Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume 1 Number 143
Info-ParaNet Newsletters, Number 143
Saturday, February 3rd 1990
Today's Topics:
Re: Skeptomania is cool
Re: Dr. Dan Overlade
Re: Mysterious fireballs
New Affiliate
Paranet Echo Guidelines
PHOTOGRAPH
Re: Mars Face
Re: Mars Face and Skeptics
Re: Mars Face
Re: Skeptomania is cool
Re:ignorance!!
Re: Mysterious Fireballs
Current Affair Upcoming Expose (?)
Re: Journalist needs info
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f19.n19.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Bryon.Smith
Subject: Re: Skeptomania is cool
Date: 2 Feb 90 03:07:00 GMT
In a message to John Daly <01-31-90 10:10> Jim Delton wrote:
JD> >>Free speech cuts both ways.
JD> Thanks for your well thought out post on that subject. I
JD> have lost count of the number of times I have been beaten
Heck, I don't know anymore, I get so far behind in trying to keep up with
all these messages.
It appears that you and John are arguing about virtually the same thing from
different points.
That's like saying you are both arguing for the very same thing, but against
each other.
Correct me if I have missed something here, believe me I think I have.
:-)
...Bryon
--
Bryon Smith - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Bryon.Smith@p0.f19.n19.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f19.n19.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Ray.Griffin
Subject: Re: Dr. Dan Overlade
Date: 2 Feb 90 04:07:00 GMT
Gentlemen, I don't want to cloud the picture, but before someone with
inside knowledge and otherwise motives jumps in I would like to add
something to your discussion. You are right Dan's death wasn't
mysterious, but what precipatated it was not a coronary. It was
uncontrolled bleeding due to persistent use of anti-inflamatory drugs
for a chronic condition. Upon, his addmission several pints of blood
were given, and the outcome looked bleak from the beginning. I bringing
this up not to start up discussion again, but there are those who will
accuse you of being in on a cover-up, and this is to keep the release
of that information from becoming a new issue. Dan's family has
suffered enough.
--
Ray Griffin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Ray.Griffin@p0.f19.n19.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f19.n19.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Ray.Griffin
Subject: Re: Mysterious fireballs
Date: 2 Feb 90 04:11:00 GMT
Typical material composition of core should not burm green, but it can
upon rare types. I believe pink however would be out of the question
for science to explain.
--
Ray Griffin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Ray.Griffin@p0.f19.n19.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f28.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jerry.Seward
Subject: New Affiliate
Date: 2 Feb 90 06:49:00 GMT
> Please welcome a new ParaNet affiliate:
>
> ParaNet ALPHA-ETA(sm)
> Jerry Seward
> Rochester, New York
> 716-436-2759
>
> Jerry is involved with a group called The Rochester UFO
> Study Group.
>
Thanks for the welcome, Michael. I'm restructering my QuickBBS
system now and should have the board available for Paranet
callers within the next few days.
I look forward to participating in your exciting forum. The
Rochester UFO Study Group has been in existence for over 26
years, but I've just become a member a few years ago. Our group
takes a serious look at all issues relating to UFOlogy and one of
our members has initiated a local hotline for reporting
incidents.
Having 'instant' access to the experts and seasoned investigators
that participate on the Paranet forum will greatly enhance or own
queries and help us keep abreast of new developments as they
happen.
--
Jerry Seward - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jerry.Seward@f28.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f3.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Doug.Rogers
Subject: Paranet Echo Guidelines
Date: 2 Feb 90 13:54:14 GMT
At the request of the Administrator, I'm re=posting the guidelines for posting
in the echos. I hope this will make some of my recent comments to individuals
a bit clearer.
******* PARANET ECHO POLICIES ********
The following are guidelines for the operation of the Paranet Echos on member
boards. Please take a moment to read (and understand) these policies. If we'll
adopt these attitudes, we'll have a more polite, effective network.
1. No anonymous messages may be posted on the network. Some Paranet BBS's
allow users to use "handles". If a user uses a handle, then all posts to
Paranet Echos must be signed at the end of the message using the user's
REAL NAME. It is the responsibility of the Sysop of each Paranet Node to
enforce this requirement, either by reviewing all messages before
release, or by disallowing Paranet access to users using handles.
