Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume I Number 403 Wednesday, May 15th 1991 Today's Topics: (none) 10 bicyclists vanish in fog cloud oops Dan Quayle and Alternative Three Re: Frank Edwards TV shows on Paranormal subjects Re: WALTER.SAL Internet Mailings Re: RECENT STUDIES Re: Frank Edwards Re: ALIEN ALLOYS Re: (NONE) Re: FRANK EDWARDS WALTER.SAL Re: WALTER.SAL Re: WALTER.SAL CROP CIRCLES Zen Faulkes Article on ET Intelligence Numerical Erratum ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ecn.purdue.edu!lush Subject: (none) Date: 13 May 91 05:35:35 GMT From: lush@ecn.purdue.edu (Gregory B Lush) Subject: 10 bicyclists vanish in fog cloud The following is from a Canadian tabloid of sorts. It is called the News. It isn't like American tabloids in that it doesn't print stories about Hollywood lust-affairs, I guess it just likes 'different' stories. ===> BEGIN QUOTING <=== News May 14, 1991 BIZARRE ENDING TO TEENS' RIDE FOR CHARITY 10 BICYCLISTS VANISH IN FOG CLOUD! Ten teenage bicyclists on a charity fund-raising ride through the countryside pedaled into a 150-foot fog bank - and vanished of the face of the earth! 'They just rode into the thcik fog and never rode out,' said bewildered witness Roland Saugey. 'There were no screams, no crashes, no anything. It was like something out of the Devil's Triangle. 'The cops have searched for a mongh now and they haven't found a trace of them - not one single clue. The flabbergasted shool-teacher was one of eight adult vounteers assigned to accompany the teens on their trek through the rolling hills outside Marseilles, France. 'There wer about 80 kids on the trip altogether and they'd all signed up pledges for AIDS research,' rattled Roland told a reporter. 'They rode off in groups of 10 and I followed the first bunch in my car, just in case anybody ran into trouble. There were five boys and five girls, and they were all looking forward to a nice long bike ride in the country.' But two hours out, the unsuspecting schoolkids rounded a curve, rode into a fog bank - and disappeared forever. 'I saw them go into the fog ahead of me, and I drove in about 15 seconds later,' Roland recalled. 'I turned on my lights because it was thick as pea soup in there,, and when I came out I expected to see the youngsters up ahead of me, pedaling away. 'But there were 10 or 15 people picking up bottles along the road and they told us the kids never came out of the fog. 'The stuff lifted a little later, but we never found a trace of those kids or their bicycles. It was like the earth just opened up and swallowed them alive.' And the cops are just as bamboozled as anybody else. 'There's no sign of foul play - there's no sign of anything,' said dumbfounded detective Claude Bletner. 'We have searched every square inch of ground for miles around and there's no indication any of those kids has ever been there. 'If it was one or two teenagers, you'd say maybe they ran away or were abducted. But 10 able-bodied teenagers on bicycles, with a man in a car right behind them - there's just no way. 'The other day, somebody said a spaceship swooped down and got them. And the scary thing was, nobody laughed. ===> END OF ARTICLE <=== Must have been a meteorite. Greg (lush@ecn.purdue.edu) -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ecn.purdue.edu!lush Subject: oops Date: 13 May 91 15:44:24 GMT From: lush@ecn.purdue.edu (Gregory B Lush) I just submitted a post in which I put in the wrong date for the article I typed in. I'll have to check on the proper date as that was what was given to me. Greg (lush@ecn.purdue.edu) -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: shemtaia.weeg.uiowa.edu!jrblack Subject: Dan Quayle and Alternative Three Date: 13 May 91 15:46:17 GMT From: James Roger Black Vice President Dan Quayle, as one of the duties of his office, is titular head of the U.S. space program. Here is what he had to say recently about Mars: We have seen pictures where there are canals, we believe, and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If oxygen, that means we can breathe. Of course, this was in the same statement where he declared that 'Mars is essentially in the same orbit' as earth--a revelation about orbital mechanics that had somehow escaped the astronomers until now. Consequently, while it is tempting to believe that Danny has been briefed on Alternative Three, it is much more likely that he picked up his information from a late-night viewing of 'Robinson Crusoe on Mars'. -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Clark.Matthews@f816.n107.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Clark Matthews) Subject: Re: Frank Edwards Date: 8 May 91 09:45:00 GMT > I do believe Jim Speiser is right--the author was Frank > Edwards. Jim is pretty to have caught that boo- > boo. But...Great Minds all think alike, and we all > remembered a story (from HOW LONG AGO??) Yes, but sometimes I think it's my personal curse to have a mind like flypaper. Just kidding, wouldn't have it any other way :-) Best, Clark -- Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@f816.n107.