--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 221 UFO Ref: F5G00221 Date: 05/02/98 From: PATRICK FORD Time: 10:32pm \/To: CRAIG MEEKINS (Read 0 times) Subj: Still More Faceless In a message of 30 Apr 98 CRAIG MEEKINS wrote to me: CM> I believe on a link to the above page there is evidence of the planets CM> that have been found. No planets have been found. What has been found is evidence that is generally accepted as conclusive that suns have been found to have planets. That's not quite the same as finding planets. PF>> same face to the sun. One side is super hot and dry and the other PF>> frozen and dry. Nobody can say these are not typical and our solar PF>> system is the typical system. Ours might be unique. CM> Well I don't or to that fact no one has absolute proof of any life on CM> another planet. What? No one has absolute proof? Don't you mean no one has a tiniest scrap of evidence? CM> another planet. But it is safe to assume that it has to exist on some CM> other planet in the millions of galaxies out there. Now whether or not It is definitely *not* safe to assume that. No theory about how life began has yet been formulated. It could have been such a way out chance that the odds of it occurring twice in the universe are a million to one against. No scientist would say that given the right mix of chemicals and enough time it _will_ happen. All they will say is that it happened once. _patrick_ (email: patrick.ford@amiga.gen.nz) Team *Amiga* --- Spot 1.3a #1649 * Origin: ====Patrick Ford====Auckland, NEW ZEALAND=====Fidonet: (3:772/235.3) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 221 UFO Ref: F5G00222 Date: 05/02/98 From: PATRICK FORD Time: 10:06pm \/To: DAVID BLOOMBERG (Read 0 times) Subj: I'm back....(Look out!) In a message of 30 Apr 98 David Bloomberg wrote to Jack Sargeant: DB> The question would be, "What is a well-doctored photo?" Just putting a DB> new head on somebody else's body might be detected by things like DB> lighting (the sun is on the left but the shadowing on the face doesn't DB> match with that). That was what makes the domes on Mars photo so obviously fake. But any photographer will check that because it's one of the things he looks at and checks before taking a photo. It just becomes second nature to look at the angle of the light source. Check out any good portrait and see where the light source is and you will see how much attention a photographer pays to . _patrick_ (email: patrick.ford@amiga.gen.nz) Team *Amiga* --- Spot 1.3a #1649 * Origin: ====Patrick Ford====Auckland, NEW ZEALAND=====Fidonet: (3:772/235.3) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 221 UFO Ref: F5G00223 Date: 05/02/98 From: PATRICK FORD Time: 10:12pm \/To: DAVID BLOOMBERG (Read 0 times) Subj: I'm back....(Look out!) In a message of 30 Apr 98 David Bloomberg wrote to me: PF>> That is what I keep telling people about von Daniken and Hoagland and DB> Yup. They are not the ones who are crazy and obsessed -- some of their DB> FOLLOWERS might be, but I tend to think these guys are in it for the DB> money. Then again, people in their positions have been known to start DB> believing their own baloney... A science-fiction writer once wrote that a person could get seriously rich inventing a fake religion and finding suckers to sell it to. His name? L. Ron Hubbard, who spent the last thirty years of his life just cruising the world in idle luxury in his private cruise liner while poor silly Scientologists supported his money habit. _patrick_ (email: patrick.ford@amiga.gen.nz) Team *Amiga* --- Spot 1.3a #1649 * Origin: ====Patrick Ford====Auckland, NEW ZEALAND=====Fidonet: (3:772/235.3) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 221 UFO Ref: F5G00224 Date: 05/02/98 From: PATRICK FORD Time: 10:15pm \/To: FRED AUSTIN (Read 0 times) Subj: Still More Faceless In a message of 29 Apr 98 Fred Austin wrote to me: PF>> There is one *very* good reason to believe this is the only planet with PF>> intelligent life: PF>> No other has been found! FA> That is a very debatable point if you look at human FA> history and the current state of the world. I was referring to dogs. :-) _patrick_ (email: patrick.ford@amiga.gen.nz) Team *Amiga* --- Spot 1.3a #1649 * Origin: ====Patrick Ford====Auckland, NEW ZEALAND=====Fidonet: (3:772/235.3) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 221 UFO Ref: F5G00225 Date: 05/02/98 From: PATRICK FORD Time: 10:30pm \/To: ANTONIO RUGGIERO (Read 0 times) Subj: UFO In a message of 27 Apr 98 Antonio Ruggiero wrote to All: AR> Hello, I am new in this area and i want tell you any questions. Excuse AR> me for my not good english !! You English seems OK to me. AR> Last summer 1997, in July, about 4:00am, i have seen a white tiny ball, AR> for 2 or 3 second, then it there wans more not. Do you think i see an AR> UFO ?? In June 1997, go of a great supermarket, about 19:00pm I and my AR> father, and about 20 persons, we have seen a ball red and then yellow AR> who goes in the sky. After 5 or 6 seconds it there was not more. Do you AR> think in this case i have seen an ufo ?? What