Questions about PROTECTION part one

Path: ns-mx!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!pmafire!
From: jeffl@servprod.inel.gov (Jeff Later)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Questions about PROTECTION
Message-ID: <1991Jun20.210043.21547@pmafire.inel.gov>
Date: 20 Jun 91 21:00:43 GMT
Sender: J. B. Later
Distribution: na
Organization: WINCO
Lines: 44


While there is a great deal of information regarding UFO abductions, victims
and types of dangers associated with "visitors/intruders",
I have not found a single source for information regarding PERSONAL DEFENCE!
I have tried contacting a few of the more "knowledgeable" and  "serious"
members of this group regarding the following questions, to no avail.
Perhaps they would feel more inclined to respond in a more "public forum".
 
1.  IS there ANYTHING one can do to protect himself and his family
    from becoming victims of an "alien" abduction?

2.  Is there ANY kind of "security system" that might work
    in protecting an individual within the boundaries of his home and auto,
    or does the possibility of these intruders having
    "multi-dimention capability" make "barriers" or alarm
    systems useless?

3.  Can, or should conventional weapons, ie- handguns, rifles, shotguns, be
    considered for protection, or are they useless?

4.  What about the possibility of other "non-conventional weapons", ie.
    sonic, optical, laser, eletrical etc., for protection?  Or are we
    totally helpless?

5.  Is there ANY way or means one can tell if he or his family or friends
    have been victims, or have "implants"?

6.  How can one communicate this great danger to family and friends
    without being given the "nutcase" treatment??

7.  Could it be that the single reason our government has kept this information
    from its people for so long, is that they are totally HELPLESS
    in protecting us?  And that the only "bargaining chip" our government has
    with the alien intruders is the "loaded gun to the head" type, ie.
    "if you interfere too much, or invade, we will Nuke ourselves, and you
    with us"????

8.  Is there ANY hope, or is it in God's hands at this point?




jeffl@pmafire.inel.gov     
***Opinions expressed are not those of my employeer***
Path: ns-mx!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!bronze!anachem
From: anachem@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (mark s gilstrap)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Questions about PROTECTION
Message-ID: <1991Jun20.230539.19833@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Date: 20 Jun 91 23:05:39 GMT
References: <1991Jun20.210043.21547@pmafire.inel.gov>
Distribution: na
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington
Lines: 153

In article <1991Jun20.210043.21547@pmafire.inel.gov> jeffl@servprod.inel.gov (Jeff Later) writes:
>
>While there is a great deal of information regarding UFO abductions, victims
>and types of dangers associated with "visitors/intruders",
>I have not found a single source for information regarding PERSONAL DEFENCE!
>I have tried contacting a few of the more "knowledgeable" and  "serious"
>members of this group regarding the following questions, to no avail.
>Perhaps they would feel more inclined to respond in a more "public forum".
> 
>1.  IS there ANYTHING one can do to protect himself and his family
>    from becoming victims of an "alien" abduction?
>
This may be a very unpopular viewpoint.

I am of the opinion that UFOs and aliens are real
phenomena. BUT I do not ascribe the extraterrestrial
humanoid space traveller etc interpretations to them.

I have been reading the posts which are accounts of
abductions and see a common thread which confirms my
opinions (which are also shared by many).

The aliens themselves have an achetypical appearance
which is reminescent of leprechauns, or other
traditional manifestations of demons. The most common
depictions I have seen are quintessential demonic
images. Only the modus operandi of these demons leads
to modern interpretations which reflect the technology
of the day. (Of course modern UFO "sightings" are all
post WWII - earlier visitations were given different
interpretations - but the demons have always inhabited
the "aerial realm")

[I need less margin...]

As a teen, my father and I went to  Kansas City UFO Club
meetings. At that time I did not in any way believe the way I do now.
We both believed that there were funny things going on, and my uncle
who piloted a B-52 for SAC confirmed that from personal experiences.

At the club meeting we leraned that to contact the UFOs you
first needed to want to. Then it was said that it was helpful to
"invite" them - perhaps repeating a phrase while meditating on them.
To those of you familiar with incantations and mediumism, this will
sound familiar.

To repeat, I believe in UFOs. I have seen them. I know the
personal distress and psychic damage that comes from any contact at
all. The stories of the desert dwellers and ascetics of the past are
full of the very same descriptions of what they have always called
spiritual warfare (not the pablum of the evangelicals, but the real
thing - your soul on the line - for keeps!) and demonization.

In summary, the answer to your question about defense is to
not become involved with them at all. They have no power over you that
you do not allow by a dissolute life or by your conscious invitation.
The standard weapon of course is a religious one. I am convinced that
it works however. Soon after my conversion to Orthodox Christianity
(in my case Russian Orthodoxy) I was attacked from the aerial realm.
I can still vividly see the confusing dance of the lights and the
associated images which came in dreams for some time thereafter. For
a brief period I couln't go outside without the skys manifesting these
"phenomena" and they were not a pleasant experience. But I learned
first hand that the power of the Cross is real. The Orthodox (in a
manner similar to Catholics) make the sign of the cross by touching the
forehead, the chest, the right then the left shoulders with the hands
held in a certain way representing the dogma of the Trinity. This sign
trully conquers the enemies of mankind, the demons. And the sign of the
Cross "scatters the enemies" they "flee from its prescence" and "as wax
melts from the presence of fire, so the demons perish from the presence
of those who love God and who sign themselves with the sign of the Cross
and say in gladness: Rejoice, most precious and life-giving Cross of the
Lord, for Thou drivest away the demons by the power of our Lord Jesus
Christ crucified on thee, Who went down to hell and trampled on the
power of the devil, and gave us thee, His venerable Cross, for driving
away all enemies."

If you are trully wanting to overcome the damage and threats
of these psychic visitations, and if you trully believe the words you
say, this prayer will be effective. You need no other protection than to
get yourself out of such deceptions and into the life of grace in the
Church.


>2.  Is there ANY kind of "security system" that might work
>    in protecting an individual within the boundaries of his home and auto,
>    or does the possibility of these intruders having
>    "multi-dimention capability" make "barriers" or alarm
>    systems useless?
>
Holy Things which are accumulated on pilgrimages etc are very
effective.

I do not wish to ascribe most of mental illness etc to the work
of demons, but some cases are that. I have personally seen what
the demons do in a possessed person when they come into the
presence of Holy Things. It is fearful. Demons cannot stand to
be in the presence of holiness.

>3.  Can, or should conventional weapons, ie- handguns, rifles, shotguns, be
>    considered for protection, or are they useless?
>
Under the influence of demons, men use these to their own harm.

>4.  What about the possibility of other "non-conventional weapons", ie.
>    sonic, optical, laser, eletrical etc., for protection?  Or are we
>    totally helpless?
>
You are totally helpless, yourself. But there is protection
available.

>5.  Is there ANY way or means one can tell if he or his family or friends
>    have been victims, or have "implants"?
>
There are many signs and manifestations of the psychic distur-
bances one may experience. The discernment of an experienced
monastic or priest are to be preferred over our often deceived
opinions.

Implants and other "medical" procedures are commonly reported
by abductees, but they never make any sense materialistically,
only when one understands the tricks of the mental games do
these illusions of procedure make sense.