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hpvclmd.vcd.hp.com!miked Subject: TV shows on Paranormal subjects Date: 13 May 91 19:34:55 GMT From: Mike Dobbs This week the networks are really loaded with shows dealing with the paranormal. So... Get your VCRs ready. Wednesday night on CBS (opposite of Unsolved Mysteries) at 8pm we have 'Haunted Lives: True Ghost Stories' - hosted by Leonard Nimoy. Thursday night on ABC at 9pm, 'Miracles and Other Mysteries' - Four unexplained events from San Diego, Portland (OR), Vietnam, and California are re-enacted. Friday night on CBS at 8pm, 'Visitors From the Unknown: UFO Abductions' - James Earl Jones narrates re-enactment of several documented encounters with extraterrestials. -------- Mike Dobbs / Internet: miked@vcd.hp.com -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Speiser) Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL Date: 9 May 91 17:07:00 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? Did hundreds of > others reports seeing the same UFO? Oh well in the interest of fairness > and information (plus I didn't see it posted before) I had to send this > out. A million thanks, Pete. Fairness is what we're about. Jim -- Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Michael Corbin) Subject: Internet Mailings Date: 9 May 91 23:47:00 GMT > Does anyone know why the Internet feed of Paranet UFO messages hasn't > sent anything for about a week? The feed has been operating correctly. The traffic coming back has been slow. Mike -- Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda.Bird@paranet.FIDONET.ORG (Linda Bird) Subject: Re: RECENT STUDIES Date: 9 May 91 06:05:00 GMT Hi Robert, You bet I read The UFO Casebook (last summer). It was a terrific intro to the subject. If you liked this book, you me1ight like The UFO Conspiracy: The first 40 Years by Jenny Randles. No relation! She's British, so has a slightly different slant to the English language than what we speak (American) but it is also very interesting too! I'm currently reading The October Scenario bu Capt. Kevin Randle. I'm getting all these "Randles" mixed up! Happy reading, and thanks for the offer! See ya, Linda -- Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Linda.Bird@paranet.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda.Bird@paranet.FIDONET.ORG (Linda Bird) Subject: Re: Frank Edwards Date: 9 May 91 06:09:00 GMT Hi Clark, To quote: I sometimes think my mind is like flypaper... Well, I sometimes think my mind is an "infinite sink" where all the good stuff "sinks" to the bottom! :-) Good to chat with you again, Linda -- Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Linda.Bird@paranet.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro) Subject: Re: ALIEN ALLOYS Date: 7 May 91 21:55:18 GMT Meteors can be loaded with magnesium, especially the bright green ones that fly slower and for longer periods of time. Usually they don't leave anything to research since they completely burn up crossing the atmosphere. -- Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro) Subject: Re: (NONE) Date: 7 May 91 21:58:37 GMT Ah the Bentwaters Incident! That one I have seen before. Thanks for improving my mind. -- Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro) Subject: Re: FRANK EDWARDS Date: 7 May 91 22:01:43 GMT Wasn't it Bloom County or was that Dogpatch TN? I'll leave this one alone it's way out of my state. -- Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro) Subject: WALTER.SAL Date: 7 May 91 22:12:50 GMT The following represents a statement provided by Mr. Ed Walters of Gulf Breeze, Florida and received on February 23, 1991. The original document contained various phrases emphasized by underlining, bold print or capitalizations. In the reproduction below, all emphasized wording was CAPITALIZED. -------------------------------------------------------------- A REVIEW OF STATEMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS PRESENTED TO THE MEDIA BY REX AND CAROL SALISBERRY (and recently reprinted on CompuServe) ABSTRACT: The nine page media release by Rex and Carol Salisberry is based on factual omissions and partial quotes. *********************************************************** 1) With a copy of the Dektor Counterintelligence lie detector test results in hand, THE SALISBERRYS ONLY QUOTED PART OF THE ANALYSIS. The balance of the lie detector report concludes: "Ed's interview as such only shows one area that shows a reaction which indicates something is wrong with what he said and that is where he (Ed) took the photographs to the newspaper and told the person (Mr. Cook) that he (Ed) was only the errand boy. The rest of the interview, for what its worth from the stand point of being able to say he (Ed Walters) is being truthful about what he saw and what he did, DOES NOT SHOW ANY REACTIONS TO CAUSE THIS EXAMINER TO DOUBT HIS ANSWERS, ......." 