Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume I Number 431 Thursday, June 27th 1991 Today's Topics: Re: UFONS Re: Crop Circles? Russian "octopus" Roswell UFO Crash at Roswell Cufos Roswell Special Report Russian "octopus" June 10, AW&ST Re: UFO Crash at Roswell Re: CROP CIRCLES? Russian "octopus" Undeniable evidence Crop Circles? Hoax Document Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee Re: Crash at Roswell Re: UFO Crash at Roswell UFO Crash at Roswell Review CUFOS Roswell Report ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bob.Trevithick@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Bob Trevithick) Subject: Re: UFONS Date: 25 Jun 91 22:10:00 GMT Hi Peggy, I got your CIS note, and remembered that I hadn't been back here for a long time! I keep meaning to send in my $$$ but keep getting wrapped up in other things and forgeting. The rare times I remember I usually procrastinate. Is it hopeless?? :-) I am at work, waiting for the VAX backup run to complete, so this is a good time to write a check and address an envelope! Thanks for the note. No, don't have that Silver Express thing, but will look for it. In the meantime, I will go back to TapCis and send you a longer note while meter is on pause... Talk to you soon, -Bob -- Bob Trevithick - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Bob.Trevithick@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David.Villa@f2704.n206.z1.FIDONET.ORG (David Villa) Subject: Re: Crop Circles? Date: 22 Jun 91 17:58:00 GMT >I am not sure, but I think that there have been many other types of designes >that have appeared in crops, not just circles. Also there are a few other >types of designes such as human figures and various animals that are >'engraved' in the earth which are very large, that are possibly in nevada or >other places, but I am not sure where exactly. True, I remember seeing pictures of a giant stick-figure horse and snake somewhere in Europe or thereabouts which can be seen from the sky. Being built so long ago, why would it's constructors direct the field of view to the skies, having no flying instruments of their own. Also, what about those huge shapes in the desert that can be seen from the sky. People claim they are 'landing marks'. -- David Villa - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: David.Villa@f2704.n206.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Russian "octopus" Date: 24 Jun 91 07:47:00 GMT DE> do not recall Marina placing any great emphasis on that DE> picture, I imagine that it garnered the interest because of DE> how spectacular it looked. Yes, I noticed she had an assortment of photos, and didn't place any emphasis on that one. It sure is spectacular. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Roswell Date: 25 Jun 91 04:52:08 GMT > I was just informed that on July 1st, the Roswell case will be > discussed on the Larry King TV program on CNN. Thanks. Marked it on my calendar. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: UFO Crash at Roswell Date: 25 Jun 91 04:54:09 GMT > Kudos to Randle and Schmitt! If they were prosecutors, a conviction would be almost certain. Great job. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Cufos Roswell Special Report Date: 25 Jun 91 04:56:10 GMT How about posting CUFOS mailing address. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Russian "octopus" Date: 25 Jun 91 04:58:11 GMT > I think I've lost track of this conversation. No, it was a still photo of what looks like an aerial octopus. Marina Popovich waved a handful of photos, and that one was visible. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: June 10, AW&ST Date: 25 Jun 91 05:00:12 GMT > triangular aircraft which have been developed by the U.S. to provide > support for the Stealth fighter. That's mighty interesting. Did the article mention the role (specifically) of these aircraft? jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Re: UFO Crash at Roswell Date: 25 Jun 91 05:01:13 GMT > Do you know if the book is available at the usual places, > Waldenbooks, etc.? That's the title, and I found my copy at a Walden's. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro) Subject: Re: CROP CIRCLES? Date: 24 Jun 91 20:34:12 GMT If it's the cover I'm thinking of, the circles are irrigation arms photographed from the air. Notice how none overlap, and there are long lines leading into each circle into the center. (the pivot point) I think it's the back of Coda right? Since I'm at work I don't have it hand to observe specifics. -- Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Don.Ecker@p0.f3.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Don Ecker) Subject: Russian "octopus" Date: 24 Jun 91 19:53:00 GMT Jim Speiser said: > I think I've lost track of this conversation. Are we talking about the > photo that PHOBOS sent back of the shadow on Mars? If so, that photo > appears on page 282 of "Genesis Revisited" by Zechariah Sitchin. If not, > could someone please clarify? Jim the photo referred to was a type of "light flash" that resembled what looked like a surrealistic octopus. This photo was included in the bundle that Marina had with her. Don -- Don Ecker - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Don.Ecker@p0.f3.