>6.  How can one communicate this great danger to family and friends
>    without being given the "nutcase" treatment??
>
Just tell the truth. There is no way to avoid being railed
against by ignorance but truth always prevails. The Church
*has* been doing a pretty poor job in this hemisphere of
being relevant to the real threats. The Eastern Church has
a much better track record.

>7.  Could it be that the single reason our government has kept this information
>    from its people for so long, is that they are totally HELPLESS
>    in protecting us?  And that the only "bargaining chip" our government has
>    with the alien intruders is the "loaded gun to the head" type, ie.
>    "if you interfere too much, or invade, we will Nuke ourselves, and you
>    with us"????
>
If there is any truth at all to government collusion it would
have to be thru the organization(s) which counts the power brokers
among its members - Freemasonry.

>8.  Is there ANY hope, or is it in God's hands at this point?
>
>
:)   you have a free will. The deception only
thrives in ignorance.
>
>
>jeffl@pmafire.inel.gov     
>***Opinions expressed are not those of my employeer***
Path: ns-mx!uunet!spool.mu.edu!cs.umn.edu!ariel.unm.edu!cie.uoregon.edu!christ
From: christ@cie.uoregon.edu (Christian G. Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Questions about PROTECTION
Message-ID: <1991Jun21.085737.19669@ariel.unm.edu>
Date: 21 Jun 91 08:57:37 GMT
References: <1991Jun20.210043.21547@pmafire.inel.gov>
Distribution: na
Organization: Campus Information Exchange, University of Oregon
Lines: 26

In article <1991Jun20.210043.21547@pmafire.inel.gov> jeffl@servprod.inel.gov (Jeff Later) writes:
>
  {Deleted}
>3.  Can, or should conventional weapons, ie- handguns, rifles, shotguns, be
>    considered for protection, or are they useless?
>
>4.  What about the possibility of other "non-conventional weapons", ie.
>    sonic, optical, laser, eletrical etc., for protection?  Or are we
>    totally helpless?
>
  {Deleted}

  While reading this message I started wondering if guns and lasers were real
-ly useless against aliens.  On television, and in the movies, aliens sometimes
have the mysterious and remarkable ability to render pistols useless (i.e. a
man firing a loaded gun at aliens only gets 'CLICK-CLICK').
  While admitting that aliens, if they exist, would have some pretty hoopy powe
-rs, the power to stop a gun from firing would require some pretty godlike
(relatively) techknowlogy.
 
  Are there any cases of this happening?

-christian
christ@cie.uoregon.edu
DISCLAIMER:I don't care what my boss thinks, just don't get my sysadmin pissed
           at me!
Path: ns-mx!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!crdgw1!ge-dab!tarpit!bilver!dona
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re-post: Jacques Vallee Interview off ParaNet
Message-ID: <1991Jun20.163456.7594@bilver.uucp>
Date: 20 Jun 91 16:34:56 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Lines: 621


This is a re-post of the Jacques Vallee article about his book,
"Confrontations". This originally appearred on ParaNet.

------Begin Included Text ---------------------------------------






Message #6053 - INFO.PARANET
   Date : 28-May-91 23:26
   From : ParaNet(sm) Information Service
     To : All
Subject : Jacques Vallee Interview

*****************************************************************
                 I M P O R T A N T  N O T I C E
               concerning the following text file
*****************************************************************
ParaNet  makes  no  endorsement of this material  and  the  views
expressed herein are not necessarily the views of ParaNet.   This
information is provided as a public service only.

This file is SHARETEXT material.  This means that you are free to
distribute  it to anyone you like, as long as it is not used  for
commercial purposes, you do not charge for it, you do not  remove
this header, or change the contents in anyway.  Additionally,  we
ask  that  you contribute to ParaNet, if possible,  to  assure  a
continuation  of  this valuable, educational  SHARETEXT  service.
The  suggested  contribution is $75.00 and entitles you  to  full
access to our comprehensive library and our network of electronic
affiliates  all  over the world.  Other services  are  available.
Mail your contribution to:

ParaNet Information Service
P.O. Box 172
Wheat Ridge, CO  80034-0172

ParaNet(sm):  Freedom of Information for a better world!

(C) 1991 ParaNet(sm) Information Service.  All Rights Reserved.
****************************************************************
ParaNet File Number:  01154
****************************************************************
                    A VOICE IN THE WILDERNESS

     Recently,  Jacques  Vallee  has  been  making  more   public
appearances following a hiatus which took him out of the American
ufological  scene  for  nearly ten years.  His  reasons  for  the
absence  were  directly tied to the disgust he  felt  toward  the
methodology  employed  by UFO researchers and  investigators.   A
very  controversial figure, Vallee is highly regarded within  the
French and European community, where it appears progress is being
made  due to a diverse attitude among our European  counterparts.
One  has  to agree that things are a sad state of  affairs  right
here  at  home.  Virtually no progress is being made  as  we  are
actually further from an answer than we were ten years ago.  This
can  be credited to the lack of a focused,  scientific  approach,
coupled  with a move away from critical thinking so necessary  to
begin to understand the complexities that this enigma presents.
   
     Vallee has published two books of late - Confrontations  and
Dimensions,  which detail the fruits of his  research,  conducted
quietly  and  away from the public scene.   Vallee's  message  is
clear - The UFO phenomenon represents a clear and present danger.
His  research indicates that we may be dealing with an  extremely
complex  set  of models that demand scientific discipline  and  a
whole  new approach to the problem.  Vallee is  highly  concerned
with the public's seeming "blind faith" acceptance of the  "space
brothers"   scenario,   considering  that   there   are   serious
actions  on the part of the phenomenon to do harm to  individuals
ithout  any  consideration  for our comfort  or  feelings.   The
problem  is agitated further by unqualified personnel  performing
hypnotic regression which seems to cement the contact to fit  the
hypnotists  idea  of  what  happened,  instead  of  what   really
happened.  This, as Vallee says, attempts to force the event into
the  victim's reality, when it really doesn't  belong.   Although
Vallee  has drawn a lot of fire from noted abduction  researchers
such  as  Budd  Hopkins,  his ideas are  not  far  from  accepted
scientific  methodology.  Hypnosis is not for the unqualified  to
be  performing.   It  belongs  with  credible,  degreed   medical
personnel  who know the intricacies involved with the  procedure.
More  harm  is being done to the alleged victim  than  good  when
unqualified  people perform the regression.  The victim is  often
left with the trauma of the contact, and cannot effectively  deal
with  it.   It must be treated as a medical problem.   As  Vallee
states about unqualified hypnotists dealing with victims:  "It is
unprofessional  and unethical."  With this he sharply  criticizes
Dr.  Edith Fiore, who took a course on hypnosis during a  weekend
and began to regress abductees the following Monday morning.
     The question comes down to:  Are we interested in getting to
the  bottom  of this problem, or are we more concerned  with  the
sensational  aspect of it?  If the answer is the former, than  we
must begin to police our own backyard and change the direction of
things.    The  data  pool  is  so  polluted  and  corrupt   with
information  that has been arrived at with  faulty  investigative
methods,  that we are drawing false conclusions about  what  UFOs
really represent.  We must have an open mind.  But, we also  must
employ  a  methodology  that is akin  to  forensic  investigative
methods.  In this respect, we will make substantial progress, and
with  the  data  that is collected in this fashion,  be  able  to
construct theoretical models which hold some hope for the answer.
     ParaNet  has  reprinted the entire  interview  with  Jacques
Vallee.  We invite your discussion and comments.
=================================================================
This  article was reprinted from FATE Magazine, Vol. 44,  No.  7,
Issue 496, July 1991.  (C) 1991 Llewellyn Worldwide, Ltd.