2. Personal Attacks are *NOT* allowed in the Net. In any echo dealing with
issues as emotional as those with which we deal it is a matter of course
that the validity of testimony on the part of certain individuals will
be called into question. It is important, however, to remember that
*ALL* parties are to be treated with respect. If you wish to question a
person's validity, state your reservations AS YOUR OPINION. For example:
"John Doe is a totally unreliable witness" could leave you legally
vulnerable. "I BELIEVE John Doe to be a totally unreliable witness" is
much better, especially if you can add "because...". Please be careful
how you judge the parties involved, and attempt to defend your
contentions.
3. Direct Flames are best posted elsewhere. They will not be tolerated in
the echos.
4. References should be included if required for clarity. Some users tend
to copy the entirity of previous messages before responding, while
others never quote anything and simply make comments about previous
posts. You should remember that many boards don't hold all messages
forever. Quote (if your software allows it) or at least paraphrase
(write a simple summary of) the content of the message you refer to.
Please DO NOT quote the entire message, as this is just expense for
all boards concerned. Quote only the germaine material.
5. Please make all messages conform to the specified content of the Echo
Area in which you are posting. Putting the messages in the right pile
makes it MUCH easier to make sense out of the stacks of messages.
6. Enforcement. Users who violate these guidelines will be advised of the
lapse by the Echo Moderator. After three violation notices, the user is
to be locked out of Paranet areas by the sysop. A FIRST lockout will be
for THIRTY DAYS. A SECOND lockout will be for NINETY days. The THIRD
lockout will be PERMANENT. Sysops who refuse to lock out troublesome
users can be dropped from the net by the Paranet Administrator. Users
who believe the Moderator has been unfair in requesting a lockout can
request that their Sysop plead their case in the Sysop Echo. In such
cases, ALL net Sysops will be asked to vote on the matter. Vote of the
net is binding on all concerned.
Doug Rogers
Echo Moderator
--
Doug Rogers - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Doug.Rogers@f3.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f422.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Boston
Subject: PHOTOGRAPH
Date: 2 Feb 90 14:21:00 GMT
i ONCE SEEN A PHOTOGRAPH IN A BOOK OR UFO CONVENTION AND I WOULD LIKE
TO GET A COPY. THIS PHOTO WAS A PICTURE OF A CLASSIC FLYING SAUCER
FLYING OVER A MAIN HIGHWAY WITH TWO CARS IN THE PICTURE WITH ONE
UNDER THE SAUCER. I HAVE BEEN TOLD THERE WERE TWO FEMALES IN THE
CAR. ALSO ON EACH SIDE OF THE SAUCER ARE WHAT LOOKED LIKE COBRA
HELICOPTERS FLYING ESCOURT. I HAVE QALSO BEEN TOLD THAT IT WAS TAKEN AT
WRIGHT PAT AIR FORCE BASE. CAN ANYONE TELL ME MORE INFO. ON THIS
PICTURE AND WHERE I CAN GET A COPY. THANKS
JOHN
--
John Boston - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Boston@p0.f422.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f26.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG!steve.rose
Subject: Re: Mars Face
Date: 1 Feb 90 16:21:47 GMT
> telescopes. We are dealing with something that has already
> been on the publics mind for a few years and that the proof,
> if there ever is any, will be at best, slightly ambiguous,
> at least initially, since it will be based on flyby photos
> with on-site sampleing many decades away. In my *opinion*
> people are mucbetter at accepting such things then you are
> giving them credit for; a million year old artifact isn't
> going to affect the shine on their BMW so they aren't going
> to get too worked up about it.
True enough. The movie and TV series "Alien Nation" is a fine fictional example of this. Life goes on...
--
steve rose - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: steve.rose@f26.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: gross@dg-rtp.dg.com (Gene Gross)
Subject: Re: Mars Face and Skeptics
Date: 2 Feb 90 18:20:28 GMT
-+From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
-+Subject: Re: Mars Face
Jim:
Before things get a bit out of hand, let me grant you that I think that
a good portion of the population will probably handle the discovery of
of life elsewhere in the universe quite well. But I can not grant you
that the remaining minority won't cause problems, potentially major and
serious problems.
