Actually, the world tensions could be a show to distract us from the reality of UFOs or even the truth about Star Wars. Who knows? What we should do is discern everything with a careful, objective eye to see what really is happening. Mike -- Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rick.Moen@f2.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Rick Moen) Subject: Re: Belgium Date: 28 Oct 90 20:09:16 GMT MC> ParaNet is attempting to open up an electronic link to the MC> University in Belgium where study is being conducted. We will MC> keep you posted on the progress of this. It is our desire to MC> get a link there via our UUCP feed. Anyone getting information MC> on this as it becomes available is encouraged to post it. Mike -- You need to reach Unix sites in the Belgian division of EUnet, which is more or less a pan-European extension of UUCP/Usenet. The central host of the EUnet backbone is mcvax, which is cwi.nl in domain form. This is the Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science) in Amsterdam. This is connected to the _Belgian_ backbone host, prlb2, the Philips Research Laboratory Brussels in Watermael Boitsfort, and also to mcvax at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (Free University of Brussels), which is vub.be in domain form. The Secretary of the Brussels Unix Users Group, Marc Nyssen, can very likely help you out. Send e-mail to "marc@minf.vub.be". You're welcome! Regards, Rick M. -- Rick Moen - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Rick.Moen@f2.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rick.Moen@f2.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Rick Moen) Subject: Re: Belgium Date: 29 Oct 90 05:05:54 GMT RM> You need to reach Unix sites in the Belgian division of EUnet, RM> which is more or less a pan-European extension of UUCP/Usenet. RM> The central host of the EUnet backbone is mcvax, which is cwi.nl RM> in domain form. This is the Centrum voor Wiskunde en RM> Informatica (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science) in RM> Amsterdam. This is connected to the _Belgian_ backbone host, RM> prlb2, the Philips Research Laboratory Brussels in Watermael RM> Boitsfort, and also to mcvax at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel ~~~~~~~~ RM> (Free University of Brussels), which is vub.be in domain form. Mike -- It was late at night, and I garbled this. Sorry. "mcvax" is, of course, the Dutch central machine, _not_ the site at the Free Univerity of Brussels. I don't know what the UUCP host name of the latter is, but the "vub.be" Internet-style domain address is definitely correct. If you can't even reach Marc Nyssen (marc@minif.vub.be), for some reason, you might ask for help from "postmaster@minif.vub.be". Regards, Rick M. -- Rick Moen - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Rick.Moen@f2.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David.Stager@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG (David Stager) Subject: Kecksburg Fire Station Date: 1 Nov 90 04:55:00 GMT 10/29/90 UFO model mounted atop fire hall KECKSBURG, Pa. -- No kidding, there's a UFO resting atop the Kecksburg Fire Department Building in Westmoreland County. Actually, it's a reasonable facsimilie of an object alleged to have cut across the skies and paid a visit in the area 25 years ago. The NBC television network donated the 300-pound metallic model shaped like a huge acorn. It was used to tape the network's "Unsolved Mysteries" show this past summer. As legend, myth and embellishment have it, the UFO streaked across the Kecksburg sky on Dec. 7, 1965, landed and was carted away by the government. Many in the Kecksburg area call the UFO story a hoax and protested the taping of the show. Kecksburg firefighters had the UFO mounted atop their fire station after approving the move last month. -- David Stager - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: David.Stager@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff.Ballard@f3.n1011.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Jeff Ballard) Subject: The Great Gulf Coast UFO Gathering Date: 31 Oct 90 17:10:00 GMT On November 10th, 1990 the Broadwater Beach Hotel in Biloxi, Mississippi will host The Great Gulf Coast UFO Gathering. Speakers at the all day affair include Peter Robbins (The Bentwater UFO Cover-up), Betty Andreasson and Bob Luca ("The Andreasson Affair" and "The Watchers Among Us"), Ed & Francis Walters of Gulf Breeze, FL, Debbie Tomey ("Kathy Davis" of "Intruders"), and Charles Hickson (1973 Pascagoula, Mississippi abductee). There will also be exhibits and merchandise from four states. This event is sponsored by Project Awareness, Inc. More information can be received by calling (904) 432-8888. -- Jeff Ballard - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jeff.Ballard@f3.n1011.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Public Release Date: 31 Oct 90 17:10:00 GMT I've now received paper copies of this and the second report directly from Rex via snailmail. