Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume I Number 506 Monday, December 2nd 1991 Today's Topics: Gulg Breeze Gifs. Belgian UFO An Interesting Development ... Re: An Interesting Development ... Paranet Nodes in the UK 1991 VG candidates Re: Bill Cooper Re: Omni Comments Author Belgian UFO Gulf Breeze Sentinel buy-out Mysterises Flugobject rast auf die Erde zu... Omni ONLINE Re: Omni Comments To Mike Corbin Gulg Breeze Gifs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: doc.imperial.ac.uk!aixssc.ibm.co.uk!rob Subject: Gulg Breeze Gifs. Date: 28 Nov 91 04:39:53 GMT From: Robert Trevelyan +I have three photos GIFfed online here. Can you file request? The wildcard name +GBREEZ*.GIF will get all three. + +Jim Jim, Thanks for the offer but I am not sure if/how I could request the files from here as we only have a pickup/dropoff mail service. Can you explain to how I would go about requesting theses files. Thanks again for the offer. Regards, Robert -- Robert Trevelyan UKnet: rob@aixssc.ibm.co.uk AIX Communications VNET: TREVELR at NHBVM7 Voice: +44-(0)256-56144 -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim.Speiser@p666.f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Speiser) Subject: Belgian UFO Date: 27 Nov 91 15:46:53 GMT In a message to All <24 Nov 91 23:25> Michael Corbin wrote: MC> The following report has been provided by Jean Manfroid of the MC> Liege University and the Institute of Astrophysics. Mr. Manfroid MC> is a subscriber to the ParaNet digest on Internet. MC> SCIENTISTS OF THE ASTROPHYSICAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MC> LIEGE COMMUNICATE THE FOLLOWING REPORT ON THE SOBEPS BOOK MC> ABOUT BELGIAN UFOS, AND AGREE TO HAVE IT DISTRIBUTED VIA PARANET. MC> Belgian UFOs Mike: This is amazing. I think some skepticism of the skeptics is called for. For one thing, it was my understanding that the "spurious" radar signals were seen on three different radar scopes, including ground- and air-based. I also understand that the latest generation of radar can filter out anomalous propagation. Furthermore, this case does not fit the pattern of spurious sightings of Venus or aircraft. Usually such sightings are isolated, and not part of a wave. I find it hard to believe that so many thousands of people misinterpreted conventional aircraft for low-flying triangular platforms with bright white lights. If this report had limited itself to criticizing SOBEPS' treatment of the affair, I could accept it. But this case does not live or die by the (rather limited) involvement of SOBEPS. They were hardly even mentioned when the wave first began. Nonetheless, the report extrapolates from the miscues of SOBEPS to damning the whole incident. Naturally, my mind is open to further, more comprehensive debunkings, but I don't think it would be proper at this time to lower the ParaNet rating of this case until something more definitive is forthcoming. On the other hand, I'm glad to see that this report appeared here first! And I'm glad to see we have an open channel to Belgium! Jim -- Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@p666.f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim.Speiser@p666.f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Speiser) Subject: An Interesting Development ... Date: 27 Nov 91 16:01:08 GMT In a message to All <26 Nov 91 13:04> ncar!wrs.com!davidj@scico wrote: nc> From: davidj@wrs.com (David Jones) nc> I thought that I would share some interesting information with you. nc> A week or so ago, a friend of mine nc> spoke with Wendelle Stevens (perhaps the nc> premier UFO investigator of our time) at his home. At that time, That's the second time you've referred to Stevens that way. Tell me, why are you so enamored of him? Because he has the guts to present a woman from Venus at his conventions? nc> is another 'whistleblower' (we need nc> more!) and would blow the top off things. I predict that this person will either a) never come forward, b) will come forward with an alias, or c) will come forward with his real name, but will be able to provide nothing in the way of evidence, either for his claims or his background. Anyone care to make a wager? Jim -- Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@p666.f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda.Bird@p0.f8.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Linda Bird) Subject: Re: An Interesting Development ... Date: 28 Nov 91 04:18:43 GMT Hi David, Thanks for the interesting message. We'll just plan to keep our eyes and ears open...wider. Best, Linda -- Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Linda.Bird@p0.f8.