UFO Reflections

UFOR BOTW...#6

2006-08-14T19:04:00.000-05:00

[Click image for full-size version]

This week's Babe of the Week harkens to an earlier time...2000 to be precise...and reflects a rather dichotomous intent.

The sly, almost coquettish smile imparts a feeling of sweetness...

...while the nonchalant brandishing of the flog seems to indicate something "else" altogether. :)

The luxuriously abundant tresses conceal much as well...

I leave it to you to discern the truest intent therein.

Until next week!

UFOR BotW...#5

2006-08-07T16:24:00.000-05:00

[Click image for full-sized version]

While photos of women with cats always seem to elicit rather sophomoric "pussy" jokes, this one rises above such demeanor.

The comfortable serenity and obvious affinity with which women relate to felines is readily apparent in this image.

Of course, the number of takes that it took to get this shot might make mincemeat of such an assertion, but no matter...it's still a wonderful image.

Our venerable Babe is nothing if not patient... :)

Until next week!

Ok...I think I've seen enough...[UPDATED]

2006-08-03T14:03:00.000-05:00

[Click title to visit site & click image for full-size version]

Words cannot adequately describe...

If THIS is what the "multiverse" really means...

Well, you get the idea. :)

[UPDATE: The image above was a photoshop job done by an enterprising graphics geek. This however, is not. :)

[h/t to I-Am-Bored.com]

Coast to Coast left on the Debris Field...

2006-08-02T12:48:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read blog post]

Spunky Lesley of The Debris Field is angry. She is...or has been...a regular listener of Coast to Coast AM for some time. At least since the earlier Art Bell days, she has suffered the more insufferable guests in the interest of the show's over-arching cause...to celebrate the quirky, the para-normal, and the bizarre with a sense of wonder.

This past weekend however, C2C has in her opinion, crossed the line. And Richard C. Hoagland is at the crux of the issue...imagine that! :)

At issue is a recent discussion between host George Noory and Richard about the status of UFOlogy today. Using the subject of a prior show involving Art and Disclosure proponent Steven Greer as a jumping off point, George and Dick launched into a "bash UFOlogy" party.

While any discussion of UFOlogy could be excused for pointing out the fields lethargic mode of "progress", this one then took the unfortunate turn. Richard Hoagland contrasted the field of UFOlogy...a bunch of kooks with no evidence for their pet theories...with his assertions on Moon and Mars ruins, "hyperdimensional physics", and explaining how he was different because he had plenty of hard evidence for HIS positions.

As Lesley points out, this is beyond the pale. But also expected from an opportunist like Dick. What got her dander up...in Bristol fashion...was the fact that George then joined in with the bashing!

She rightly points out that UFOs in large part have made C2C into the popular show that it is. From breathless "open lines" calls from truckers seeing odd things in the sky, to discussions with literally dozens of UFOlogical guests, C2C has greatly benefitted from UFOlogy, and this convenient "biting the hand" coupled with the faux contrast in legitimacy offered up by Dick Hoagland was just too much.

While I share the feelings of many with regard to Greer and his Disclosure carnival, to toss the "baby" of sincere UFOlogy out with the "bathwater" of its most egregious hucksters is in direct conflict with the supposed goals of C2C.

Regardless of ones position on the origin or intent of UFOs, there is ample evidence that they exist. Are they from other worlds? We cannot be sure. But there IS ample evidence that they in fact exist. From radar, film, video digital images, physical traces, eyewitness testimony and editorial reports, we know that sometimes very strange things appear up there. Determining what they are is the purview of UFOlogy.

With Dick Hoagland's position, we're in a completely different milieu. Dick looks at moon photos and sees things that others do not. He looks at the face on Mars, and perceives numerous mathematical congruences that do not fit when examined closely. He sees a mans face on Mars, but then...when the true asymmetrical nature of the face is brought to light, he claims not only that this is not damaging to his theory, but that the non-human side is a feline aspect predicted by him all along. Pardon me while I take a moment to bust a gut.

Dick is a charlatan. He always has been. He lied about his involvement with the Pioneer plaque. He lied about the circumstances surrounding his being a "recipient of the Angstrom Medal". He lied about the status of his "talks" at NASA conferences.

He has applied his dubious hyperdimensional physics canard to any and every event to come along...global warming, hurricanes, the shapes of moons, ad nauseum.

In short, Dick is a known quantity.

But for George Noory to join in the denigration of UFOlogy as if he has never thought anything of the field himself, is truly revelatory, hypocritical and reflective of what has become a rather common attitude among American media these days...

"What have you done for me lately?" Noble, huh?

I join with Lesley in crying foul on this ridiculous discussion.

While Dick Hoagland and his "unitary executioner" role will fizzle to irrelevency in due time (and rather soon, I predict), there will continue to be people seeing, recording, measuring and talking about things they observe...up there.

And there will be groups of educated, curious, imaginative, talented folk to gather that information and experiment and speculate on its content, its meaning, and perhaps determine the truth to be found therein.

UFOlogy lives on, despite the rantings of puerile pretenders and fairweather friends.

Dick and George represent the decay of paranormal studies, and bring it down to the level of sensationalistic fakery and convenient pseudo-science.

