Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume 1 Number 506
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 <rob@aixssc.ibm.co.uk>
+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 <rob@aixssc.ibm.co.uk>
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! <g> 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 <grin> 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 <rob@aixssc.ibm.co.uk>
> 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************************