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: doc.imperial.ac.uk!aixssc.ibm.co.uk!rob Subject: Paranet Nodes in the UK Date: 29 Nov 91 02:31:39 GMT From: Robert Trevelyan Hi, Can anyone tell me if there is any Paranet nodes in the UK either currently or planned. If there is not any could someone explain how one would go about becoming a node and how someone could get a private Paranet/Fidonet mail address. I would like to be able to access this service from home in the future (not immediate future). Keep up the excellent service and appologies for my ignorance of it. Thanks, Robert -- Robert Trevelyan UKnet: rob@aixssc.ibm.co.uk AIX Communications VNET: TREVELR at NHBVM7 Voice: +44-(0)256-56144 -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com!vanth!jm Subject: 1991 VG candidates Date: 29 Nov 91 06:39:50 GMT From: vanth!jms@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (Jim Shaffer) In case anyone needs it to debunk alien rumors, here's the list of man-made objects that might be approaching us next month: ----- 1991VG is predicted to pass Earth on December 5th. Smart money says it's a Saturn V booster stage. * From Bruce Watson: EVERYTHING ARTIFICIAL IN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT (1991VG candidates) 112 59 MU 1 LUNA 1 USSR 02 JAN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 113 59 NU 1 PIONEER 4 US 03 MAR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 27 60 ALP 1 PIONEER 5 US 11 MAR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 80 61 GAM 1 VENERA 1 USSR 12 FEB HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 221 62 ALP 1 RANGER 1 US 26 JAN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 222 62 ALP 2 RANGER 1 DEBRIS US 26 JAN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 282 62 MU 2 RANGER 4 DEBRIS US 23 APR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 374 62 A RHO1 MARINER 2 US 27 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 375 62 A RHO2 MARINER 2 DEBRIS US 27 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 439 62 B ETA1 RANGER 5 US 18 OCT HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 440 62 B ETA2 RANGER 5 DEBRIS US 18 OCT HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 450 62 B NU 2 MARS 1 DEBRIS USSR 01 NOV HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 785 64 016D ZOND 1 USSR 02 APR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 923 64 073A MARINER 3 US 05 NOV HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 938 64 077A MARINER 4 US 28 NOV HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 942 64 077B MARINER 4 DEBRIS US 28 NOV HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 953 64 078C ZOND 2 USSR 30 NOV HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 1298 65 023B RANGER 9 DEBRIS US 21 MAR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 1393 65 048A LUNA 6 USSR 08 JUN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 1454 65 056A ZOND 3 USSR 18 JUL HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 1730 65 091A VENERA 2 USSR 12 NOV HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 1736 65 091D VENERA 2 DEBRIS USSR 12 NOV HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 1841 65 015A PIONEER 6 US 16 DEC HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 2130 65 027D LUNA 10 DEBRIS USSR 31 MAR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 2393 66 075A PIONEER 7 US 17 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 2402 66 075C PIONEER 7 DEBRIS US 17 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 2845 67 060A MARINER 5 US 14 JUN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 2846 67 060B MARINER 5 DEBRIS US 14 JUN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3066 67 123A PIONEER 8 US 13 DEC HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3134 68 013A ZOND 4 USSR 02 MAR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3533 68 100A PIONEER 9 US 08 NOV HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3627 68 118B APOLLO 8 DEBRIS US 21 DEC HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3759 69 014A MARINER 6 US 25 FEB HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3760 69 014B MARINER 6 DEBRIS US 25 FEB HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3770 69 018B APOLLO 9 S-4-B US 03 MAR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3837 69 030A MARINER 7 US 27 MAR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3845 69 030B MARINER 7 DEBRIS US 27 MAR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3943 69 043B APOLLO 10 DEBRIS US 18 MAY HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 3949 69 043D APOLLO 10 LM/ASC US 18 MAY HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 4040 69 059B APOLLO 11 DEBRIS US 16 JUL HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 5267 71 051B MARINER 9 DEBRIS US 30 MAY HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 5861 72 012B PIONEER 10 DEBRIS US 03 MAR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 6425 73 019B PIONEER 11 DEBRIS US 06 APR HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 6742 73 047A MARS 4 USSR 21 JUL HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 6776 73 053A MARS 7 USSR 09 