You seem willing to extend to all the proposition that they are
basically logical and informed people with the desire for positive
development. I seriously have to disagree with this. Having been a
preacher in a conservative fundamentalist Christian denomination at one
time (long story), I can tell you that those folks will not adapt
easily, if ever. That is why I pointed to the Creationists and
anti-abortionists in my last post.
Let me point you to something else. You can say that what I'm about to
point to is pure fiction, but consider it for a while before making such
a judgement. The TV show Alien Nation. The Purists are exactly what
I'm thinking of, and such people are far more dangerous than some might
think. Also, think about groups like the Klan or the Aryan Nation who
would only be too happy to join in.
Jim, I simply cannot ignore those folks and the resulting reactions.
Now on to some of the points in your post.
+
+ I'm afraid that you are confusing revising history with revising
+ science or adding to our knowledge. The face on mars is not going to
+ suddenly cause us to realize that water doesn't freeze at 32 degrees,
+ or that like magnets really don't repeal, or that gasoline really
+ doesn't catch fire. Some scientists may be forced to change their
+ opinions but, in and of itself, proof positive of the face being
+ artifical, will not have much effect at all on what we "know" aside
+ from that one fact and the implications and new ideas that will spring
+ from it.
Does not our current scientific view say that we are the only lifeform
in this solar system? Doesn't our current scientific view state that at
the most only primitive life could have evolved on Mars, and that that
life is probably dead lo these many millennia? Doesn't our current
scientific view state that no aliens (ETs if you prefer) have ever
visited Earth, past and present? And who's to say that some of the
bascis might not change depending upon what we discover on Mars, if the
objects turn out to be of artificial origin.
I think we will have to rewrite and revise some of our science, as well
as our history. I don't see how you can get around that. But that is
how it should be. We are constantly discovering things that cause
revision of thinking and the current standard textbooks. I don't see it
as a problem or negative.
+
+ There are already a fair number of people who seem to be
+ convinced that the face is of artifical origin but I haven't seen it
+ having all that much effect on thier lives. Lets say we do get proof
+ tomarrow. It is front page news. Will that mean you quit you job?
+ Why? Will that mean people stream into the churches?
Fair number! But then you have people like Sagan and those who follow
his thinking, which I believe is the majority of the scientific
community.
Would I quit my job? No, but I might try to find one that got me into
the mainstream of further research on the Martian objects. And, yes,
there will be people streaming into churches for the reasons that I've
already covered. Not everybody is as adaptable as you seem to think
they are. Enough of them so that we will have problems on our hands.
When the established authorities go before the public and announce that
alien life has definitely be found, I hope that I'm around and still in
touch with you. I think you'll find it rather interesting to see the
results on society, in general, and the conservative 'Purists' types
specifically. Though I doubt that I'll live long enough to see it.
+
+ WHy would they
+ when so many had no problem dealing with "Chariots of the Gods" and its
+ "proof" of long ago alien visits right here on earth.
Personally, Jim, I don't consider _Chariots_of_the_Gods_ as providing
evidence of anything--except one man's incredible imagination and poor
scholarship. On UFOs, I think that there are far better cases to study.
Evidence of past contact may well be all around us, but the evidence
presented by von Daniken was quickly shown to be highly inaccurate and
in some cases imaginary. Shoot, Jim, I never even read his books.
+ people are mucbetter at accepting such things then you are giving them
+ credit for; a million year old artifact isn't going to affect the shine
+ on their BMW so they aren't going to get too worked up about it.
Let me just say that I hope you are right and I'm wrong. But I don't
have nearly as much faith as you seem to have. Maybe it's due to living
through several wars and spending two years in the jungles of Viet Nam
myself. Maybe it's due to watching the great propensity for my fellow
creatures to wreack havoc and destruction over what seems to me
something inconsequential. Maybe it's a combination of everything. But
whatever the reason, I don't give that much credit to them.