Luckily, there are better outlets these days for such subjects. Coast to Coast AM has indeed "jumped the shark".

[h/t to The Debris Field]

Hoagland gets a theme song?

2006-08-01T12:20:00.000-05:00

[Click title to view video]

Richard C. Hoagland has been singing the siren song of Cydonia for years now, so I guess it's about time a rock group (Muse) immortalized the place in a music video..."Knights of Cydonia". Yup. And what better name for a Hoagland anthem?

The video in question must be seen to be believed, but the driving beat, incoherent lyrics, and ethereal background singing seems most appropriate for the rather grandiose...if not "hyper"-bolic...Hoagland.

The only thing that would have sealed the deal would have been a cameo by "Richard C" himself.

What I found most weird...and there is PLENTY of weird in this video...was that the town of Cydonia has 143 citizens. Does this number have any "hyperdmensional" significance? :)

Only RCH knows for sure...

By the way, there IS another group and album named simply, "Cydonia", but it's not nearly as fun, or "Hoaglandesque" as this one, and they don't have an actual song with Cydonia in the title.

[via Yahoo Music]

"Total Recall"...of a sort. PKD is smiling...

2006-08-01T09:06:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read article]

Moscow's Persey Tours now offers "fake vacations". They will set you up with a complete record of your vacation...ticket stubs, landmark photos with your image added, and more...for around $500USD.

One oil exec actually paid for an artificial moon trip!

While it may seem odd to pay for such memorabilia that represent a trip you never really took, if you think about your own vacations, it is usually the photos and mementos that we turn to to remind us of the experience(s), so perhaps this kind of artificial "self-prompting" is the way of the future...at least for those with little time or money for such excursions.

Essentially, this is an...albeit less immersive...version of the "extra-factual memories" embodied in the Philip K. Dick story "We can Remember This for you Wholesale", from whence Total Recall was inspired.

How long before "Total Recall" and "Brainstorm" become "reality" (or vice versa?)...and how much longer before they are considered passe'? Frightening and exciting times ahead, indeed.

[via Technovelgy]

UFOR Babe of the Week...#4

2006-07-31T02:47:00.000-05:00

This weeks Babe is "bound" to look a little familiar by now. Our saucy ma'am is dressed to maim, and blowing a kiss in a decidedly provocative outfit.

Luckily the kiss she's blowing is with her lips rather than the cat or crop...Ahem.

Redheads in leather definitely have more fun...depending on your definition of "fun". :)

Until next week!

Sarcastic Twittery: Exopolitics on my Mind

2006-07-27T01:02:00.000-05:00

I have grazed the subject of exopolitics...reluctantly...on a few occasions. But I was directed to an article by UFO Bits' Pundit-in-Chief Regan Lee, and felt that I should respond. But rather than reply in blog comments...I am far too wordy...I figured it was as good a time as any to jump in with my full tuppence worth. So, here we go.

But FIRST...it should be stated that I have great respect for Regan and her compendium blog. I've seen many great riffs there that I would have missed otherwise. This post is not a slight to her in any way, only a record of my stance on exopolitics. She just got me wound up on the subject. Way to freaking GO, R!!!! :) So now...WHEEEEE!...

Exopolitics...many of those that find it a worthy pursuit feel that those that don't are arrogant. I find the reverse to be far more defensible.

My perspective...

If an alien species has been or ever does visit here, it would be quite arrogant in my view to believe that they would in any way resemble humans...in physical, mental, psychological, motivational...or political...aspect.

They might find that our...all too human...history of "endo-politics" shows us to be highly suspect in such matters. A perceptive alien might be foolish to think otherwise, even if he just watched todays news.

To attempt to "prepare" a method for interacting with them would be like trying to prepare antibiotics for an infection that doesn't yet exist.

The monumental effort required...and the infinite possibilities needing to be considered...is so unlikely to be applicable as to make it a waste of resources...unless we are just very lucky. [See above re: our "endo-political" history. Lucky so far? If todays news informs, not so much...no.]

If we were to learn (via Disclosure) that aliens had already been here, exopolitics would be unnecessary, since there would already be a protocol established for communication between us and them, unless the government just keeps the aliens penned up somewhere with no attempt to discern their motives, physiology, etc...a HIGHLY unlikely scenario in my view. Some even claim we already have treaties with them.

When explorers (or missionaries) went into the wilds to search for native groups with which to interact (or convert), did they presume that they could prepare ahead of time for how to communicate, or how to bargain with them, or how to determine their political motivations? Nope. They did as all explorers (or missionaries) do. They just went "that way" with their wits (or their Bibles) until they came upon someone, and the process began at that moment.

The (eventually-marginalized) Native Americans, the (eventually-"civilized") Masai, the (eventually-extincted) Incas, and the (eventually-enslaved) Africans...to name a few...stand as a testament to our (in)abilities regarding interactions with "alien races". The record is less than stellar, and these peoples looked a lot more like their discoverers than your stereotypical grey.

Just because we are a few years advanced from that reality says nothing for our preparedness to face a species perhaps millions of years ahead of us. In fact, we should pray that they are not like us at all.