Subscriptions:  $22.95/yr. to:

P.O. Box 1940, 170 Future Way
Marion OH  43305-1940
=================================================================

AN INTERVIEW WITH JACQUES VALLEE

BY George W. Earley
     In   1980,  Jacques  Vallee  "disappeared"  from   organized
ufology.  The  author  of  several  ground-breaking  (and   often
controversial) UFO books, a one-time associate of (and  co-author
with) the late Dr. J. Allen Hynek, vanished almost as quickly and
quietly as a UFO itself.
     Almost a decade would pass before Vallee reappeared; when he
did, he aroused even more controversy than he had in the 1970s.

     Vallee's  reappearance  was signaled by publication  of  two
books:  Dimensions  (Ballantine; 1989) sought to  show  that  the
phenomenon  we  call UFOs has been with  humanity  throughout-and
likely   even   before  recorded  history.   His   second   book,
Confrontations   (Ballantine;  1990),  chastised  ufologists   as
scientifically  inept  investigators, detailed the  in-depth  and
hands  on investigations (many of them done outside the U.S.)  he
undertook during the 1980s, and expressed his strong belief  that
UFOs  and  their  allegedly  attendant  beings  were  likely  not
extraterrestrial, but interdimensional forms.
     I caught up with him in Portand, Oregon, several months ago,
and between his early morning appearance on a local TV show and a
press  conference,  the  following  tape  recorded   conversation
ensued.
     Earley:  I  saw  the  program on TV  this  morning  and  you
mentioned  the  Costa  Rica photograph. I looked at  the  one  in
Confrontations  and  the  analysis  of  it  and  it  still  seems
inconclusive. What do you feel we need to have for a photo to  be
thoroughly acceptable not only to the scientific community but to
the media and the public?
     Vallee:  Well, in this case we are taking the analysis  step
by  step.  We are purposely very careful, not making  any  claims
that we can't prove as we go along.
     The  first  thing  that  was done was to  work  from  a  2nd
generation  negative  that I brought back from Costa  Rica.  Dick
Haines1  and  I published an initial article in  the  Journal  of
Scientific  Exploration.2  When  that article  was  refereed  and
reviewed,  a couple of referees raised questions about  what  the
image  could be and what artifacts could have caused it.  Now  we
have the original negative which I have succeeded in getting  out
of Costa Rica. As you know, it is a photograph taken by a mapping
aircraft  of the government of Costa Rica and it belongs  to  the
government.  What I have now is the original uncut negative,  the
frame  that  shows  the object, the frame before  and  the  frame
after,  taken  at  20 second intervals. We  have  looked  at  it,
magnified  it,  printed it with different densities, and  so  on.
That  eliminates  all the claims of possible artifacts.  We  know
this  is  not  a  double exposure, we know this  is  not  a  fine
particle  trapped  in the film...this is a real image.  It  is  a
large  image.  The  next step is to digitize it-we  do  not  have
access  to  such a place here [in America] but I know  people  in
France  who can do it, with superb facilities for computer  photo
analysis.  We are waiting for them to digitize the frames and  to
do enhancement and comparisons of one frame to the next.
     Earley:  I'll be interested in hearing the results of  their
work.   Now,  during your TV appearance today,  just  before  and
after  each  commercial  break, the station used  some  of  those
controversial saucer photos taken in Switzerland by Edward Meier.
Has  anyone  analyzed them?  I know there have been a  couple  of
books  about  him but I don't believe his claims have  ever  been
seriously examined.
     Vallee:  In the case of Meier, the negatives have never been
available,  to my knowledge.  Without the negatives, one  can  do
nothing.   So it goes back to a question of belief.  I  am  very,
very  skeptical  of the Meier case.  I've been to  his  place  in
Switzerland.   Nobody  can  tell  me this  is  an  average  Swiss
farmer...[chuckles]...the  man has led an  extremely  interesting
life.   The  photographs themselves are not convincing.   No  one
will  be  able  to  tell for sure until  we  can  work  from  the
negatives  and  the  negatives have never  been  available.   And
there's  no  good reason for withholding them.   In  a  situation
where someone has had a genuine experience, there should be  full
disclosure.  There is no reason to hide anything.
     Earley:   I agree.  I would also note that the space  beings
he says he's meeting with are more like those described by George
Adamski in the 1950s than the beings that are reported today.   I
don't  know how you feel about this but it raises a warning  flag
for me.
     Vallee:   Yes.   And  the place...I was  there  last  summer
[1989].  The place is run like a cult.  Visitors are screened  by
members  of  his  group.  He is not at  all  living  in  poverty,
getting up at sunup to work in the fields.  He has a large house,
with  the flag of his organization in front of it, a  guest  book
which has been signed by every TV station in Japan which has come
through  there.  There is a satellite antenna to pick up  foreign
television  broadcasts...this  is an organized cult.  It  is  not
just the average farmer who has happened to see UFOs.

                           GULF BREEZE

     Earley:   Very interesting.  Have you talked with Dr.  Bruce
Maccabee about the Gulf Breeze case?
     Vallee:   Yes  I have.  And I respect Dr. Maccabee,  he's  a
good  scientist.   I've looked at the photographs, spent  two  to
three  hours with him in Washington.  I should qualify this --  I
don't like to talk about cases I have not investigated myself.  I
have  not  gone  to Gulf Breeze purposely, I  am  not  trying  to
investigate  it.   As you know from my book, I  put  the  highest
priority on cases that have not been reported and cases that  are
not  big media cases with fanfare...those are the cases  where  I
can  achieve  something within my limitations, where  I  can  get
somewhere.   I like the cases that have been very quiet or  where
interest  has disappeared over the years.  Then I can go  to  the
site  and meet the people and be seriously involved and  this  is
certainly not the case in Gulf Breeze.
     Now  on  the technical questions I have about  Gulf  Breeze,
I've never gotten an answer.
     One  question  is:   Why don't we have  a  spectrum  of  the
illumination?  The object appeared again and again and again;  it
appeared  often enough that the witness could be supplied with  a
camera that had four different lenses on it.  Well, it would be a
simple   thing  to  sacrifice  one  of  the  lenses  and  put   a
[diffraction] grating in front of the objective [lens] and get  a
spectrum  and then we would know once and for all if it's a  good
old  200-watt Sylvania light bulb in there or if it is  something
unknown  to  physics.   At least we would know  that.   From  the
photographs you can't tell.
     Another thing that is very, very disturbing is that, as  you
know,  the witness, Ed Walters, has a (criminal)  record.   Well,
that  is neither here nor there -- people with records  see  UFOs
just  like  people  with  no records.   But  that  does  have  an
influence on the way one would analyze a sighting.  And the  fact
that  he has a record is not disclosed in the book.  And I  think
that's wrong!  I feel there should be full disclosure.
     Earley:   There was a vague mention of an "indiscretion"  or
something like that.  I would note that in a recent issue of  Jim
Moseley's Saucer Smear newsletter 3, Walters writes that  because
of  "my  reputation as a responsible business man  and  community
leader"  he has been granted "a Full Pardon" by Florida  Governor
Bob Martinez.  Of course that doesn't take away the guilt of what
he  did...I know Phil Klass loves to get into things  like  that.
He  pointed  out that Travis Walton had also  been  charged  with
forgery...