-+From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
-+Subject: Re: Skeptics
+
+ You say the establishment stands clear of UFO's and martian objects.
+ While I think there is some basis for the part about UFO's, just what
+ would you like the establishment to do in regard to the martian
+ objects?? Aside from a trip back to mars, which is a little outside th
+ budget of most researchers, just what research should the local
+ university be engaged in with regard to the face, that would add
+ anything to what has already been done? I think you are condeming the
+ establishment for failing to do something that is clearly impossible.
What do I want from the establishment is rather straight forward--fund
the research that is currently under way. Give it a fair and impartial
hearing in public forums. Even with the data that we have now, we can
probably learn a lot. The vast majority of the photos taken of Mars
have not been developed and looked at and it would be nice if facilities
could be provided to get those photos developed and examined.
I know that I sound rather sour about the establishment. I assure you
that I'm not really sour about science nor scientists, just the
arrogant, supercilious, know-it-all types who seem generally to be in
charge. I dislike the treatment accorded to those independent
researchers and scholars who are looking into things that the
establishment has spurned as not fitting in with the current standard
view of "reality." Such things as UFOs and the Martian objects are but
two of the areas that go against the current view, but that doesn't mean
that there isn't something to these that needs to be researched and
examined. Frankly, from what I've run across just in the past few
weeks, I'd say that we have a lot to research and examine.
Shalom alechem,
Gene
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: swarren@convex (Steve Warren)
Subject: Re: Mars Face
Date: 2 Feb 90 19:31:45 GMT
+From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
[...]
+doesn't catch fire. Some scientists may be forced to change their
+opinions but, in and of itself, proof positive of the face being
+artifical, will not have much effect at all on what we "know" aside
[...]
Well, my overall attitude toward the face is one of skepticism, however
my mind remains open. If the face should prove to be artificial it
would mean one of four things:
1) A native ecosystem once thrived on Mars, allowing an intelligent
indigent species to live and to build such artifacts.
Implications: Mars would then be expected to house a treasure-trove
of fossilized remains of these ancient native Martian
flora and fauna. The study of these remains would
likely revolutionize the biological sciences, as well
as spawning a new and distinct branch of archeology.
2) A race of creatures predating human-kind and possessing powerful
technology once lived on Earth and colonized Mars.
Implications: These creatures either died out completely or abandoned
the Earth. What happened to them, and what does this
mean for the future of the human race? This might
have profound social ramifications. In addition, is it
possible that well preserved artifacts from this civilization
would still exist on Mars? Perhaps images and descriptions
of ancient life forms from Earth? What would this do for
the field of paleontology?
3) A race of space-faring creatures visited the solar-system long ago,
leaving artifacts on several planets. They left and apparently have
never returned.
Implications: There are other races that are 'accessible' in the universe
(ie we are not alone). The fact that they were able to
cross the void of space to reach us tells us that their
technology was far advanced beyond us at least 1,000,000
years ago. They would have advanced even further by now.
It may be possible to travel galactic distances without
paying the relativistic penalties (some kind of space-
warping trick that bypasses the intervening space rather
than traveling through it?). We may find evidence of
how these creatures communicate across space. Finding
their artifacts on Mars may mean only a short time before
we could actually be in contact with them. This would
of course ruin all the fun for many scientists ;^). All
the secrets they have struggled painfully to uncover for
a life-time revealed for free, and they didn't have
anything to do with it. It would have to be a bitter-sweet
thing for them, excitement over the longed-for knowledge,
combined with the loss of the challenge (sort of like
having someone read you all the answers to a cross-word
puzzle, then you slap your head and say, 'I could've
figured that out!').
4) The 'mysterious' non-explanation. What if whoever built the
structure didn't need vehicles to get to Mars, and didn't need
tools or technology to build it? What if they are Vallee's
"interdimensional travelers" or whatever one wants to call them:
fairies, angels/demons; some kind of creature that functions
outside our observed realm of experience. What if the artifacts
are there not to inform us, but to deceive and confuse us?