2) On February 10, Charles Flannigan asked Ed Walters to take a polygraph test. On February 18 Ed was interviewed and tested. During the interview Ed supplied the names of Charles Flannigan and Don Ware to the examiner so specific MUFON questions could be asked. THE EXAMINER CONSULTED DIRECTLY WITH MUFON. Ed passed the polygraph and one week later Ed Walters was tested again and once again passed. The Salisberry's account of the above February 18, 1988 polygraph test by Harvy McLauglin is a distortion. They imply that MUFON was not involved in the testing and only quote a piece of the examiners conclusion. The balance of the lie detector report ignored by Salisberry concludes: "MR. WALTERS TRULY BELIEVES THAT THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND PERSONAL SIGHTINGS HE HAS DESCRIBED ARE TRUE AND FACTUAL TO THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY." 3) On June 19 Ed Walters was Psychological Stress tested (lie detector) by Ronald Lauland of New Orleans, a leading expert in the Southeast. THE SALISBERRYS QUOTED THE FOLLOWING PARTIAL PHRASE FROM MR. LAULAND'S STATEMENT, "......and the questions were reworded for clarification....." BASED ON THAT PARTIAL PHRASE, the Salisberrys concluded that, "This gave Walters the opportunity to carefully word the questions so that he could answer truthfully without providing any meaningful results." This distortion of the facts by the Salisberrys is easily checked and confirmed that I did not word or reword the questions. After a long interview, Mr. Lauland told me that one test is all that was necessary for him to determine my truthfulness. Based on the interview, Mr. Lauland (not Ed) worded the questions to demand clear cut affirmative answers most suitable to Stress Evaluation. THE SALISBERRYS DID NOT TALK TO MR. LAULAND AND AS WITH THE OTHER LIE DETECTOR TEST RESULTS, THEY CHOSE TO OMIT MR. LAULAND'S CONCLUSION WHICH IS: BASED ON THE RESULTS OF THE TEST, IT IS MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT AS A CERTIFIED INSTRUCTOR IN THE FIELD OF PSYCHOLOGICAL STRESS EVALUATION (VOICE LIE DETECTION), AS A COURT RECOGNIZED EXPERT IN THIS FIELD AND AS A LICENSED ANALYST BY THE STATE OF LOUISIANA, THAT YOU (ED WALTERS) WERE BEING TRUTHFUL IN ANSWERING ALL OF THE RELATIVE QUESTIONS. 4) The Salisberrys have concluded that the reflection in (the road shot) photograph #19 is "impossible". They present as evidence a "simple demonstration" with a circle of white paper 7 inches in diameter placed 185 inches away on a flat table. They then conclude that the 7 inch circle viewed from 5 inches altitude represents the shape of the reflection that should be seen in Ed's photo #19 if the photo is valid. A. The Salisberrys ignored the pentagon shape that is clearly seen in the bottom of the UFO in photo #11 and the fact that light passing through a pentagon can make an angular reflection. B. The Salisberrys "7 inch circle of paper" experiment does not re-create the conditions at the road site (slope of the road, etc.) and therefore proves nothing. C. Whereas, on Oct. 30, 1990, eight test photos were taken on Soundside Drive at the exact location of photo #19. At the same time of day and with the same camera this re-enactment was made using a 100,000 candle power light shining on the road 185 feet down the road from the camera. THE TEST PHOTOS SHOW DISTINCT ANGULAR REFLECTIONS ON THE GRAY/WHITE GRAVEL ROAD SURFACE VERY MUCH LIKE THE REFLECTION IN PHOTOGRAPH 19. 5) The Salisberrys describe how several UNNAMED PHYSICISTS have validated their conclusion about the reflection being impossible. We discovered the identity of one of the unnamed physcists and learned that he was told to "ASSUME ONLY CYLINDRICAL SYMMETRY OF LIGHT EMISSIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE OBJECT AXES OF SYMMETRY." THIS MEANS THAT HE WAS TOLD BY SALISBERRY TO ONLY CONSIDER THAT THE LIGHT SOURCE WAS A CIRCLE. The physicist was given no information about the pentagon shape structure within the bottom of the UFO, no information about the irregular road top with it's gray/white rock surface embedded in the asphalt and no information that the UFO may have been farther down the road. (Salisberrys say that the road is "black top" with no mention of it's gray/white surface.) This unnamed physicist said that he has now talked to Dr. Maccabee and agrees that there are many other considerations that could cause such a reflection. Plus he said that he was very upset at the release of his preliminary work to the media. "This is not science, and I want nothing to do with it," he said. 6) The Salisberrys boldly use Dr. Robert Nathan's name as if he agrees with them. But when Dr. Maccabee consulted with Dr. Nathan, he (Dr. Nathan) denied having endorsed the simplistic "7 inch paper circle on a flat table" theory and flatly stated that he had cautioned Salisberry to remember that light can do strange things. 