Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume I Number 444 Thursday, August 1st 1991 Today's Topics: RE: New Planet (none) Sightings near Pittsburgh Re: Star Trek--The Next Generation Re: JOHN LEAR'S NEW HYPOTHESIS Re: New Planet Crop circle: Wiltshire,UK The Coverup Re: Hi -where ya been? ST:TNG -- 'First Contact' Re: GULF BREEZE Re: Lear Hoax Circles (reply to Gregory Lush) Bennewitz miscellaneous Re: Hi -where ya been? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ucs.usl.edu!pgwres01 Subject: RE: New Planet Date: 28 Jul 91 21:40:18 GMT From: Fraering Philip G Two notes about the new planet: it is not the first planet ever discovered outside our solar system (a Canadian group using radial spactroscopy has 'seen' some, although the method used seems to see large close-in planets like Jupiter more readily than earthlike planets), and it might not be a planet: the 10 earth masses may just be a lower limit. Phil Fraering dmb8516@bss.usl.edu -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ecn.purdue.edu!lush Subject: (none) Date: 28 Jul 91 21:40:45 GMT From: lush@ecn.purdue.edu (Gregory B Lush) Subject: Sightings near Pittsburgh I heard from a friend who heard from his mother that there have been regular sightings of a UFO in a suburb of Pittsburgh. Apparently this is not just a light like the present Gulf Breeze sightings, but rather people can actually see the outline of a ship. Further, people are travelling to see it since it makes frequent appearances. Anybody out in the Pittsburgh area? Anybody hear about this? Greg (lush@ecn.purdue.edu) -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: James.Nugent@f14.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (James Nugent) Subject: Re: Star Trek--The Next Generation Date: 26 Jul 91 02:29:00 GMT You never know!!!!!!! -- James Nugent - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: James.Nugent@f14.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hrusovszky@f300.n238.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hrusovszky) Subject: Re: JOHN LEAR'S NEW HYPOTHESIS Date: 27 Jul 91 07:25:50 GMT FC> Does anyone out there know if John Lear's new hypothesis is posted on FC> any boards around the U.S. , or know any information about it. This is FC> supposed to be some of what he shared at the West Coast UFO Conference FC> back in June in Los Angeles. His posisitomn of late has been rumored FC> that things are so far along that "the screaming will all be over FC> before anyting can even be done". Now he is supposed to have new FC> information that may shed a little different light on this matter. Thi FC> is all I know and wondered if anyone else has heard anything. I, for one, would love to hear what he has to say this time. Does anyone have any information or text files on this? -- John Hrusovszky - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hrusovszky@f300.n238.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Danny.Brandenburg@p0.f1.n606.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Danny Brandenburg) Subject: Re: New Planet Date: 28 Jul 91 09:27:25 GMT There is a problem if the discoverer of the planet claims that scientists agree there is a good chance for life existing on the newly discovered planet. Most obvious to me is that "life as we know it" could not be sustained on a planet orbiting a pulsar (neutron star). Another problem with the planet (not an arguement against life there) is that it should not even be there. If there star is truly a neutron star, it should have went through a supernova stage. While in super nova, it should have either destroyed the orbiting planet or made its orbit incredibly elliptical. However, the scientists say that the planet has a normal near circular orbit. There still may be processes to be investigated. Danny Brandenburg -- Danny Brandenburg - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Danny.Brandenburg@p0.f1.n606.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Don.Allen@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Don Allen) Subject: Crop circle: Wiltshire,UK Date: 27 Jul 91 09:19:06 GMT Latest Crop circle news off the Internet: +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Article 1012 of alt.alien.visitors: Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors Subject: Wiltshire Pictograms Date: 23 Jul 91 10:09:42 GMT Sender: rob@aixssc.ibm.co.uk (Robert Trevelyan) Organization: IBM AIX Systems Support Centre, UK. Lines: 39 The last few weeks have been very busy for crop circles in Wiltshire.I took a trip around the key sites and could see about nine formations varying from dumb-bells , insectograms