Implications: Assuming that this turned out to be the case, *and*
investigators were able to *confirm* this as fact,
it would become the first hard evidence of a physical
reality relating to the "supernatural" realm. This
would certainly have the most profound implications for
science of any of the four scenarios I have outlined.
The possibility that the structures are artificial seems so unlikely
that any explanation for it would also seem to be fantastic. Therefore
in the interest of open-mindedness I have included every explanation I
could imagine. Having read back over them all, I remain convinced that
skepticism is the wisest attitude to cultivate without further evidence.
Cheers,
--Steve
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
{uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.COM
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
Subject: Re: Skeptomania is cool
Date: 2 Feb 90 16:01:00 GMT
I think you missed something. John and I agree on most things we have
discussed except that while he is convinced that the greenhouse "thing"
is not what it is made out to be, I don't feel I have studied it enough
to form a good opinion on it. He and I both agree that free speech is
a two way street -- that the "believers are entitled to express their
beliefs but that the non-beleivers are ALSO entitled to express their
NON-belief and in just as strong of terms as the believers.
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser
Subject: Re:ignorance!!
Date: 2 Feb 90 16:41:00 GMT
>
> Hey, Jim, we'll certainly be willing to supply your ignorance
> needs!
> <waggish grin>
>
> Yrs. Truly,
> Rick M.
> Secretary, Bay Area Skeptics
No need to wag your grin at me, Rick - I think you know what I'm saying.
By the way, I established contact with the skeptics on that board, and
I was right, they were ignorant of the issues. I think the difference
between yourself and these guys illustrates the difference between
informed and uninformed skepticism. You seem to be pretty "up" on
things, and you also seem disinclined to the intellectual snobbery I
see rampant in many skeptics, whereas these guys were full of little
side comments such as "No evidence <yawn>", etc. Needless to say, I
shook them up a little. I also gave them the number for our Atlanta
board, Tau Gamma (which I hope is still active??) so they may be logging
in here soon enough. Perhaps you can set them straight on the proper
application of skepticism.
Jim
--
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser
Subject: Re: Mysterious Fireballs
Date: 2 Feb 90 16:47:00 GMT
> I noticed Jim Speiser's message about green fireballs, however as
> I recall from the Project Twinkle material, LaPaz felt that green
> fireballs was just not normal for a meteor.
But in my reading of Twinkle, I didn't see any explanation of WHY such
fireballs would not be normal. I think what was troubling LaPaz was the
frequency of the occurences, more than anything.
If they ARE mysterious, I still think they are a distinct subclass of
mystery, separate from the "TRUFOs" we find so interesting. I see them
as a problem more for meteoritics experts, not ufologists.
>
> Also, if these are meteorites, why are they becoming so prominent
> all of a sudden? There have been literally scores of reports of
> these lately.s
Picture this: a collision in space eons ago that breaks up a planetoid
or asteroid with a high degree of copper composition. The pieces are
basically confined to one area in space, and the movement of our solar
system just happens to be bringing us through that area of space. Like
you, I'm no scientist, but that seems to make sense to me.
Jim
--
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser
Subject: Current Affair Upcoming Expose (?)
Date: 2 Feb 90 16:51:00 GMT
> Perhaps someone in the UFO community could offer Maury some
> assistance with his story...Mike, Don, Jim??
I would, but something tells me its hopeless. If ACA is anything like
Inside Edition, they will go looking for the negative evidence, the
whole negative evidence and nothing but the negative evidence.
Jim
--
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f26.n123.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Komar
Subject: Re: Journalist needs info
Date: 2 Feb 90 18:54:00 GMT
In a message to All <01-12-90 21:20> infopara@scicom.alphacdc.com wrote:
in=>-Keith Rowell, Tektronix, Wilsonville, OR
Keith, I replied to your messages listing the info I have re the cattle
mutiliatiions in your area, but the message was returned stating you do not
exist at that node.
This is getting stranger by the message!
John
--
John Komar - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Komar@p0.f26.n123.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
ADMIN Address infopara-request@scicom.alphacdc.com
{ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara-request
******************The**End**of**Info-ParaNet**Newsletter************************