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Gulf Breeze Report Date: 31 Oct 90 17:12:01 GMT I erroneously said the interview was conducted by Ray. It was not. It was entirely done by Rex and Carol; Ray just transcribed it. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Conclusion - Gulf Breeze Date: 31 Oct 90 17:14:02 GMT The News-Journal article erroneously says the Salisberrys have not filed the report with Walt. It was sent to Walt on Sept. 9, according to Rex. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: James Roger Black Subject: Williamsburg Iowa 28 October 90 Date: 2 Nov 90 04:15:37 GMT The following UFO report appeared on the University of Iowa's internal BBS system on 30 October 1990. The sighting is described as having occurred at approximately 10:00 pm on Sunday, 28 October, along Interstate 80 near Williamsburg, Iowa. The author of the note is one E. Larson, presumably a student at the University. The text given below is a conflation of two separate postings, slightly edited. If anyone wants to follow up on this, I can act as a go-between. *************************************************************************** I thought I might have actually seen a UFO the other night. I was driving and this light traveled down the side of the highway about 2-4000 feet. It had no flashing lights and had two smaller craft following it on either side. They were in a formation of some sort. It did NOT resemble any airplane lights I have ever seen. But I'm open to any possibility. I got a pretty good look. The 2 small craft had normal airplane blinking lights but, there were only red (small light) and 2 blue (big lights) on each one. The main ship that caught my attention was a real big white light like landing lights. The only difference between landing lights were that when it passed, I could not see behind the lights. Normally when a plane with landing lights passes you can tell you are looking at the back because the light dims and looks like it's projected away from you. Well this thing did not do that. It constantly looked as though it were coming right at me. This is why I thought it to be strange. Actually, I figure it to be more of an airplane than a UFO because it obviously had 2 others with it. Then again, maybe they were just imitating aircraft?:) *************************************************************************** End of quoted material. -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike.Keithly@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Mike Keithly) Subject: Ufo Capital Date: 2 Nov 90 03:37:00 GMT What town in Wisconsin is famous for having all the UFo's there? I know what it is but i forgot it,and is there any info on this phoenomena here? Mike Keithly -- Mike Keithly - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Mike.Keithly@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Doug.Kraft@f502.n202.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Doug Kraft) Subject: Re: Horse-patooties And Sonic Booms Date: 2 Nov 90 02:14:00 GMT Getting back to the radar deflection characteristics of stealth aircraft... Actually, the surfaces of the F-117A are mostly flat! However, since these surfaces are oblique to points which are least likely to face a radar transmitter, they deflect away from the radar that portion of the radar burst which is not absorbed by the coating. (I had intended to finish up on this line of thought during my original message, but got cut off in time... will continue now) Although stealth technology is a great advance, it is not foolproof... It is intended to make an aircraft difficult to spot by both visual and radar means, albeit more the latter. This has been accomplished with the B-2 and the F-117A. However, both of these aircraft can be detected by radar. If the craft is far off in the distance, or at certain angles to the radar, it is difficult for the radar equipment to discriminate between a stealth aircraft and noise. As the craft nears the radar, and the angle of elevation increases, revealing a larger surface area of the craft, the radar "blip" would be more evident. To back this up, the B-2, still undergoing tests in the Mojave Desert, was sent up within the past two weeks to determine its effectiveness at evading AWACS radar... It is my understanding that they failed with flying colors, even though this was not unexpected. The large surface area and exposed exhaust vents available to the look-down radar were to much for stealth to match... Thank goodness Iraq doesn't have any look-down radar capabilities (they don't - do they?) By the way - couldn't that super loud, superfast aircraft that pulses at 1 - 2 Hz be the Fulcrum aircraft that was supposed to havbe been developed and dropped (or something like that. Seem to remember something about that aircraft and that it would travel Mach 3+.) And is it really becoming this hard to discriminate between deep black projects and actual UFO's? -- Doug Kraft - via FidoNet node 1:207/109 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Doug.Kraft@f502.n202.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************************