     Vallee:   I  think that's relevant and it should  always  be
disclosed.   There should be no question in disclosing  it.   The
fact that in this case there is no full disclosure, that the book
represented him as a pillar of the community, I find that wrong.
     Earley:   I  think  the  pardon  came  after  the  book  was
published. Perhaps it will be put in the 2nd edition...
     I'd like to talk about witness harassment and ridicule.  You
mentioned this topic in your book; I believe in one instance  you
wrote of "vandalism."  Was this to a victim's home or car?
     Vallee:   If  you remember, there were  several  cases  like
this.   There was a policeman in the Midwest,  Herbert  Schirmer,
who suffered from harassment.  Even in the case of Lonnie Zamora,
he  was  harassed and had to leave the  police  department.   The
kids, when he tried to arrest them in Socorro [New Mexico], would
say  "Why  are  you after me?  Look at that  flying  saucer  over
there.  It's going faster than I am.  Why don't you arrest it and
leave me alone?"  And in the famous case in Michigan, the  "swamp
gas"  case, the witness's house was pelted with beer bottles  and
Coke  bottles and cans...jsut the reaction of the friendly  local
community.
     Earley:  And the police chief in Alabama I think it was, who
took the picture of an alleged entity...Greehaw, was it?  I think
he  resigned  because of the hassles he had.  Have  any  of  your
fellow  scientists done any sociological studies as to why  there
should be this reaction to UFO reports?
     Vallee:   Not  any  formal studies.  It is  a  normal  human
reaction  in  a way; there is a reaction of laughter  to  relieve
tension  and  the fear of the unknown.  It's nice to be  able  to
laugh at it and it makes you look smart.  It is a normal reaction
by people who don't want to be bothered by such things.  I  don't
know  what it will take for people to grow up and recognize  this
phenomenon as something very important.  I hope that my book will
be a contribution in that direction.  Among my colleagues it  has
started  to  have  that  effect.  After  reading  the  book  they
understand that this is obviously not just a bunch of  uneducated
people  in  the  countryside sitting by the  river  and  watching
flying saucers come by...
     Earley:   So  you're getting a positive reaction  from  your
colleagues in the United States as well as in France?
     Vallee:  Absolutely.

                       COSMIC IMPLICATIONS

     Earley:   That's encouraging.  Because what it gets down  to
is how do we develop a proof that will allow people to take  this
seriously...why  are people ignoring the, shall we say,  "cosmic"
implications of the UFO phenomenon?
     Vallee:   Well, you know, the people who are  interested  in
the   UFO   phenomenon...we've  been  guilty   of   pushing   the
extraterrestrial theory to the exclusion of everything else.  The
word  from many people in the public and also in  the  scientific
community  is -- either UFOs don't exist and it is all  illusions
and mistakes and hoaxes and so forth, or we are being visited  by
beings from outer space.  It seems to be either one or the other.
     Well,  it doesn't have to be one or the other.  What I  find
is that people start paying attention when you tell them "Hey, of
course  it could be aliens or a form of intelligence  from  outer
space,  but  it could be other things too!"  Then they  start  to
want  to  know  more, they start thinking...before  they  had  to
decide  between not believing the witnesses or agreeing  that  we
were being visited by aliens.  People have reacted negatively  to
that narrow choice.  Scientists have certainly reacted negatively
to it.  They say "Oh yeah?  If they are space aliens, how and why
do  they  come here?"  I had that reaction yesterday at  a  radio
station  in Seattle.  "Why do they do these absurd things  people
say they do?  Why do they look like us?"
     We have to deal with the fact that while this phenomenon  is
very   complex,   it  does  not  have  to   be   extraterrestrial
necessarily.   That  opens  up many  other  hypotheses  including
interdimensionality, which is now mainstream physics.  There  are
theories about the universe having more than four dimensions, and
to me the UFO phenomenon is interesting to the extent that it  is
forcing  us to ask those questions and to test some of those  new
and  exciting  theories.  When you say  that,  scientists  become
interested  once again because it means that the UFO  problem  is
not a closed system anymore.
     What has surprised me is that when you start proposing  such
ideas,  the  people  who react the most negatively,  not  to  say
venomously,  are  not  the skeptics but the  people  in  the  UFO
community  themselves.   I have been astonished by  this  violent
reaction  and you may have seen the comments of Budd Hopkins  and
of  Jerry  Clark4  calling  me  a  flake  for  opening  up  these
possibilities.
     I've argued before, as you know, with Donald Menzel and I've
argued  with  Philip  Klass,  yet  I've  never  experienced  such
polemics.   Mind  you,  I  don't  mind  the  polemics.   I'm  not
particularly looking for it, but if it happens, it happens.   Yet
I've never encountered the kind of vitriolic reaction I have with
Jerry Clark, which was totally uncalled for.  It just came out of
nowhere  as  far as I'm concerned.  That taught me  an  important
lesson,  though,  that  I'd not  realized  before:   parochialism
within the UFO community itself may be what is preventing us from
being heard by the scientific world.
     Earley:   I  think that could be a possibility.  The  "house
divided" effect...
     Vallee:   Jerome  Clark  is  reacting almost  as  if  I  had
questioned something very sacred for him, something that must not
be questioned by someone who calls himself a UFO researcher.  I'm
questioning  the  dogma that these beings are  ETs...yet  when  I
listen  to  the witnesses, which is what I try to  do  carefully,
they  tell  me  they see objects appearing out  of  nowhere,  and
disappearing on the spot.  They don't necessarily see things that
take off and go up in the sky and go through the atmosphere.   In
some cases they do, but in many cases they describe objects  that
seem to have the ability to operate on space-time, to  manipulate
space-time.  Well, if there is a form of consciousness that  does
that,  if there is a technology that does that, then it opens  up
all  kinds  of  questions that we have  never  really  considered
seriously.   And from a scientific point of view, number one,  it
makes  a lot more sense.  Number two, it is much richer in  terms
of what we can do with it in our own research.

     Earley:   It  is,  of course, a regrettable  fact  that  the
scientific  community,  by  and  large,  has  rejected  the   UFO
phenomenon out of hand without making any real study of it.  I've
talked  to Isaac Asimov.  He speaks of "UFO maniacs" in a  recent
book5  on  the NASA/SETI program, yet he knows nothing  of  UFOs.
When  you  try  to pin him down about his  skepticism,  he  says:
"Well,  I've  devoted enough of my time to this and I  have  many
other  things  to do."  Carl Sagan does the same thing.   A  very
personable  man  but  very glib and  shallow  in  some  respects,
particularly with regard to the UFO phenomenon.
     Vallee:   They've  never  taken  time  to  study  the  cases
themselves.   All  they know about it is what they  read  in  the
National Enquirer...
     Earley:   Are  you saying that to a large degree  you  wrote
Confrontations  for the scientific community and that  while  you
are  hoping  it  will  have an impact on  the  public  at  large,
basically you were trying to speak to your colleagues?
     Vallee:   I'm trying to show that, number one, the  data  is
robust enough that it can be studied scientifically.  There is no
lack  of  parameters that are quantifiable, there is no  lack  of
data  from  technically  trained observers.   Number  two,  I  am
showing   that   the  phenomenon  also  has   important   medical
implications, physiological implications that should be  studied.
A lot of attention has recently been placed -- and rightly so  --
on  the  abduction  phenomenon.  That is  fine,  but  beyond  the
abduction phenomena there are other types of impacts that  should
be  documented  and  studied:   that  includes  the  medical  and
physiological impact and I'm trying to call attention to that.

