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: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (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: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ncar!watson.acc.virginia.edu!JBB Subject: UFO Cover-Up? video Date: 20 Jun 91 21:49:20 GMT From: Joe 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 <70142.2426@CompuServe.COM> 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: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (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: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (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: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim.Speiser@paranet.FIDONET.ORG (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: Jim.Speiser@paranet.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve.Rose@p1.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (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: Steve.Rose@p1.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ncar!presto.ig.com!stuczyns Subject: Re: Paranet Newsletter 428 Date: 21 Jun 91 17:12:24 GMT From: Martin Stuczynski 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 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 wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil OR wmartin@st-louis-emh2.army.mil -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 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 | tbetz@panix.com | betz@marob.uucp%phri.nyu.edu GBS | {att,philabs,rutgers,cmcl2}!phri!marob!upaya!tbetz -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sheldon.Wernikoff@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG (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: Sheldon.Wernikoff@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim.Speiser@paranet.FIDONET.ORG (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: Jim.Speiser@paranet.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim.Speiser@paranet.FIDONET.ORG (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: Jim.Speiser@paranet.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Don.Sudduth@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG (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: Don.Sudduth@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Don.Sudduth@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG (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: Don.Sudduth@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Burke@f9.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (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: John.Burke@f9.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Burke@f9.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (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: John.Burke@f9.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Burke@f9.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (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: John.Burke@f9.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim.Speiser@paranet.FIDONET.ORG (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> stuczyns@presto.ig.com 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: Jim.Speiser@paranet.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sheldon.Wernikoff@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG (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: Sheldon.Wernikoff@p0.f150.n30163.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 For administrative requests (subscriptions, back issues) send to: UUCP {ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara-request DOMAIN infopara-request@scicom.alphacdc.com To obtain back issues by anonymous ftp, connect to: DOMAIN ftp.uiowa.edu (directory /archives/paranet) ******************The**End**of**Info-ParaNet**Newsletter************************