can it be ?? I think you saw meteors. Can you find a local astronomy club? They will tell you if the June meteor showers were at the time of your sighting. They can also tell you the when all the other meteor showers are due. Some of them are worth goinh out and watching. The Leonid shower comes in November and in 1966 they were seen over midwestern USA at a rate of 40 per second. Very big meteors are often called fire balls and can be as bight as the sun for a few seconds _patrick_ (email: patrick.ford@amiga.gen.nz) Team *Amiga* --- Spot 1.3a #1649 * Origin: ====Patrick Ford====Auckland, NEW ZEALAND=====Fidonet: (3:772/235.3) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 221 UFO Ref: F5G00226 Date: 05/02/98 From: PATRICK FORD Time: 10:50pm \/To: FRED AUSTIN (Read 0 times) Subj: I'm back....(Look out!) In a message of 29 Apr 98 Fred Austin wrote to me: DB>>> subject looked and looked and couldn't find evidence of tampering. FA> FA>> My comment is simple, if several 'knowledgable' people think FA>> it is genuine, why is it so hard to believe it is not. FA> I have misreported nothing actually. You did. You quoted people as sying the photos were genuine, when in fact they just sid they could see no evidence of tampering. FA> I was speaking with hard line skeptic Mr. Bloomberg. Hmm. There are a lot of us around, you know! FA> You see you are creating catch -22 here. Many photos have been FA> analyzed over the years by the experts using technology that keeps FA> advancing of course. And you are quite correct, many that looked good FA> were of course fakes. Secondly the people are looked over, as in FA> credibility and reason to hoax. Now, if we cannot find a problem with FA> a photo, and no problem with credibility and circumstance, should we FA> discount them. You are back to well its not genuine regardless. Not I. I will say it may or may not be genuine and so can prove nothing. FA> But FA> now under these circumstances in reality nothing can be genuine. So FA> an endless loop, all photos are therefore useless. As evidence, yes. But I wouldn't call the photo of my daughter flying like a bird useless (severe telephoto fore shortening, and the contributing trampoline out of the frame). It serves its purpose of amusing people admirably. FA> The simple point is who do you trust. Somewhere along the way one FA> has to make a reasonable stand. Or distrust everyone and everything. Scientists don't even trust themselves or each other. Scientific proof gets published but is not accepted until the scientist's rivals have failed to prove him mistaken or lying. And they try very hard. FA> And that leads to paranoia. No it doesn't. It leads to scientific truth! FA> On another note, what makes one article more genuine than another. FA> If Hubble shows me a supposed black hole in the center of some galaxy, FA> or some old lady from Kansas has a photo from a 110 camera of some FA> object in the sky, explain to me which is more genuine. I would like FA> the parameters...... I'm sorry, I can't give them to you. I have mine; you will have to get your own. _patrick_ (email: patrick.ford@amiga.gen.nz) Team *Amiga* --- Spot 1.3a #1649 * Origin: ====Patrick Ford====Auckland, NEW ZEALAND=====Fidonet: (3:772/235.3) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 221 UFO Ref: F5G00227 Date: 05/02/98 From: PATRICK FORD Time: 11:11pm \/To: MARK LEWIS (Read 0 times) Subj: Still More Faceless In a message of 29 Apr 98 mark lewis wrote to me: ml> hehehe... ok, good enough... you're not a religious person, are you? i ml> make that comment only in that "proof of god" is not readily apparent ml> either... All the sensible religious people I know agree that it is not possible to prove or disprove the existence of God. If it were, either all or none would be believers! PF>> Until then: PF>> NO tooth fairy without proof; PF>> NO intelligent life on other planets without proof; PF>> NO guilt without proof. PF>> Is that simple or what? ml> well, "tooth fairy" and "intelligent life" are 'positive' things. ml> "guilt" is a 'negative' thing... "innocence" is a 'positive' thing... ml> sure, if one were to believe that comparing apples and oranges is a ml> valid approach then one would believe the above... <> Sorry Mark, but you are quite wrong here. None of these concepts has a negative state, only positive or zero. X exists=1 x not exists=0 Saying guilt is a negative thing is confusing human value terms with math terms. Guilt is positive if it exists and zero if it doesn't, same as tooth fairy or extra terrestrial life. ml> your third line, above, comes out incorrectly for what you are ml> apparently trying to say... make them all 'positive' or make them all ml> 'negative' then try again ;-) No, _you_ have a good think and try again. BTW, is the Tooth Fairy male or female? He told me he's female. _patrick_ (email: patrick.ford@amiga.gen.nz) Team *Amiga* --- Spot 1.3a #1649 * Origin: ====Patrick Ford====Auckland, NEW ZEALAND=====Fidonet: (3:772/235.3) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 221 UFO Ref: F5G00228 Date: 05/01/98 From: KEITH MORGAN