                     ABDUCTIONS AND HYPNOSIS

     Earley:   You  mentioned  Hopkins'  disagreement  with  your
theory  as to the possible origin of the aliens -- do  you  still
feel the abduction phenomenon is a real one?
     Vallee:   I've never said otherwise.  People have  tried  to
imply  that I was rejecting the abduction phenomena and  I  never
have.   As  you know, both in this book (Confrontations)  and  in
Dimensions,  I even talk about abduction cases I've studied.   In
Confrontations  you will find the case of the woman I call  "Mrs.
Victor" and several other cases.
     In  Happy  Camp  (California), for  example,  there  was  an
abduction  case, among many other things.  In some cases  I  have
studied  those  incidents  whit the help of  hypnotists.   But  I
surely would not do the hypnosis myself as some abductionists so.
As I have said before, and I will say it at every occasion,  this
is   unethical  and  unscientific.   What  they  (the   abduction
hypnotists)  are  getting  is not the truth.   They  are  wrongly
assuming that they are looking at the first level interpretations
of  what  the  witnesses  have encountered.   In  many  of  those
hypnosis sessions you will find that leading questions are  being
used.   Besides, there is obvious screening or self-selection  on
the part of the people who come forward to be hypnotized.   There
is a framework that is put on the experience itself.
     The tragedy is that once that kind of framework has been put
on  the  experience, you cannot go back.  I've had  a  number  of
people who have been studied and hypnotized, people who have been
mentioned  in some of the more prominent books on abduction,  who
have come to me saying "my experience was much wider than what is
described in the book.  The author took things out of context  to
fit them in his book, but I need help to deal with other  aspects
of my experience that nobody wanted to look at."
     I'm  not in a position to help these people because  they've
already  been hypnotized a number of times, they are stuck  in  a
certain framework -- I don't know of any way one can go back  and
rehypnotize these people to get back to the original  experience.
Which is why in many cases a...psychiatrist using hypnosis in his
work  will tell you that you have to be very careful and that  in
many cases hypnosis is not even the proper form of investigation.
     Earley:   That's  why I was frankly appalled  at  Dr.  Edith
Fiore's book6 because she "learned" hypnosis over one weekend and
then began using it the following Monday.  And now she thinks she
is an abductee after having been hypnotized by Dr. James  Harder.
I  understand  Dr. Rima Laibow is saying she's an  abductee.   It
seems to me there is a lot of self-contamination and pollution in
this business.
     But  let's take a scenario here.  Suppose I came to you  and
said  I've been having disturbing dreams and I've read things  in
newspapers  and  magazines  about  abductions;  maybe  I've  been
abducted; you're the first person I've come to about this.   What
would your step-by-step procedure be with a person who approached
you in that manner?
     Vallee:  I think witnesses should only go to trained people.
Hypnosis is a complex and dangerous thing; people should only  go
to clinical psychologists or M.D.s for that kind of work.   There
is an objection to that, which I have heard from Jerome Clark and
other  people in the UFO field, saying that many witnesses  don't
have access to such experts, so Budd Hopkins and Dave Jacobs  and
others  are  performing  a  valuable  service  when  they  do  it
themselves  because  the  medical professionals  are  not  always
available to do it.
     Well,  it's  obviously a flawed argument.   It's  like  your
coming  to me and saying "I need a triple [heart] bypass.   Would
you  please take your kitchen knife and do it because  my  doctor
doesn't  want to do it?"  Well, I'm not qualified to do a  triple
bypass  and  I'm not qualified to hypnotize anybody and  I'm  not
going  to learn the technique so I can start  hypnotizing  people
left   and  right.   Again,  I  think  this  is   unethical   and
unscientific  and  it doesn't get us to the kind of UFO  data  we
need.
     In  the  cases when this situation has happened,  what  I've
done  is to go to professionals I know.  I would not discuss  the
case with a witness.  I would say, "Look, we are going to get  to
know  each other.  You are going to tell me about  yourself,  but
let's  not  talk about UFOs.  Please don't read any more  on  the
subject  for a few weeks until we can get you to see someone  who
is trained in hypnosis."  In one case I went to a friend of  mine
who  is  a  clinical psychologist and he said,  "You  won't  need
hypnosis with this person, there are other ways -- there are much
more  sophisticated  techniques that can be used to  help  people
remember what happened to them, under their own control."

     In  certain  cases, a "day dreaming" type of  technique  can
help  the  person remember things at his or her own  pace.   This
could   also   come  through  dreams,  it  could   come   through
drawings...it  could take a long time, like months.  But this  is
much more intrusive than saying  "You-Are-Now-Under-My-Power-and-
You-Will-Remember-the-Time-When-the-Aliens-Took-You..." which  is
very often what you hear on those ridiculous abduction tapes.
     Earley:   This  goes along with a recent book  review7  that
examined  hypnosis  and questioned if hypnosis  per  se  actually
existed or whether we can, by simply relaxing people, enable them
to  be  in a fully waking state but simply have  more  access  to
their memories.
     Vallee:   Again, I'm not a specialist of that field and  I'm
just  relaying what different professionals have told  me.   They
disagree  among  themselves so I should obviously  qualify  that.
There  are  obviously  some  instances  where  hypnosis  is   the
technique of choice.  There is another case in my files in  which
I  went to a...psychiatrist who is trained in hypnosis.  He  told
me he did not want to do it.  And his reasons showed the reaction
of  a true professional.  He said "I should not be the one  doing
it  for two reasons.  First of all, I do not have  enough  recent
clinical experience with hypnosis.  And second, I know you.  I've
read  your books and you're a friend of mine and I know too  much
about the subject.  We should find somebody who is qualified, who
knows hypnosis, who has an open mind on UFOs but does not have  a
personal framework..."  It is difficult, but such people exist.
     Let  me  mention another case I've worked on  recently,  the
case of a man with a Silicon Valley computer company, who came to
me  because  he remembered seeing some objects over  Hawaii.   He
wanted  to  be  hypnotized because he felt there  had  been  some
action  of  that type (abduction).  I took him to a team  of  two
doctors.  One is not a psychiatrist but an M.D. who uses hypnosis
in  his medical practice and the other one is a psychologist  who
teaches hypnosis to psychologists -- in other words, he is  doing
research  on hypnosis and he teaches it.  I asked them what  kind
of  methodology could be used in abduction cases, how would  they
go  about it.  they said the only way we should do it is  to  use
the  standards of admissibility of hypnosis in court.  The  state
of California has published some very strict guidelines for  when
hypnosis  is  admissible   in the courts of  that  state.   These
guidelines  are  perfect.   They are tailor-made for  us  in  UFO
research.   Hypnosis  is not admissible unless everything  is  on
video tape including the induction phase, so you can see if there
are leading questions, you can check if there is full  disclosure
in the beginning by the hypnotist on what the person is to expect
and so on.  You should also have physiological measurements;  for
example, skin response measurements and pulse measurements.   You
never see this in UFO abduction research.
     In this case, the two doctors set up a number of instruments
that  were  visible  to  the cameras.   There  were  two  cameras
shooting at the same time so you could always see the instruments
as   you  heard  the  answers;  you  could   have   chronological
correlation.   Another  expert  could alter  say,  "that  person,
doctor,  was not hypnotized when he said this.  He was not  in  a
state  of hypnosis."  And different experts could  challenge  the
data  and  argue.  Otherwise what you have is pure  garbage,  you
just have someone saying something on tape.
     In the case of this man, we found that indeed he  remembered
a lot about the incident in Hawaii but that the real incident did
not  happen  in Hawaii.  It was many years before and  there  may
have been an abduction in the south of the United States when  he
was  in  a  car with his parents.  At that  point  he  became  so
agitated  that the two doctors got him out of hypnosis, which  is
precisely  the point where a ufologist would have jumped  up  and
down and said "Oh goody, let's find out what happened!  Did  they
have  big  eyes, were they grey, which planet did they  take  you
to..." and so on.
     But  the  doctors stopped everything and said  "We  are  not
going  to  do anything further until we have a  therapy  contract
with  this  man.   Obviously  this  is  an  extremely   traumatic
experience for him and if we pick it up again we will pick it  up
as  part of a course of therapy."  That is the reaction  of  true
professionals  in  the business, where you have  to  worry  about
possibly  causing harm to the patient, and keeping  your  license
and malpractice and everything else -- all the things  ufologists
treat very lightly.
     Earley:  Have they gone deeper into it?
     Vallee:   We  did not pursue it yet.  It will be up  to  him
[the subject] to decide if he wants to do more.