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: vanth!jms Subject: Undeniable evidence Date: 27 Jun 91 07:39:22 GMT From: vanth!jms@amix.commodore.com (Jim Shaffer) To: David Villa + 2. The way the Govt. handles the UFO phenomena in that there is such a +MASSIVE outpouring of eye-whitness accounts of sightings and abductions. A +Govt. so 'responsible' for the welfare of it's people and even as a purely +scientific interest, should take the phenomenon more seriousy. Because of +the volume of sightings and reports, the Govt. should be forced to respond +with it's own hardcore investigative measures no matter how outlandish the +outcome may yeild. All the Govt. has stated on the phenomenon is that it is +'inconclusive'. This, in itself, proves to me the Govt. knows somthing we +do not. Our Govt. has never acted this way in the past with more 'up-front' +measures. Look at the 'Red Scare'. Although the government professes to have no interest in the phenomenon, there's evidence that that simply isn't true. Have you read 'Above Top Secret' by Tim Good yet? It's a huge book, covering not only the American government but the Canadian, British, and Russian as well. Waldenbooks is selling it for about $13, and it's a bargain! -- * From the disk of: | jms@vanth.uucp | 'Let's become Jim Shaffer, Jr. | amix.commodore.com!vanth!jms | alive again.' 37 Brook Street | uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms | Montgomery, PA 17752 | 72750.2335@compuserve.com | --Yes -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: vanth!jms Subject: Crop Circles? Date: 27 Jun 91 07:40:19 GMT From: vanth!jms@amix.commodore.com (Jim Shaffer) To: David Villa + Does anyone know if that weird chain of symbols in the crops on the cover +of the Led Zepplin collection is a crop circle? If so, that sure is a weird +'circle'. Looks more like artwork to me. 'Artwork' or not :-) , it's an actual formation found in England. They *have* been getting stranger lately. (When I say 'lately' I mean as of last season. I haven't heard much this year.) -- * From the disk of: | jms@vanth.uucp | 'Let's become Jim Shaffer, Jr. | amix.commodore.com!vanth!jms | alive again.' 37 Brook Street | uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms | Montgomery, PA 17752 | 72750.2335@compuserve.com | --Yes -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: vanth!jms Subject: Hoax Document Date: 27 Jun 91 07:41:14 GMT From: vanth!jms@amix.commodore.com (Jim Shaffer) To: Jim Speiser +THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT IS A HOAX. IT IS NOT TO BE CIRCULATED WITHOUT THIS +PREAMBLE. + +This document was received by a noted abduction researcher, along with an +anonymous letter. My cursory investigation shows that there is no Maj. Thomas +Shively at the Pentagon. The only Thomas Shively in the Pentagon Personnel +Index is a civilian computer programmer for the Dept. of the Army. Efforts to +contact him thus far have been fruitless. Nevertheless, it is our considered +opinion that this document is a hoax, and we provide the transcription of it +here for information and cautionary purposes only. If you circulate this +document, either in print or electronically, please include this preamble. + +Jim Speiser +[...] + First, there are still some concerns over the October issue of +Av-Week. We could not understand why they would run the Edwards story +without review. This is still under review. What are your ideas? Does the government usually review AvWeek stories? I've never seen the magazine, so I don't know what its policies are. + The Belgium situation has been corrected to all our satisfaction. I +understand that another show will air on the tabloid program that will show +that the sightings could be a mis-identification of terrestrial objects, say +a street light. This should air in January. Huh? A street light? Are they talking about the same Belgium situation? Did this show air? We don't get it around here. + The Nevada situation has been brought under control by the inclusion +of the 'porno' queen along with the Nellis allegations. That was a brilliant +coup. This entire issue is under constant monitoring. Anything else you may +hear will be of great interest. Oh please! How is Marilyn Chambers with *one* sighting which doesn't even match the others supposed to discredit the entire story? + The last area to be addressed concerns our 'friend' Mr. Cooper. As +you can see by the attachment included, the reason for Mr. Cooper leaving +Naval service, I believe back in the old days, the phrase would be keel +hauling. Cooper has worked out beyond our expectations. With his paranoid +personality, and alcohol abuse not to mention the crowds he draws, we feel +that the field has been covered. Cooper, as expected, will self-destruct at +some point, and with that, a large part and parcel of this field will go +with him. We were concerned last year when he drew police interest in the Again, who does this author take us for? Seeing as how a lot of sincere dedicated researchers have already rejected Cooper, how does he figure that his 'self-destruction' will take out "a large part and parcel of this field'? Only that part which gets in all the other parts' way! My conclusion (in case it hasn't been obvious): This document was written by a fool. I have difficulty believing that the government could fall to this level of illogic, regardless of what else you might say about them. +[...] +END DOCUMENT + +I'd like to request that at least two people not connected with ParaNet +Administration reply to this message and quote the preamble in its entirety. +At least one person should be on InterNet. OK... -- * From the disk of: | jms@vanth.uucp | 'Let's become Jim Shaffer, Jr. | amix.commodore.com!vanth!jms | alive again.' 