and pictograms . Just south of Stonehenge two insectograms and a circle lie in a field. The insectograms are very large and are of the normal ring , circle , path and arc type seen at Upham near Winchester . The circle is a ringed type with curved spurs .This is obviously near a great deal of tumuli and the ancient monument where there are a great deal of lay lines that I am sure cross the field . In Alton Barnes , site of last years massive pictogram , there are three formations . Two of these show the "key" symbol as seen last year and the third is a variation of a circle . Two of these are in one field and the other one in a field that faces this one but all three are within about half a mile of each other and can be seen all at once . Malborough Downs have about four formations , some very large pictograms and a dumb-bell as well as a ringed circle with two circles inside touching and looking as a figure of eight . The main formation is at Barbury Castle nearby and appeared at between 9pm on 16-07-91 and 9am on 17-07-91 according to a local pilot . At the time of its arrival dramatic sightings of pulsing coloured lights were made in the area and two witnesses reported seeing a dark object which flew rapidly overhead blotting out the starlight . Everyone who has seen this are sure it is genuine apart from Terence Meaden , possibly as it is a combination of rings, triangles and circles , not explainable by an atmospheric vortex . I have not seen this yet but will hopefully have some more details on this later . +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | DISCLAIMER: | | The views expressed in this document are not a corporate view | | nor reflect the views of my employer by any means but are my | | own personal views on this subject . | | | | Robert Trevelyan UKnet: rob@aixssc.ibm.co.uk | | AIX Communications VNET: TREVELR at BASVM2 | | Voice: +44-(0)256-56144 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ _________End of article________________________________________________ Don -- Don Allen - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Don.Allen@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve.Rose@p1.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Steve Rose) Subject: The Coverup Date: 26 Jul 91 16:22:00 GMT >> In my view...we should be demanding this as a >> group, and not be forced to send serious researchers >> running around the globe examining corn crops every time a >> gopher farts. This isn't a GAME! If they really DO exist >> and is not just wishful thinking on our parts, then they >> should stop wasting time and show themselves! JB> That's the spirit! Maybe we can just "shame" them out into the open Absolutely! Though that may sound humorous...I find nothing funny about having researchers scurrying about like rats after the cheese, being nothing more than glorified accident investigators. If all we are finding out there is straw figures...then let's stop wasting our time. If one wants to believe 'greys' can never be spotted or trapped in the open, then let's just admit defeat now and let THEM decide when and where to meet (if ever). After all, THEY are the 'superior' ones, right? How can we ever hope to win?? Sure, we can continue tying up valuable resources while never having an actual provable encounter in our lifetime(s). We can also continue searching for exciting historical trinkets such as Noah's Ark or the Holy Grail. But those are simply OBJECTS (if they truly exist) people! What we are talking here is a supposed RACE of beings with obvious intelligence, and look at the way *they* are playing with *us*. We run around screaming, "Coverup!" at the government.. "Liars!" at the media...and "Fraud!" at those who claim to have been witnesses. All the time...everthing remains status quo...AFU! We play accusatory games that would make historical witch hunting an art form. In fact...I challenge those who do this, to prove that they are playing nothing more than modern day witch hunters with white lab coats. Only difference I see, is that some may actually BELIEVE there are greys out there waiting to be discovered. To others...its a nice diversion from daily life, such as any hobby would be. Some make it their business to exploit. Still more just pay lip service to the existence of UFOs. In the end...the greys remain safely 'out there', while we sit wiping the egg off again, and again as each new investigation reveals nothing they haven't covered up. No, this is not an attack against those who are sincere in their research efforts. Such individuals are scorned and ridiculed enough as it is. This is a scathing open message