                       ANIMAL MUTILATIONS

     Earley:   You  wrote  some  introductory  remarks  to  Linda
Moulton Howe's book, An Alien Harvest...
     Vallee:   There  are certain parts of the book I  would  not
condone  or agree with but it is her right to publish it,  and  I
wanted  to  support  her work on mutilations.   I  think  she  is
raising  a  number of important questions the UFO  community  has
been ignoring.
     Earley:  Do you feel that the mutilations are not being done
by a normal human agency?
     Vallee:  Ahhh...let me put it this way.  I made it clear  in
Confrontations  that I was not going to discuss mutilations  even
though they were a possibly relevant subject.  I've done a number
of field studies of mutilation cases on the same level as this in
which  there  was certainly no classic explanation for  what  had
happened  to the animals.  The witnesses had seen objects in  the
sky  at about the same time the mutilations had  happened.   That
doesn't  mean that I can prove a correlation and that's  where  I
stop.  I do have an open mind on that.  Linda is doing some  very
good work in that field.  More people should be looking at it.  I
cannot   tell  you  that  there  is  a  link  between  UFOs   and
mutilations.
     Earley:   Would you be planning to publish your research  at
some point?
     Vallee:  I don't know.  I might.
     Earley:   Thank you very much for your time, Dr. Vallee.   I
am sure FATE readers will be interested in your remarks.

NOTES:

1)   Dr.  Richard  Haines, a retired  senior  scientist  formerly
employed  by  NASA,  is  the author  of  several  books  on  UFOs
including,  Advanced  Aerial Devices Reported During  the  Korean
War; L.S.A. Press; 1990
2)  "Photo Analysis of an Aerial Disc Over Cost Rica" by  Richard
F.  Haines & Jacques Vallee; Journal of  Scientific  Exploration,
Vol. 3, No. 2, 1989.  A response by Haines & Vallee, based on  an
examination  of  the  original negative,  to  referee  questions,
appeared  in Vol. 4, N. 1; 1990 as "Photo Analysis of  an  Aerial
Disc Over Costa Rica:  New Evidence."
3)  Saucer Smear Vol. 37, No. 3, April 30, 1990.
4)  "The Thickets of Magonia" by Jerome Clark; International  UFO
Reporter; Jan.-Feb., 1990.
5)  First Contact. ed. by Ben Bova & Byron Preiss; NAL; 1990.
6)  Encounters by Edith Fiore, Ph.D.; Doubleday; 1989.
7)   "Demystifying Hypnosis" in the Skeptical Inquirer, Vol.  14,
No.  3/Spring  1990.   the book under review  is  Hypnosis:   The
Cognitive-Behavioral  Perspective edited by Nicholas P. Spanos  &
John  F. Chaves; Prometheus Books; 1989.  Also see They  Call  It
Hypnosis  by Robert A. Baker; Prometheus Books; 1990; pages  237-
250, "Hypnosis and Alien Abductions."

END

PARANET FILE NAME:  VALLEE.INT

-----------------------------------------------------------------

EOF


--
-* Don Allen *-  InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP  // Amiga..for the rest of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything else? :^)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!vicstoy!dona      0110 0110 0110 Just say NO!
Illuminati < MJ-12|Grudge|TLC|CFR|FED|EEC|Bush > WAR = "New World Order"
Path: ns-mx!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bruce!goanna!minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au!rxxgre
From: rxxgre@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Geof Rey Evans)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Mars face.
Message-ID: <1991Jun21.082452.6546@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 21 Jun 91 08:24:52 GMT
References: <1991Jun20.092852.26388@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU>
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.
Lines: 69

woodc@jacobs.cs.orst.edu (Major Havok) writes:


>In article <wTBg41w164w@inqmind.bison.mb.ca> casper@inqmind.bison.mb.ca (Max Vernon) writes:
>>give me a small break!  If I were some sort of extraterrestrial I don't
>>think I'd leave a signal to another race of beings like ours!  Especially if
>>I had superior techology.  what would be the *POINT*???  You people are just
>>dreaming about what you think would be a great discovery. 
>>
>>Ok.  Assuming the face is actually a face.  What next?  Do we start carving
>>out a similar face in Earth's surface?  I mean really...If a superior race
>>actually wanted to contact us, don't you think they'd do it over one of the
>>14million or so radio frequencies that we are currently scanning for such
>>activity?  Or have none of you thought of that?  I suppose you would have me
>>believe this potential race may not know about radio waves?  Or maybe they
>>don't communicate in the same way as us?  So WHAT!  If that was the case why
>>would they want communication at all.  And why would they want communication
>>with a bunch of environment wreckers like ourselves?  After contact we'd
>>probably invade their territory and build acid rain factories and the
>>like!!!

>  OK, IMAGINE THIS: Aliens come upon this tiny developing planet called
>Earth a few thousand years ago. The inhabitants on the planet have no way
>of communicating with aliens through radio transmitions so rather than wait
>a few thousand years to send radio transmitions, they constructed a huge
>face on the nearest planet outward from our own. Perhaps there is no real
>'messages' behind the face, maybe all they wanted to do is let us know that
>intelligent life does exist elsewhere but they're not trying to tell us
>anything just yet. If they were to build a city like structure on the face
>of Mars, that would be misleading and might cause us to errorneously believe
>that their civilization was located at some time on Mars. A face however
>would be perfect! For most people, when they think of intelligent life forms
>they immediately think of humans or humanoid beings, so what better way would
>there be than to construct a face on a neighboring planet. It has no message
>other than to tell us that other beings know of our existance.