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 7224 73 053D CAPSULE USSR 09 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 6919 73 085A MARINER 10 US 03 NOV HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 7567 74 097A HELIUS 1 FRG 10 DEC HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 7569 74 097C HELIUS 1 DEBRIS US 10 DEC HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 7570 74 097D HELIUS 1 DEBRIS US 10 DEC HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 7947 75 054A VENERA 10 USSR 14 JUN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 8111 75 075B VIKING 1 US 20 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 8272 75 083B VIKING 2 US 09 SEP HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 8582 76 003A HELIOS 2 FRG 15 JAN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 8583 76 003B HELIOS 2 DEBRIS US 15 JAN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 8584 76 003C HELIOS 2 DEBRIS US 15 JAN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 10272 77 076B VOYAGER 2 DEBRIS US 20 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 10273 77 076C VOYAGER 2 DEBRIS US 20 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 10321 77 064A VOYAGER 1 US 05 SEP HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 10322 77 064B VOYAGER 1 DEBRIS US 05 SEP HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 10323 77 064C VOYAGER 1 DEBRIS US 05 SEP HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 10912 78 051B PIONEER 12 US 20 MAY HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 11003 78 078C PIONEER 13 DEBRIS US 08 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 11004 78 079A ICE US 12 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 11020 78 084A VENERA 11 USSR 09 SEP HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 11025 78 086A VENERA 12 USSR 14 SEP HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 12927 81 105E VENERA 13 USSR 30 OCT HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 12938 81 110A VENERA 14 USSR 04 NOV HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 14104 83 053A VENERA 15 USSR 02 JUN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 15432 84 125A VEGA 1 USSR 15 DEC HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 15447 84 125D VEGA 1 DEBRIS USSR 15 DEC HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 15449 84 128A VEGA 2 USSR 21 DEC HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 15450 84 128B VEGA 2 DEBRIS USSR 21 DEC HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 15464 85 001A MS-TS JAPAN 07 JAN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 15465 85 001B MS-TS DEBRIS JAPAN 07 JAN HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 15875 85 056A GIOTTO ESA 02 JUL HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 15967 85 073A PLANET A JAPAN 18 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 15969 85 073C PLANET A DEBRIS JAPAN 18 AUG HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 19281 88 058A PHOBOS 1 USSR 07 JUL HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 19282 88 058B PHOBOS 1 DEBRIS USSR 07 JUL HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 19287 88 059A PHOBOS 2 USSR 12 JUL HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 19288 88 059B PHOBOS 2 DEBRIS USSR 12 JUL HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT 20842 90 090B ULYSSES US 06 OCT HELIOCENTRIC ORBIT Ephemerides on newly discovered asteroids and comets are posted weekly in sci.astro. -- jcj@tellabs.com ----- -- * From the disk of: | jms@vanth.uucp | I'm in a groove now Jim Shaffer, Jr. | uunet!cbmvax!vanth!jms | -- or is it a rut? 37 Brook Street | jms%vanth@cbmvax.commodore.com | Montgomery, PA 17752 | 72750.2335@compuserve.com | (Rush, 'Face Up') -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve.Rose@p0.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Steve Rose) Subject: Re: Bill Cooper Date: 26 Nov 91 23:32:00 GMT JS> Shot Kennedy" theory. Even more interestingly, though, he is now JS> backpedaling on the aliens bit, saying that its all a ruse by the JS> government to get us to unite behind the New World Order. Guess he likes to watch old 'Outer Limtis' reruns with Robert Culp in them. JS> Interestingly, the caller told Cooper, "By the way, Vicki Cooper and JS> Lars Hanson said `Hi', and to tell you that you are still the biggest JS> liar in the world." Luckily, the moderator let that go by without using the delay-dump button. haha. -- Steve Rose - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Steve.Rose@p0.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve.Rose@p0.