37 Brook Street | uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms | Montgomery, PA 17752 | 72750.2335@compuserve.com | --Yes -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sheldon.Wernikoff@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Sheldon Wernikoff) Subject: Re: Wernikoff On Maccabee Date: 27 Jun 91 01:25:00 GMT Jim Greenen writes: >"John; and who said that Ed wasn't smart. If it was I that had >taken those photo's, there would be a clod day in hell before I >would turn them over to the JPL lab or to anyone else connected to >the government. And that wouldn't have anything to do with the >notion that thay are fake or not. Turning these photos over to JPL >is like having Phillip Klass the final word on the GB case. Ed did >the right thing on this and if people don't want to believe these >phots are real because JPL didn't analyze them, then that their >problem. And goes along with all other photos that come from >Russia or other places in the world. This is just like handing a >gun to the accused and asking him if this is the gun that he used >in the crime. One must check to see who funds the JPL and other >places. We must all look before we leap and Ed has looked and he >ain't leaping." <<< Jim Greenen Jim, JPL is one of the most highly esteemed laboratories for photographic analysis in the world. I am confident you will agree that an affirmative response from Nathan re: the GB polaroids, videotape, and Nimslo shots, would boost Ed Walters' credibility significantly. If Walters is apprehensive about his originals vanishing, why does he entrust them to Maccabee, who is employed by the government? How does he know for sure that the "originals" he now retains, are not copies? Obviously, there has to be some degree of trust. If not JPL, what scientific body would you personally endorse to do further evaluation of the available material? Proper scientific method stipulates that all elements of doubt in any experimental situation be controlled, with results being reproducible by others. It is irresponsible of you to state that "...if people don't want to believe these photos are real because JPL didn't analyze them, then that (sic) their problem..." I think we all want these photos to be "real", but we must not let our desires cloud our objectivity. Sheldon Wernikoff, N9EHL -- Sheldon Wernikoff - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Sheldon.Wernikoff@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda.Bird@paranet.FIDONET.ORG (Linda Bird) Subject: Re: Crash at Roswell Date: 26 Jun 91 00:28:00 GMT Sheldon, The cover photo on "UFO Crash at Roswell" looks like a hoax photo I saw in another book. I probably have it and will look further in this room I call my "office." :-) Will let ya know. 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: UFO Crash at Roswell Date: 26 Jun 91 00:34:00 GMT Hi David, I, too, just picked up the LAST copy of "UFO Crash at Roswell" and can't wait to read it. See ya, Linda -- Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Linda.Bird@paranet.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ParaNet.Information.Service@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (sm) Subject: UFO Crash at Roswell Review Date: 27 Jun 91 07:53:00 GMT Book Review: "UFO Crash at Roswell" by Kevin D. Randle and Donald R. Schmitt (Avon Books, 1991), 327 pages. (Reviewed by Michael Corbin and James R. Black, ParaNet Information Service. Copyright 1991 by Michael Corbin and James R. Black. All Rights Reserved.) There are some books that everyone with an interest in UFOs should own. "UFO Crash at Roswell" is one of them. Here, for the first time, is a definitive answer to the long-standing question, "Has the U.S. government ever recovered a crashed flying saucer?" The answer is a resounding "Yes!" The Story and the Evidence ------------------------- In brief, "UFO Crash at Roswell" tells how an unidentified flying object struck the earth on July 2, 1947 near Corona, New Mexico during a violent thunderstorm; how the wreckage was found by a local rancher and reported to the 509th Bomb Group at Roswell Army Air Field; how the soldiers of the 509th gathered the wreckage, discovered a second (and possibly a third) associated crash site, took possession of four alien bodies, and transported their finds to Los Alamos and Wright Field for analysis; and how the military brass in the Eighth Air Force