>  A face also can stand the test of time. In the thousands of years that it
>would take for us to get to the point that we are at now, their alien race
>might have become extinct therefore they would then be unable to send radio
>transmittions... they may have anticipated this and prepared for the worst.
>A solid humanoid face would likely exist long enough for us to find it though
>and realize that we have been watched for quite some time.
>
>  Also, a face constructed on a neighboring planet would ensure that we would
>only begin to know about them when we are ready to except their existance.
>We have the technological capability now to observe the face on Mars, if we
>were to know of the existance of an alien race before we achieved our
>current level of technology, then it may have affected our technological
>evolution.

>  I feel a face structure on Mars would be perfect for that type of
>communication.

>--
>+---------------------------+----------------------------------------------+
>| Chris Wood                |  "If you can't convince them, confuse them." |
>| woodc@jacobs.cs.orst.edu  |                                   -unknown   |
>+---------------------------+----------------------------------------------+
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Oh dear oh dear oh dear...ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
How boring can life on earth be....totally wierd man.
Where can I get some of that shit you're smoking ???

--



  ___________________________________________________________________ 
Path: ns-mx!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bruce!goanna!minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au!rxxgre
From: rxxgre@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Geof Rey Evans)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: CONFESS NOW!!
Keywords: Follow-ups to alt.alien.visitors
Message-ID: <1991Jun21.082853.6982@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 21 Jun 91 08:28:53 GMT
References: <1991Jun18.210755.29207@linus.mitre.org> <1991Jun20.025025.22069@eng.ufl.edu> <969@baby.and.nl> <1991Jun20.185301.2701@linus.mitre.org>
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.
Lines: 28

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> THEY'RE BAAACK >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>







--



  ___________________________________________________________________ 
Path: ns-mx!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!dali.cs.montana.edu!decwrl!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!shodha.enet.dec.com!timpson
From: timpson@shodha.enet.dec.com (Steve Timpson)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re:  CONFESS NOW!!
Message-ID: <3435@shodha.enet.dec.com>
Date: 21 Jun 91 13:32:01 GMT
Sender: news@shodha.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 11


In article <1991Jun20.185301.2701@linus.mitre.org>, andrea@chimera.mitre.org (Andrea Ostensoe) writes...

>Don't, don't don't you ever mention this number again!!!!!!!!
>
>Jos (a very terrified person)
>
        Are you  being  serious  or  is  ther  supposed  to be a 8^) face
        somewhere in the above?

        Steve
Path: ns-mx!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!msuinfo!eecae.ee.msu.edu!grimm
From: grimm@eecae.ee.msu.edu (Jerry Michael Grimm)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranormal,alt.slack,alt.who.is.bob,alt.conspiracy,talk.religion.newage,misc.headlines,misc.misc,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: INFO: Are You A "Star Person"? Take This Test!
Keywords: Follow-ups to alt.alien.visitors
Message-ID: <1991Jun21.130437.8957@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
Date: 21 Jun 91 13:04:37 GMT
References: <1991Jun17.201733.16406@bilver.uucp>
Sender: news@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu
Organization: Michigan State University
Lines: 103
Xref: ns-mx alt.alien.visitors:1007 alt.paranormal:1923 alt.slack:606 alt.conspiracy:6126 talk.religion.newage:5679 misc.headlines:16796 misc.misc:4642 sci.skeptic:12245

Well, since out good buddy Don has once again cross-posted and tied
up tons of bandwidth with obviously un-original stuff, I should do
my best to take it in the manner received.  So

'Ave At Thee!

dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen) writes:

>The following text comes from the MUFONET BBS (1-901-785-4943):
>---Begin Included Text ----------------------------------------------
>Date: 04-19-91  19:43
>From: William Ivey
>To:   All
>Subj: Star People Quiz

>Are you a "Star Person?" This quiz is based on a list of
>characteristics of people that Brad Steiger seems to think might
>have a touch of the star-brush in their background (i.e. alien
>genes). The list was found in a 'zine called "Psychic & UFO
>Revelations in the LAST DAYS" by Timothy Green Beckley (1980).
>(I found a bunch of old UFO stuff at a garage sale. :-)

>1. Do you have an unusual blood type?
  Does purplish count? 

>2. Do you have a lower than normal body temperature?
  What is normal? 

>3. Were you an "unexpected" child?
  Yep. Sure was.  Like the time I was 5 and walked in on my parents
  in their room and they were making lots of noise and I think I was
  kind of unexpected but I'm not sure.

>4. Do you have an extra vertebrae and lower back problems?
  I'm sorry, I don't have an extra VERTEBRA in my lower back.  Why
  are extra Vertebras important?  More support or something?  Are
  they underwired?  What good are bras for the lower back anyway?

>5. Do you seem to be hypersensitive to electricity, electromagnetic
>     force fields?
  Nope, just work with 'em for a living.  BTW, it is ELECTROMAGNETIC
  FIELDS (force fields, while TECHNICALLY accurate, IMPLIES that a
  barrier of impenetrable force is created.  Should've been Electro-
  magnetic fields of force.)

>6. Do you have unusually sharp hearing and light-sensitive eyes?
  Eh?? Let me get my glasses.  Having trouble seeing this.

>7. Did you feel that your mother and father were not your real parents?
  Did the ZETA GREYS tell you this?

>8. Do you complain of feelings of great urgency, like you have only a
>     short time to complete tasks?
  All the time.  Guess that's what I get for being a grad student :-)

>9. Do you have low blood pressure?
  Oh yes.  But also is a sign of a very healthy heart.

>10. Do you have chronic sinusitis?
  Pardon me while I blow by dose.

>11. Do you feel that your true ancestors came from another world or
>     dimension and yearn to go back?
  I sure miss the Antediluvian sun setting over the spires.

>12. Did you have unseen companions as a child?
  Drop Dead, Phred.

>13. Do you have natural talent for art, music, healing or acting?
  No, but I do have a natural talent for girls named Mary.

>14. Do you experience a buzzing or clicking noise in your ears prior to,
>     during some psychic events?
  Sure.  But you know what I mean, after all, we're psychic.

>15. Did you have an unusual experience around the age of five which may
>     have taken the form of a white light, or a visitation by human-type
>     beings who gave information and comfort?
  Does my minister count?  Howsabout the cute nurse who helped me after
  my tonsillectomy.

>16. Have you maintained a continuing series of experiences with "angels",
>     "elves", "masters", or admitted UFO intelligences?
  No.  And do I feel deprived.

>17. Do your dreams and/or artwork involve multi-moon environments?
  Well, I have a copy of a magazine called "Buns".  Does this count?

>18. Are children and animals attracted to you?
  Sure.  They all love the candy.

>19. Do you do your best work at night?
  Of course. 

>-* Don Allen *-  InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP  // Amiga..for the rest of us.
>USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything else? :^)
>UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!vicstoy!dona      0110 0110 0110 Just say NO!
>Illuminati < MJ-12|Grudge|TLC|CFR|FED|EEC|Bush > WAR = "New World Order"

Yep, there you have it.  Guess I must be a space alien.  Now if I can
only use my ESP to learn to play guitar.