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Steve Rose) Subject: Re: Omni Comments Date: 26 Nov 91 23:32:00 GMT In a message from Peggy Noonan to Steve Rose, it was revealed: PN> PN> Thanks for your reply. Well, you raise a good point because I PN> thought that the "offset" quote from a debunking skeptic did sort of PN> achieve what you've described but obviously a lot of other people -- PN> correction, some other people -- think that there's no debunking at PN> all but that unsupported stories are presented as fact without any PN> criticism. How could they not make the connection!? I know that these 'news items' in the old 'Anti-Matter' were presented without judgmental references to their validity...but one could CLEARLY see the offset of each UFO or psychic presentation. It would typically start out with the WHO WHAT WHERE aspects...but before every column was finished you would get the, "But Professor Whackenhut from the Kiss My Core Institute disagrees, saying...". It was clearly a debunking effort on every occasion. Yet, I assuuuuuuumed that this was normal for Omni, who at the time was presenting itself as more of a commercialized scientific magazine for us lay people. In that light, I thought they were trying to cast any reported paranormal activities in a less than believable light...because of the unscientific nature of those claims. PN> (by the way, it's black pages now instead of red) still asks Hmmph. I can recall the days of Silver or Gold Continuum pages on a doubly-thick issue. Price of paper and ink that high? ;-) PN> for "offset quotes" from reputable people who disagree with the claims PN> of the interviewee or story. It's not a full debunking because it PN> doesn't take apart the whole story, but it does offset the claim. The PN> reader then can take either side he feels is more persuasive. Yeah...but the trouble with simply saying that a 'Professor Whackenhut disbelieves the report' is simply that his statement is judged on the merits of his title or experience with *like* phenomena. Such an offset offers little if any conter-evidence, and the reader is left feeling cheated because there was NO support for any debunking. One would simply get a "We see these nuts cases all day long" white-wash. PN> In fact, the question you raised is something people here have PN> suggested be added to OMNI -- a feature in which at least one story PN> would be taken apart by a skeptic, point by point. Alright! Now there's some meat on dem bones. :) PN> Of course you know what the magazine's answer to your question PN> would be: buy OMNI and see! Thanks for adding your comments Well, after my ten year subscription run ended, I found little incentive to return. Guess my computering and work kept that from happening. ;-) -- Steve Rose - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Steve.Rose@p0.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim.Greenen@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Greenen) Subject: Author Date: 27 Nov 91 15:00:00 GMT * Replying to a message originally to Linda Bird DE> Linda Bird; DE> DE> > What can you tell me about an author named Keith Thompson? I saw a book DE> > of his called Angels and Aliens." I can't recall who he is and he is DE> > not an author that all of us have mentioned before (to my knowledge). DE> > Is he reliable? reputable? a crackpot? DE> DE> Linda, I will be meeting Keith on the Larry King Live show DE> on CNN on November 22nd. You can make your mind up about it then....... DE> DE> Don Don; saw your show, as usual you did a good job. Maybe a bit on the conservative side but all and all a jolly good show. I thoyght Keith was out in left field and wrote the book to make a buck. I don't think he did that much research or his position would be different. You will have a letter forth coming that you might be interested in. It is not UFO related but deals in the subject we discussed a couple of weeks ago on the phone about a certain individual and his claims. 73'S ---JIM--- -- Jim Greenen - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Jim.Greenen@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Belgian UFO Date: 28 Nov 91 08:18:01 GMT > The following report has been provided by Jean Manfroid of the Liege *Very* interesting. Note that the "object" filmed over Mexico City during last summer's eclipse that Wendelle Stevens was so excited about also appears to have been Venus. 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: Gulf Breeze Sentinel buy-out Date: 28 Nov 91 08:25:02 GMT The Gulf Breeze Sentinel was purchased by Gannett from Duane Cook. The purchase was announced in the Sentinel a couple of weeks ago. Gannett also publishes the Pensacola News-Journal, which has frequently taken the Ed Walters case to task. I understand that the purchasers were badgering Cook to sell, so finally he named an exorbitant price. They said yes, so he got to thinking about it and raised his price, and the purchasers then agreed to that. So Cook is not associated with the Sentinal any more. Lest anyone automatically read anything sinister into the purchase, that's simply the way Gannett operates. They buy up the competition. Plus, daily circulation is declining while community