and the Pentagon squelched the facts, disinformed the public, and suppressed almost all discussion of the events for decades afterwards. Such a story could easily be dismissed as the rankest sort of sci-fi nonsense, and in its previous incarnations it has been so dismissed by UFO believers and debunkers alike. When Charles Berlitz and William L. Moore's "The Roswell Incident" made the first tentative steps to cover this ground in 1980, it was mercilessly derided and picked to pieces for its intrinsic unbelievability and its lapses of both fact and logic. But Randle and Schmitt know their history, and they were determined not to repeat the mistakes of the past. Randle is a former helicopter pilot and Air Force intelligence officer; Schmitt is Director of Special Investigations for the Center for UFO Studies, one of the oldest and most respectable of today's UFO organizations. Together, over the course of almost three years, they interviewed more than 200 witnesses, reviewed hundreds of documents, and conducted the first scientific site visit by private citizens to the crash site itself. The result is a mountain of proof which will delight the true believer, astound the open-minded, and hopefully give the debunkers a real run for their money. Inevitably, much of the book is concerned with sometimes confused tales of unearthly materials and alien bodies. But in our estimation this is not the most important and convincing evidence; much more telling is the downright strange behavior of the government itself, both then and now. Witnesses can easily be mistaken about esoteric technical issues outside their everyday experience; it's much harder to misinterpret being threatened by uniformed men carrying guns. The U.S. military has buried the Roswell event under all the trappings of a full-blown government coverup: the intimidation of witnesses, the destruction or suppression of evidence, and a systematic campaign of lies and disinformation to prevent the truth from becoming widely known. The indisputable fact of the coverup itself is enough to establish that Roswell is truly the tip of the "Cosmic Watergate" iceberg. The authors have anticipated the inevitable assault by debunkers who "know" that the Roswell event cannot have happened as described. They consider whether the Roswell crash can be explained as nothing more than a downed weather balloon, or a stray V-2 rocket nose cone, or a late-breaking Japanese balloon bomb--and then firmly reject them all. In the end, only one explanation remains: that in 1947 the New Mexico countryside witnessed the crash of a vehicle that was "not of this world". The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly ------------------------------ "UFO Crash at Roswell" is not without its flaws. It was published as a paperback original rather than in hardcover, which almost inevitably means it will appear in few libraries and will garner few serious reviews. The cover art (against the authors' wishes) is a classic "daylight disk" photo which has been widely denounced as a hoax and has nothing whatever to do with the Roswell crash. The text is replete with typographical errors and grammatical slips that even casual editing should have caught and corrected. There are mangled and self-contradictory quotations (some of which can be repaired by reference to repetitions of the same material elsewhere in the book), and there are "backward glances" to facts that have not yet been discussed. But these represent a failure by the publisher to take the book seriously, rather than a failure by the authors to write a book worth reading. Perhaps more disconcerting is the authors' decision to cover the same ground four times from different perspectives: once in a brief historical overview, once in a "just the facts" account of the event itself, once in a blow-by-blow description of their investigation, and finally once more in a day-by-day time line. This occasionally gives the reader an annoying sense of "deja vu", as well as making it difficult to know which part of the book to search through for any particular detail. On the positive side, the authors have taken a very professional and forthright approach to their work. The contributions of previous researchers are acknowleged (and, where necessary, gently corrected); shortcomings in the evidence are freely admitted; witnesses are named, and sources are documented. There are detailed lists of interviewees and participants, a glossary, a bibliography, extensive footnotes, and an index--all of which will greatly assist anyone who wishes to verify their information or to build on their efforts. One senses no "proprietary interests" at work here, which is a welcome relief in a field where information is often jealously guarded and cooperation among researchers is all too rare. Where Do We Go From Here? ------------------------ "UFO Crash at Roswell" does not mark the end of crashed-disk research; indeed, it is only the beginning. A moment's consideration yields any number of avenues for further research, some of which Randle and Schmitt are no doubt already pursuing: (1) The material relating to the second and