Time: 08:49pm \/To: ROGER NELSON (Read 0 times) Subj: UPN to Air Mexico UFO Video! -> KEITH MORGAN wrote in a message to KIM GALANT: -> KM> [...] Religion is the worst thing in society, and for the soul. It -> KM> segregates man even further, it is a money making industry, and -> KM> each says the other is going to hell fro not following their -> KM> teaching's. -> You were doing fine up until the above paragraph about religion, which is -> off-topic. Please remember that in the future. Whether anyone is religious -> or not is not open for discussion here and neither are views about it. Kim brought it up first, I was just replying to her quick comment on that. -> KM> Kim, you are about to see some events take place between now and -> KM> 2000, that will make you re-think your position. [...] -> How do you know this and what are the events? -> Keep an eye open Rodger, because there are discoveries that are about to be announced about Mars. Then hold on to your hat as the battle begins between the scientist over the possibility of life elsewhere. The reason I know is because I have been working with the researchers since 1988 and I have an inside track of what's happening. s --- Big Ted 1.2 for Wildcat/5 * Origin: Multilevel Planes Of Infinity - 301-261-6242, Maryland (1:109/572) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 221 UFO Ref: F5G00229 Date: 05/01/98 From: KEITH MORGAN Time: 09:14pm \/To: PATRICK FORD (Read 0 times) Subj: UPN to Air Mexico UFO Video! -> In a message of 26 Apr 98 KEITH MORGAN wrote to me: -> KM> things on tape that were nerver thought possible before. And when these -> KM> same objects use to be caught on film by amateurs, that too was -> KM> dismissed. But sightings by hundreds of witnesses all with video -> KM> cameras can't be dismissed, and that's what happened in 1990 in Mexico. -> KM> I have heard some of the dumb explanations for this mass sighting, nd -> KM> none hold water. -> I also have to wonder if the elongation is not just motion blur. And is it -> the motion of the object or the camera? As I said in another message, there are refernce objects in most of these videos, and it is the object, not the camera that is moving. -> Now I don't have an answer to the hundreds of witnesses, except to doubt the -> veracity of the reporters. Each witness had their own camcorder. That means there are hundreds of tapes to backup the witnesses, so the reporter's veracity is irrelevent. Talk to some people from Mexico, or Hawaii, they will tell you the real deal. There is something going on, and just because it is happening outside of everyone else's abilities to experience it first hand, doesn't mean it's not real. Have you experienced a Space Shuttle launch first hand? Does it mean that it's not real. What's the veracity of the reporters that show you the launch? Can you trust what they are telling you? The reporters said the FACE on Mars was just a pile of rocks after the first raw photo was released, and that's not science when you rush to judgement like that. Well, I can tell you for a fact that they were wrong, but they already have the public accepting this conclusion while evidence is slowly being revealed that these object are clearly artificial. But the damage is done, because everyone is under a false impression. The reporters that spit that lie out didn't know what they were looking at, and NASA never told them what they were looking at, they just let them look at a photo taken under bad conditions, and at a angle looking back at the FACE, and not from over head as in the original Viking photos. You couldn't recognize your own mother under those conditions. The FACE has now been orthographically correct to the extent of verifing the its construction. Take a good look before you too follow the masses in the wrong direction. -> I am willing to be convinced, but I'm not being taken without a struggle... -> Ok, that's good, keep on struggling, but at the same time watch the next unfolding events at the same time. There are some things that will shake everybody up. s --- Big Ted 1.2 for Wildcat/5 * Origin: Multilevel Planes Of Infinity - 301-261-6242, Maryland (1:109/572) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 221 UFO Ref: F5G00230 Date: 05/02/98 From: ADAM MAJER Time: 11:08am \/To: ANTONIO RUGGIERO (Read 0 times) Subj: UFO AR>Hello, I am new in this area and i want tell you any questions. AR>Excuse me for my not good english !! AR>Last summer 1997, in July, about 4:00am, i have seen a white tiny ball, or AR>2 or 3 second, then it there wans more not. Do you think i see an UFO ?? AR>In June 1997, go of a great supermarket, about 19:00pm I and my father, AR>and about 20 persons, we have seen a ball red and then yellow who goes in AR>the sky. After 5 or 6 seconds it there was not more. Do you think in this AR>i have seen an ufo ?? What can it be ?? Was it stationary or did it more? And how big was it? * SLMR 2.1a * It's only a hobby ... only a hobby ... only a --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: -= The Dragon's Lair =- (204)269-2164...Wpg.MB (1:348/943)