to the 'greys', themselves. Yes, I say to the Greys who are reading this. You ARE intelligent life forms...right? You do want to keep in touch with the pulse of the human's UFO research which is you lurk on ParaNet echos...right? Well then, Mr. Grey: STOP SQUASHING WHEAT FIELDS AND MULTILATING CATTLE! WE ARE NO LONGER IMPRESSED WITH SUCH CIRCUS TRICKS! WE DO NOT CARE TO BE MEDICAL SUBJECTS BECAUSE YOUR PHYSICIANS CAN'T CURE THE COMMON COLD ANYMORE THAN OURS CAN! STOP TRYING TO BE OUR MODERN DAY SAVIOR! STOP TRYING TO MAKE GULF BREEZE ANYTHING MORE THAN THE SAD SEASONAL VACATION SPOT IT TRIES TO BE. SHOW YOUR SCALEY FACES AND PROVE ONCE AND FOR ALL YOU ARE NOT JUST MYTH OR WISHFUL THINKING ON OUR PARTS! GIVE US MUCH MORE THAN FALSE HOPE, SCORCHED EARTH AND BLURRED PHOTOGRAPHS! TELL US WHAT YOU WANT AND STOP JERKING OUR CHAIN! Any takers? ;-) \\ParaNet(sm) Alpha-Epsilon -- Steve Rose - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Steve.Rose@p1.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve.Rose@f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Steve Rose) Subject: Re: Hi -where ya been? Date: 28 Jul 91 11:20:00 GMT Hello Clark! CM> Hi Linda! Thanks ... I feel better already! The 9600 CompuCom is a CM> nice addition, although it can't talk to US Robotics or Hayes 9600 CM> modems because it's v.29, not v.32/v.32bis. Well, those who want to consider a new CCom are now in luck. Although the older v.29 models won't talk high speed to those others...there are a new selection of V.32/V.32bis models coming out at the end of August. Sysop pricing will make these CCITT compadible units very competitive. Hope to check one out, soon. Now...back to... :-) -- Steve Rose - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Steve.Rose@f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve.Rose@f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Steve Rose) Subject: ST:TNG -- 'First Contact' Date: 28 Jul 91 11:27:00 GMT vcc> Add me to the list of people who were blown away by the resemblance of vcc> the government's reactions in Star Trek to what our own government vcc> might be going through -- the idea that the public isn't ready for it, vcc> and all that. The *really* good part was the line about how even vcc> though they're going to keep it a secret, there would be rumors... So I gather the idea of Star Trek being pure science fiction doesn't wash with anybody anymore? My...how we love to live out our fantasies. ;-) -- Steve Rose - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Steve.Rose@f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim.Delton@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Delton) Subject: Re: GULF BREEZE Date: 28 Jul 91 23:21:00 GMT Well, if I may be forgiven for saying so, I've heard that song before. If events, such as have transpired at GB were sufficent proof of anything, this mystery would have been solved many many years ago. The sad fact is that GB is not significantly different from any number of other "breakthrough" cases over the last 40 or so years. And the case is not made stronger by adopting a posture of if "..they need to keep some information from us they must have a good reason.." as if the "good reason" could not be to keep the whole charade from crashing. So there are 350 supposed witnesses. Would it matter if there were 3000 if everything else was the same? There probably ARE witnesses in the thousands to the Hudson Valley UFO! It should be obvious by now that counting witnesses is not getting us anywheres, nor is displaying photo's taken by questionable characters who want to maintain certain area's of secrecy. After all is said and done concerning the GB case, after all the effort that has gone into it, where are we?? There is not even agreement on the veracity of the primary witness!!!! And yet we would expect the general public to accept the case as "proof" of something???? Where are we now, that we weren't 12 or 24 months ago??? Are we more knowledgeable about what UFO's are? Or where they come from??? Or where we can expect to find the next wave?? Or how the military responds to OUR actions?? Or to look at it from the opposite side, If there had been no GB, what would have been the "loss" to the field of UFOlogy?? Would we know less?? Would "our" credibility been higher or lower?? It is not that I think there is anything wrong with investigation of GB or any other case, but when people seem to develop emotional attachments to "cases" it seems that objectivity goes out the window and we wind up with "investigators" acting more like PR fronts then anything else because now they have an "investment" to