weekly circulation is increasing, so they're covering all the bases. The Sentinel is now filled with handout Health articles and big Homes Tour articles; not a peep about ufos except that they published a letter from Don Ware which expressed his concern. Another local weekly, The Islander, apparently is now publishing ufo stories. I haven't found out where exactly it's published or who publishes it yet, but I will and I'll probably subscribe to it. jbh -- John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Andre.Eichner@f10.n245.z2.FIDONET.ORG (Andre Eichner) Subject: Mysterises Flugobject rast auf die Erde zu... Date: 23 Nov 91 19:47:00 GMT Hallo Clark! I've read the following article from a Berlin newspaper. Sorry, for the bad format, it's the input from a handy scanner and ocr-soft. I hope sombody can translate it for me. *****begin****** BM/SAD Los Angeles 20. Nov. Eine unheimlche Begegnung der deitten Art steht den Menschen im naechsten Monat bevor. Ein Mysterioeses Flugobjekt aus dem All kommt auf die Erde zu. Zur Zeit ist es noch 1,9 Millionen Kilometer von uns entfernt. Sei- nem Kurs nach wird es relativ na- he an unserein Planeten vorbeiflie- gen. "Wir wissen nicht was es ist", sagt Brian Marsden, der Direktor des Zentralbueros "International Astronimical Union" in Cam- bridge/ Massachusetts. "Vielleicht wissen es die Millitaers und ver- schweigen es.Ansonsten weiB niemand, was es ist. Das unbekannte Flugobjekt wird nach Be- rechnungen amerikanischer Wis- senschaftler in der Nacht zum 5. Dezember an der Erde vorbeifliegen Nach, bisherigen Erkenntnissen ist es etwa elf Meter breit. Am 5. November hatte der Astrono James Scotti von der University of Arizona das mysterioese Objekt entdeckt. Steve Ostro vom Nasa-Labor Pasadena sagt dazu: "Es ist einer der kleinsten Asteroiden, die je- mals entdeckt wurden - wenn es ein Asteroid ist..." Paul Chodas von der Nasa in Pasadena meint ebenfalls, das Objekt koenne ein Asteroid sein. Moeglicherweise ist es jedoch auch eine Apollo-Rake- te, die vor 20 Jahren ins All geschossen wurde. Theoretisch kann das Ufo eine Apollorakete sein. Denn einige der Antriebsraketen fuer die Raumkapseln wurden zwischen 1968 und 1972 am Mond vorbeigeschossen. Sie verlieBen das Schwehrkraftfeld der Erde und traten in eine Um- laufbahn um die Sonne ein. Der meiste Raumfahrtschrott be- findet sich in einer Umlaufbahn um die Erde. Das mysterioese Ob- jekt hingegen fliegt um die Sonne. Seine Bahn ist weitlaeufiger und elliptischer als die der Erde. Daher tipppen Wissenschaftler darauf, daB es sich um ein Raumschiff handelt. Keiner der Asteroiden, die bisher der Erde nahegekommen sind, haben eine derartige Umlaufbahn gehabt. Sollte es ein Asteroid sein, handelt es sich um einen bisher unbekannten Typ. Gelegentlich stoBen Steroiden mit der ERde zusammen. So gibt es wissenschaftliche Theorien, nach denen ein massiver Asteroidenein- schlag einst eine Klimaveraende- rung ausgeloest hat, durh die die Dinosaurier ausstarben. Das mysterioese Flugobjekt wird unseren Planeten in einem Ab- stand von 500 000 Kilometern pas- sieren. Nach astronomischen Kate- gorien bedeutet das: "Zusammen- stoB knapp verfehlt"'. Vielleicht ist es ein Asteroid, vielleicht Apollo- Schrott. Fuer Menschen mit viel Phantasie koennten es auch kosmi- sche Zwerge auf Erkundungsreise sein. Joerg Strey *******end******** cheers Andre -- Andre Eichner - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Andre.Eichner@f10.n245.z2.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Peggy Noonan) Subject: Omni ONLINE Date: 29 Nov 91 18:45:00 GMT > I just suggested Fido since it would have the widest >potential circulation. Here on ParaNet would be good too, if Mike's willing. > Otherwise...... Maybe they could just appoint (and pay, maybe) someone to >participate in the various echos on behalf of the magazine. >That'd be workable as long as that participation didn't get too commercial. > I just don't think there'd be enough participation to cover >the costs of a pay service. Right now on issuesforum's ufo Good thought, John, about ParaNet, if Mike is willing, as you say, and also the participation idea is attractive to yours truly. I'll pass this along and see if there are any nibbles. Sure would be nice, wouldn't it! Like a chocoholic being subsidized for testing Valentine candy boxes! ;-) Of course, if their idea was that "callers" (for lack of a better term at the moment) would be able to get answers to questions about previously published or in-progress stories in the magazine, then there'd be an inevitable delay while the "participant" (again for lack of a better term -- the Omni rep online in the FidoNet or ParaNet echoes) checked back with the main office and got the answers to the questions, then relayed them to the network. It'd be more efficient if they could arrange it in-house, where they already have access to all the materials, seems to me... but, on second