third crash sites, the discovery of the alien bodies, and their final disposition at the hands of the military is still sketchy and full of holes; further research is definitely needed here, both to find more witnesses and to establish precisely what happened and how it is related to the primary site. (2) Roswell is not the only rumored UFO crash; Randle and Schmitt list a number of them in an appendix. These other alleged incidents need to be investigated with the same vigor as the Roswell crash, and conclusively verified or disproved. (3) The role of Kirtland Air Force Base, not only in the Roswell recovery and its coverup but in other landmark UFO events, needs to be thoroughly investigated and documented. Kirtland crops up over and over again in Randle and Schmitt's story--as a source of orders and machinations outside the normal military chain of command, as a transshipment point for material destined for the labs at Los Alamos, as the place where secret scientific reports on the crash were filed, and as the possible source of a military mapping expedition near the crash site years afterwards. Given the prominence of Kirtland in the infamous Bennewitz affair and other disinformation operations which are known to have been carried out by personnel of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, it seems highly significant that Kirtland appears so early and so prominently in the Roswell case. (4) As far as we know now, Roswell was the first recovery of a crashed UFO; but there is reason to believe that the U.S. government had, to say the least, already given the matter some thought. The speed with which the military responded to the initial report, the forethought shown by the arrangements for transporting the wreckage, and the thoroughness with which the witnesses were hushed up and the evidence eliminated, indicate that the Roswell coverup was not an ad-hoc response to an unexpected event but rather the outworking of a pre-arranged plan. It remains to be seen whether this plan was formulated as the result of prior experience in crashed-saucer retrievals or was merely a contingency plan provoked by earlier encounters with "foo fighters", "ghost rockets", and "green fireballs" in the postwar years. (5) The revelation by General Arthur Exon of the existence of a UFO control group outside official channels once again raises the spectre of MJ-12. Exon referred to the group as "the Unholy Thirteen" for lack of a better name, but of course this could easily mean nothing more than the twelve principals of MJ-12 plus the President himself, to whom the control group undoubtedly reported. While the controversy surrounding the MJ-12 briefing paper should not be allowed to sully the Roswell event itself, the semi-official acknowledgment that such a group once existed (and presumably still exists) should add new fuel to the MJ-12 fire. (6) There is a crying need to re-evaluate postwar history in light of the now-established fact of the Roswell crash and retrieval. If the U.S. government successfully recovered an alien spacecraft, alien technology, and alien corpses in 1947, it should have had a profound impact on high-tech research (several witnesses described a material similar to modern fiber optics), on foreign policy, and on the aerospace industry and the space program--not to mention its effect on the government's attitude toward the UFO problem itself. Just as the revelation of the ultra-secret Enigma machine and the allies' successful cracking of Axis codes has required a complete rethinking of the historiography of World War II, so the Roswell event necessitates a reinvestigation of almost everything that has happened in the last 44 years. (7) Finally, a host of questions remain unanswered about the relationship between the Roswell crash and the "other half" of the UFO equation: abductions, occult phenomena, cattle mutilations, and all the rest. Roswell *looks* like the crash of an extraterrestrial spacecraft; but that could be because the event has been shaped to look that way, either by the government, by the researchers, or by the forces behind the event itself. It would be a grave error to conclude at this point that Roswell establishes the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis as the only solution to the UFO mystery. That something extraordinary happened at Roswell is astonishingly clear. Its ultimate explanation and significance are yet to be determined. Conclusion --------- If you have any interest in UFOs, go out and get a copy of this book. Better yet, get two copies--one for yourself, and one to loan out to your friends. You'll be glad you did. END PARANET FILE NAME: ROSREV.TXT -- ParaNet(sm) Information Service - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: ParaNet(sm).Information.Service@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ncar!ASTRO.dnet.ge.com!CARR Subject: CUFOS Roswell Report Date: 27 Jun 91 21:32:17 GMT From: Paul Carr I don't have CUFOS mailing address for the purpose of obtaining their Roswell report. Can anyone post this? ********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************************