defend. -- Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Delton@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda.Bird@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Linda Bird) Subject: Re: Lear Date: 29 Jul 91 05:14:00 GMT Hello Jim, Yes, it was you after all who asked for a person to look at the Face of Mars, etc. I don't how to "netmail" so perhaps we could talk on the phone? I'm in the Mesa, AZ phone book (on Sunview) and you can call me collect anytime on Monday, July 29th. Best regards, Linda -- Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Linda.Bird@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mrc-crc.ac.uk!sgamble Subject: Hoax Circles (reply to Gregory Lush) Date: 29 Jul 91 23:36:22 GMT From: Steve Gamble x3293 In reply to your question how to detect hoax circles : I do it by being told by Paul Fuller, Richard Andrews and Busty Taylor who do actual field investigation of circles! (My circles experience is (at this point) strictly attending meetings, speaking to people and examining reports). Seriously, I believe that the way a circle is clasified as a hoax is that : a) often the cereal is damaged rather than being softly laid over b) the circles do not have the sharp cut-off at the edge c) the hoaxes do not have 'smooth' edges, they are saw-toothed More controversially Richard dowses circles. The ones which show the above characteristics do not give an dowsable effect, whereas the ones which do not show the effects a to c generally do show some dowsable response. Richard's work is just extra evidence rather than the diagnostic criteria. Because the hoax circles take a relatively long time to make (2 to 3 hours or more) there are a few reports of people being seen doing it. In other cases there are other silly little things like the circle which had the message 'We are not alone' carvered in the cereal next to it (surely if it was done by the Greys, or the Greens or whoever they would write 'YOU are not alone' anyway). STEVE -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: vanth!jms Subject: Bennewitz Date: 30 Jul 91 05:36:16 GMT From: vanth!jms@amix.commodore.com (Jim Shaffer) To: Linda Bird +Be honest--could it really be possible for there to be a base of Grays +who are making cocaine? If so, who are they really making it for? The +people who seems to be into cocaine are mostly 'airheads' and "low- +lifers.' (Not that I don't feel sorry for them.) BUT, it seems to me +that rather than corrupting THOSE people, what about us UFO-watchers +and people who 'watch-dog' the UFO movement? Why aren't they tempting +US with some kind of substance that would render us ineffective? Do +you see my point?? I don't believe Bennewitz's new story, I just posted it because someone said that Lear had changed his outlook on the situation and I thought maybe something like that was why. The cocaine was most likely to raise money to keep expanding the bases. Remember that they're supposedly partly owned by the U.S. even though we all know it's the aliens who are fully in control (or so we thought until...) Also keep in mind the stories of plans to depopulate the planet through drugs and AIDS. (I don't believe any of it, but you asked...) As for corrupting the UFOlogical community with 'some kind of substance that would render us ineffective', how about *disinformation*? Bennewitz certainly got hooked on it, and look what state it's left him in! -- * 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: miscellaneous Date: 30 Jul 91 05:37:25 GMT From: vanth!jms@amix.commodore.com (Jim Shaffer) Gene Gross: Your theory about the Greys being some type of insect is just about the most sensible thing I've heard yet. People have been saying that they look a little like praying mantises, but the worker bee analogy is even better. Michael Corbin: Please post any further Usenet discussion of the alleged signals detected in Australia. I hadn't heard anything in the media, and I don't get sci.astro (right now my feed is having trouble and I'm not getting anything as a matter of fact.) -- * 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: Clark.Matthews@f4.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Clark Matthews) Subject: Re: Hi -where ya been? Date: 29 Jul 91 20:22:00 GMT LB>be cheaper. A new computer always seems to cheer a person LB>up. I have a color monitor now, and LOVE it. Hi Linda! You'll get a kick out of the ANSI graphics & stuff. It's rather nice in color (if I *do* say so myself...) Best, Clark -- Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@f4.n1012.z9.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************************