thought, there'd still be some delay time for research anyway, wouldn't there, so maybe it wouldn't make that much difference after all. I like this idea better and better! About the pay service participation, I was surprised to find when I went back to CIS this week after an absence and checked the UFO portion of IssuesForum that there were so few messages. Where'd everybody go? It was pretty lively there for a while -- to the point that responding to messages was costing me a bunch but was also stretching the old brain cells into new and more flexible shapes -- but now there are tumbleweeds blowing down the main street and ghosts peeking out of the windows. Strange! Is this a holiday-related thing, do you think, where people get busy over the holiday season and drop out for a while but come back later? If so, maybe they'll return; if not, could be serious. Have you been doing this -- the UFO boards -- long enough to note any kind of seasonal variation in participation? That could make a difference to OMNI's scheduling plans, if they should go ahead with this idea. You wouldn't want to launch when nobody's home! ==Peggy== -- Peggy Noonan - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Peggy Noonan) Subject: Re: Omni Comments Date: 29 Nov 91 19:09:00 GMT >Yeah...but the trouble with simply saying that a 'Professor Whackenhut >disbelieves the report' is simply that his statement is judged on the >merits of his title or experience with *like* phenomena. Such an offset >offers little if any conter-evidence, and the reader is left feeling >cheated because there was NO support for any debunking. One would >simply get a "We see these nuts cases all day long" white-wash. You make a good point about the format of the offset quote (in fact, you make many good points but I won't address each as time is short today), and the judging Prof. Wackenhut's comments on his title or experience with similar topics. I don't know how other writers do it, but I try to get a quote which will give a specific reason for disbelief, something like (example only, not literally:) "I found Paran Ormal's conclusions to be completely unsubstantiated because he says that these objects are linked to the time of King Solomon by their Semitic alphabet when in fact that alphabet he uses in his example was not used by those people at that time..." Or "The claim that Bigfoot was sighted and shot north of the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco shortly after World War II is completely incredible because the military unit that supposedly was involved in the shooting was not stationed there at that time. You get the idea... But, there are other considerations editors must take into account...space available, importance of the response relative to the punchiest parts of the story, and a bunch of other complicated stuff that separates the editors from us lowly writers so maybe the writer originally included something that got cut in the process of putting the thing into print. If they *could* go to that column idea we talked about, with a point-by-point critique of one story per issue, then at least one Prof Wackenhut would have his say. (Imagine how disappointed the Wackenhuts of the world must be, too, when they've given a really good and incisive rebuttal only to see it end up on the cutting room floor.) I'll relay your latest comments, too. They're very good. Thanks! ==Peggy== -- Peggy Noonan - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Michael Corbin) Subject: To Mike Corbin Date: 30 Nov 91 04:45:00 GMT > I have tried off and on to send you computer mail for > a couple months and they don't get there apparently. > Could you mail me your US mail address and I'll send > you a letter? You can also send me e-mail to mcorbin@teal.csn.org, or you can write me at: P.O. Box 172 Wheat Ridge, CO 80034-0172 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: Gulg Breeze Gifs. Date: 30 Nov 91 04:46:00 GMT > From: Robert Trevelyan > Thanks for the offer but I am not sure if/how I could > request the files from here as we only have a pickup/dropoff > mail service. Can you explain to how I would go about > requesting theses files. Thanks again for the offer. If you can uudecode them, I will netmail them to you Robert. Let me know. Mike P.S. Send your reply to me at mcorbin@csn.org. -- Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG ********To have your comments in the next issue, send electronic mail to******** 'infopara' at the following address: UUCP {ncar,isis,csn}!scicom!infopara DOMAIN infopara@scicom.alphacdc.com For administrative requests (subscriptions, back issues) send to: UUCP {ncar,isis,csn}!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) Mail to private Paranet/Fidonet addresses from the newsletters: DOMAIN firstname.lastname@paranet.org UUCP scicom!paranet.org!firstname.lastname ******************The**End**of**Info-ParaNet**Newsletter************************