Mike "Midnight Starr" Grimm
Path: ns-mx!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!msuinfo!eecae.ee.msu.edu!grimm
From: grimm@eecae.ee.msu.edu (Jerry Michael Grimm)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: INFO: OMNI Article On Abductions/Implants
Keywords: Follow-ups to alt.alien.visitors
Message-ID: <1991Jun21.132052.9099@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
Date: 21 Jun 91 13:20:52 GMT
References: <1991Jun17.200458.16318@bilver.uucp>
Sender: news@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu
Organization: Michigan State University
Lines: 39
Xref: ns-mx alt.alien.visitors:1008 alt.paranormal:1924

dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen) writes:

>----Begin Included Text ---------------------------------------------

>Date: 05-28-91  23:52
>From: John Powell
>Subj: OMNI Article: Abductions

>From the June 1991 issue of OMNI, (Volume 13, #9, ISSN 0149-8711, OMNI
>Publications, 1965 Broadway, New York, NY 10023-5965, $24/yr.)
>From the Antimatter section, UFO Update:  Can UFO researchers prove that
>aliens are tagging and tracking humans with tiny devices in the body or
>brain?

>"According to UFO abduction expert Budd Hopkins... a number of radiologists
>are privately doing MRI scans on people who claim they have been abducted by
>aliens -- and that the aliens have inserted devices in their bodies or
   does this mean that the the poeple have claimed to have stuff stuck in
   their brain, or does this mean that the radiologists have found stuff.
   How are these radioulogists.  Privately doing MRI scans?  What does
   this mean.
      "Hi, Dr. Carver.  I want to borrow the MRI Magnet/ et. al to take
      home with me for the weekend"
      "Sure, Dr. Eatey.  But don't forget to recharge the liquid helium
      chamber when you're done"

>brains.  But a neurosurgeon advised him that if, as claimed, implants exist
>somewhere above the upper nasal passages, then they are near the optic nerve.

>In that case, he says, 'it would be very risky for a surgeon to try to get
>one out.'  What does Hopkins say about the prospect of actually validating
>these weird alien implants?  'It'd have devastating societal impact,' he
>says.  'I am not looking forward to something like this.'"

  This I don't understand.  Why would it be risky?  No more so than a
  cerebro-spinal crack for tumor exploration.  And how would this
  have devastating societal impact anyway?

Mike Grimm
Path: ns-mx!uunet!decwrl!pa.dec.com!shodha.enet.dec.com!timpson
From: timpson@shodha.enet.dec.com (Steve Timpson)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Questions about PROTECTION
Message-ID: <3436@shodha.enet.dec.com>
Date: 21 Jun 91 13:34:15 GMT
Sender: news@shodha.enet.dec.com
Distribution: na
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 70


In article <1991Jun20.210043.21547@pmafire.inel.gov>, jeffl@servprod.inel.gov (Jeff Later) writes...

>1.  IS there ANYTHING one can do to protect himself and his family
>    from becoming victims of an "alien" abduction?

        Path: shodha.enet.dec.com!timpson
From: timpson@shodha.enet.dec.com (Steve Timpson)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Questions about PROTECTION
Date: 21 JUN 91 06:34:15 mst
Distribution: na
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Keywords:
Summary:
-Message-Text-Follows-

In article <1991Jun20.210043.21547@pmafire.inel.gov>, jeffl@servprod.inel.gov (Jeff Later) writes...

>1.  IS there ANYTHING one can do to protect himself and his family
>    from becoming victims of an "alien" abduction?

        Yes.   Line  your  house  and  underware with aluminum foil.  this
        keeps the aliens from scan the inside of you house and underware.

>2.  Is there ANY kind of "security system" that might work
>    in protecting an individual within the boundaries of his home and auto,
>    or does the possibility of these intruders having
>    "multi-dimention capability" make "barriers" or alarm
>    systems useless?

        Yes.  Line your house  and  underware  with  aluminum foil.  this
        keeps the aliens from scan the inside of you house and underware.

>3.  Can, or should conventional weapons, ie- handguns, rifles, shotguns, be
>    considered for protection, or are they useless?

        Yes.  conventional weapons help but  Aluminum  foil will deflect
        any of there death ray weapons away from you house and wee wee.

>4.  What about the possibility of other "non-conventional weapons", ie.
>    sonic, optical, laser, eletrical etc., for protection?  Or are we
>    totally helpless?

        Aluminum foil man!!! Aluminum foil!!!!

>5.  Is there ANY way or means one can tell if he or his family or friends
>    have been victims, or have "implants"?

        A rectal exam might help.  You might find your cranium in there.

>6.  How can one communicate this great danger to family and friends
>    without being given the "nutcase" treatment??

        It's too late.  You are a  nut case if you are worried about this
        stuff.  Get a life man.

>7.  Could it be that the single reason our government has kept this information
>    from its people for so long, is that they are totally HELPLESS
>    in protecting us?  And that the only "bargaining chip" our government has
>    with the alien intruders is the "loaded gun to the head" type, ie.
>    "if you interfere too much, or invade, we will Nuke ourselves, and you
>    with us"????

        Man there has to be a smile face around here somewhere.  This guy
        can't be for real.  I have a question.  What planet are you from?

>8.  Is there ANY hope, or is it in God's hands at this point?

        Aluminum foil man!!!! Aluminum Foil!!!
Path: ns-mx!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!ubc-cs!alberta!herald.usask.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!bison!sys6626!inqmind!themax!system
From: system@themax.bison.mb.ca (Max Vernon)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Mars face.
Message-ID: <Hguu41w164w@themax.bison.mb.ca>
Date: 20 Jun 91 19:25:04 GMT
References: <1991Jun20.092852.26388@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU>
Organization: The Max BBS, private!
Lines: 52

>
>   A face also can stand the test of time. In the thousands of years that it
> would take for us to get to the point that we are at now, their alien race
> might have become extinct therefore they would then be unable to send radio
> transmittions... they may have anticipated this and prepared for the worst.
> A solid humanoid face would likely exist long enough for us to find it though
> and realize that we have been watched for quite some time.
> 
>   Also, a face constructed on a neighboring planet would ensure that we would
> only begin to know about them when we are ready to except their existance.
> We have the technological capability now to observe the face on Mars, if we
> were to know of the existance of an alien race before we achieved our
> current level of technology, then it may have affected our technological
> evolution.
>
>   I feel a face structure on Mars would be perfect for that type of
> communication.
>
> --
> +---------------------------+----------------------------------------------+
> | Chris Wood                |  "If you can't convince them, confuse them." |
> | woodc@jacobs.cs.orst.edu  |                                   -unknown   |
> +---------------------------+----------------------------------------------+

Ok, Ok, so maybe you have a point.  They could have become extinct, and they
could have had the foresight to see this coming, and they could have built a
face on the surface of our closest planetary neighbor, BUT I have a hard
time believing this!

For one thing, assuming this potential race is somewhat similar in
intelligence to us (for the sake of argument!), why would they have allowed
themselves to become extinct...indeed how would they have known about their
impending destruction?  Either way, this is all speculation, and I believe
if an extraterrestrial race of even mild intelligence wanted to leave us a
message of ANY sort, I believe they would do it in a way that would leave no
doubt about their existence.  Could you imagine the time and expense they
would have to endure whilst making this so-called "face"?  And then when we
do find this "Face" we don't quite know what to make of it!  It's far to
complex a medium of communication to use.  Why wouldn't they leave
something a little more profound, like maybe a model of a human skeleton,
complete with very visible structures.  (ie structures that can be seen from
ANY direction).  This is just too much imporbability for me, I think we must
just wait and see if anything else comes along which offers a little more
proof. 

Later, Max.