7) The Salisberrys said, "Arguments may be advanced that a non uniform illumination might be able to produce the reflections as shown in photo 19. The experienced analysts, mentioned before, (I assume this to be one of the unnamed people and not Dr. Nathan) assure us that such non uniform illumination should still produce an elliptical pattern for the reflection." WHAT SALISBERRY IS SAYING HERE IS THAT IF A LIGHT SHINES THROUGH AN ANGULAR SHAPE THEN THE REFLECTION WILL BE ELLIPTICAL. A very bold statement but very wrong! I tested the statement and when I shined a flashlight through a star shaped hole cut into a piece of cardboard, I got a star shape reflection and NOT an elliptical shape. 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. -- Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro) Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL Date: 7 May 91 22:17:25 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." As re-affirmed by the witnesses, the film packs were opened by others and the boxes were saved. Each box has a serial number. The serial number on the back of the film matches the serial number on its box. The test photos taken before the UFO sighting have the same serial numbers as the UFO photos and the test photos taken after the UFO sighting have the same serial numbers as the UFO photos and all of the above have the same serial numbers as the box they came from. 10) The Salisberrys have repeated a deception first distributed by P. Klass in his effort to prove that the Thomas house plan design is not the plan that is seen in the UFO model. The living area and the slab area is clearly noted in the Model to be 1740 and 2393. Great efforts were made by local officials to find a house plan to match this square footage. THE ONLY PLAN WITH THE SAME EXACT AREAS IS THE THOMAS PLAN WHICH WAS DESIGNED ON SEPT. 6, 1989, ALMOST TWO YEARS AFTER I TOOK THE UFO PHOTOGRAPHS IN 1987. P. Klass selectively photocopied a tiny piece of the Thomas plan that said "sinergy" and left out the many other design and planning notes that show up on the plan. Sinergy was was an option that the Thomases were considering, as were the many other items so noted on the Thomas plan. My base (standard) plan is always for a brick house with options being added as required by the buyer. The Salisberrys are also promoting another P. Klass deception that portrays bits and pieces of numbers to be street address numbers rather than the more obvious dimensional descriptions on the plan. Also, the Thomas plan faced Shoreline Drive and would have had a Shoreline Drive address. 11) The Salisberrys say that "photos 12 and 14 bear a marked resemblance to the model found in the Menzer's attic." THE ABOVE SALISBERRY STATEMENT IS FALSE. Of all the photos, the UFO in photo 12 has a unique double bottom image and clearly has a second, lower, level of "portholes." Also photo 14 captures this second, lower, level of "portholes." The model has more "portholes" than any of the Walters' photos and it has no lower level of "portholes." 12) Ed Walters is on record describing the "horizontal" lines during an interview in December 1988. He said, "There were two lines running around the main body. One line was above the "portholes" and one below the "portholes." The portholes seemed to slide on the horizontal lines as if they were headers and sills." 13) THE SALISBERRYS FALSELY SAY THAT IN FEBRUARY 1988 ED AND FRANCES WERE ACTIVELY SEEKING PUBLICATION OF A BOOK. The details of how and when Ed and Frances agreed to write the book THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS is very clear. As the news about the UFO sightings began to spread, many editors, writers, and publishers began to pursue the rights to the UFO photos. MUFON investigators talked with one New York editor who flew to Gulf Breeze and made Frances and me an offer. we refused all offers from these writers, editors and publishers. Only after a year and a half of the continued twisting of the facts by a few critics did we agree to go public and tell our personal story. A personal comment: I normally do not take the time to read "reports" written by critics because I find it astounding how they continue to try to cover-up and distort the details of the local UFO sightings. The above examples of partial quotes and made-up "facts" are normal procedure in their efforts to "muddy the water" for those unfamiliar with the on-going local UFO sightings. The Gulf Breeze sightings continue as scores of witnesses gather to photograph and video tape the UFOs that frequent the skys over Gulf Breeze. From a distance, people can read the motivated "reports" from critics and believe what they want, but here in Gulf Breeze seeing is believing. Isn't it curious how hard the critics try to convince others that what I saw and photographed was a hoax while ignoring the hundreds of other witnesses who report seeing the UFO? May God bless and guide us all (even the UFO critics). (signature) Ed Walters -- Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro) Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL Date: 7 May 91 22:21:58 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? Did hundreds of others reports seeing the same UFO? Oh well in the interest of fairness and information (plus I didn't see it posted before) I had to send this out. -- Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sheldon.Wernikoff@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Sheldon Wernikoff) Subject: CROP CIRCLES Date: 9 May 91 13:05:00 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 the general ionized vortex theories 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: 708-677-5154 FAX: 312-252-7574 -- Sheldon Wernikoff - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Sheldon.Wernikoff@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASTRO.dnet.ge.com!CARR Subject: Zen Faulkes Article on ET Intelligence Date: 14 May 91 05:37:15 GMT From: Paul Carr My comments on 'Getting Smart About Getting Smarts,' by Zen Faulkes: In an article in the Spring 1991 issue of 'Skeptical Inquirer,' Zen Faulkes (Dept. of Biology, Univ. of Victoria, B.C.) concludes that the probability of intelligent life evolving on a planet which is capable of supporting a biosphere is about 1E-9 (one in one hundred billion). He contrasts this with the usual astronomer's assumption that the fraction is closer to one, stating that some estimates are even greater than (more than one intelligent species in the same biosphere). The perplexing problem that I have with this article is Faulke's 'derivation' of his 1E-9 fraction. It is his calculation of the reciprocal of the number of species that have ever existed, admittedly approximate. That is, of all the species of protozoa, plankton, beetles, butterflies, fish, fowl, and all other fauna that have ever existed, only one is, he judges, 'intelligent'(some people would say that the some Cetaceans are also intelligent, and this _is_ germane, in my view). All life, all adaptations, 'just happen,' and so no one species or type of adaptation surviving is no higher than any other. Not all ecological niches are fully exploited. He points to S. Gould's book, WONDERFUL LIFE. The Cambrian fossils found in the Burgess Shales are evidence that the evolution of intelligence is not the end result of a trend - the species that survived in the shale did so just by luck, not because they were better adapted (I am interested in how we can know how much better adapted one species was than another to survive a mass extinction about 500 million years ago). Therefore, we humans are a 1 in one hundred billion longshot, claims Faulkes. In fact, he goes further to claim that our particular adaptation - intelligence - is no more likely than this - no more likely than the development of woodpecking or a sea otter using a stone to open mussels. I must admit I don't follow this. First, we are ignoring the key factor of _awareness_. The woodpecker, for example isn't aware that she's exploiting an ecological niche, or that her behavior is contributing to the success of her species. The early men however, apparently were aware of whether their behavior was useful for survival and adjusted it accordingly. Intelligence isn't one adaptation, but countless adaptations. Intelligence doesn't exploit one ecological niche, but many - permitting a single species to survive in virtually every land habitat on earth, and even to create its own habitats in space and under the ocean. I would say that the sample space is smaller but is significant - we know of exactly one biosphere, and that biosphere has evolved at least one species of intelligent life. Some reasonable people think that this biosphere has given rise to two or more intelligent species, but let's discount that for the sake of argument. The best estimate we then have of the probability of an intelligent species evolving is then 1.0 - the 'astronomer's' estimate. Admittedly, since that species is the species of the estimator, as we discover more biospheres, that estimate could decrease, but by nine orders of magnitude? My WAG on the order of magnitude is 1E-1, but I could believe as low as 1E-4, because our planet has such a nice, benign biosphere and has probably been lucky on the number of mass extinctions (five, I think). So, Faulkes' estimate of 1E-9 for the fifth factor in Drake's formula can't be the last word for me. I need more evidence that the logical connection is there. Does anyone see Faulkes' argument more clearly than I do? ---Paul Carr Internet: Carr@Astro.dnet.GE.com -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ASTRO.dnet.ge.com!CARR Subject: Numerical Erratum Date: 14 May 91 13:50:53 GMT From: Paul Carr In my earlier message on Zen Faulkes' article in SE, I erroneously stated that 1E-9 is one in one hundred billion. Yikes! 1E-9 is,of course, one in ONE billion. However, Faulkes considers this to be a generous estimate. ********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************************