Arrogance is presuming to know...and claiming to understand and prepare for...what you cannot know.

Presuming ones own ignorance of things unknown, and waiting to know more before getting "political" is decidedly not arrogant...it is intellectually economical and prudent. It's downright...gasp...conservative! Our pompous exopolitical musings might even antagonize them...could even cause an intergalactic incident!

All that aside and more to the point, any species able to travel here from somewhere "else" will be far more likely than we to decide the terms, conditions and language through which we interact, or even if we do.

Would our grandiose exopolitical twaddle necessarily be expected to mean anything at all to them beyond mere amusement, much less impress them?

"Lord, what fools these 'humans' be!", might be their refrain, forgetting the inherent...and quite possibly mistaken... presumption that they even have mouths or brains or language, or an alphabet, or an opinion, or a sense of humor, or a Shakespeare...or sarcastic twits like me. :)

Now that's arrogance in my view.

Well, that's my take. My blog comments are non-moderated, so have at me if you feel compelled. I will honestly consider any alternative viewpoint that doesn't begin by claiming I'm being arrogant. LOL Any that do will be summarily ignored...I got a life! :)

Any claims that I am a sarcastic twit will be treated as at least a sign of intelligent life in the universe. To do any less would be...arrogant, no?

What gets me wet...

2006-07-26T13:09:00.000-05:00

More pictures of the day...

Here's the view down the street...from the edge of our driveway. The rain is supposedly about done for the day. Of course, Wednesday is garbage day in these parts, so the debris is what used to be in the garbage cans...the trash company took the day off. Wonder why?

Here's the view across the street. The neighbor kid is moving some debris that washed "ashore", spoiling their waterfront vista.

Weather in Houston in the summertime can be a real "beach".

Glub, Glub, Glub, Lookin' Out My Front Door...

2006-07-26T10:36:00.000-05:00

Well, this IS the view out my front door this morning. Between me and the mailbox, there's a front yard and a sidewalk.

Just beyond the mailbox there's a street...yup, under there somewhere.

Anne is staying home from work since our submarine is in the shop...

It looks like there's more watery goodness on the way, as well.

I realize that Houston is known for its humidity, but this is rather absurd.

[H/T to Creedence for the inspiration of this post title]

Disclosure...what it means.

2006-07-25T09:45:00.000-05:00

In any discussion of UFOs amongst even those with a cursory interest in the phenomena, the term "disclosure" inevitably comes up.

For many of these folks...again including even the uninitiated...there is a flat acceptance that the government or military has secrets regarding UFOs which it stubbornly keeps from public knowledge and scrutiny.

Several groups through the years have attempted to wrest such information from the government. CAUS (Citizens Against UFO Secrecy) , "The Disclosure Project", and myriad individuals...Stan Friedman notable among them...wielding FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests are just a few examples.

The one common thread which ties all these groups and individuals together is the belief that government keeps secrets that they should not...a belief that government keeps secrets of convenience as well as for reasons of national security, scientific advantage, or other "valid" justifications.

The current Bush administration has often been called "the - most - secretive" of recent administrations, and for reasons far removed from any question of UFOs. A brief and none too comprehensive list...

The details of the Vice-President's Energy Policy discussions.
The true costs of the Medicare "prescription drug" plan signed into law by the President.
The nature and extent of the domestic eavesdropping program(s) initiated after 9/11.
The nature and level of debate amongst intelligence agencies regarding Iraq's - WMD - programs.

And most recently, the revelation that the administration...and intelligence agencies ...has known for some time about a "heavy water" processing plant under construction in Pakistan, but kept it quiet.

This latest bit of "secrecy" is particularly troubling in that Congress is soon set to debate our relationship with India and Pakistan...with a keen eye on nuclear proliferation in the region...and this information was discovered and disclosed to Congressional officials by an independent watchdog group, rather than by the administration. The administration claimed that the information was withheld because it might "aggravate concerns in India...".

But this facility is not unknown to India. The only plausible reason for keeping Congress in the dark would be to tilt the debate on nuclear technology transfers to India. If news of further proliferation was kept from Congressional debate, the transfer of such technologies to India could be seen as "unprovocative". This newly uncovered information however might well have a large effect on Congressional approval for "adding fuel to the fire", as it were.

As Pakistan has made clear, it was not Pakistan but India who joined the "nuclear club" first, and proved its capability by detonating a nuclear weapon. And as a sovereign nation concerned with its own defense, Pakistan feels rightly justified in keeping up with its rival...just as it was between the US and the Soviet Union in decades past.

US policy...vis a vis the Bush administration...could do well with an alteration of this secretive trend. The United States was formed under the assumption that each branch of government would provide oversight...a balance of power...over the others.

But with such pervasive secrecy...especially regarding important bipartisan issues...hampering the rightful roles of the branches as proscribed, we face more bad decisions, continued loss of standing amongst our peer nations, and a severe affront to our Constitutional legacy.

Amidst this scenario, what are the chances of ANY disclosure of UFO-related matters?

Slim and None...and Slim just headed for the coast.

For UFO disclosure proponents and Americans at large...if not the world...the best hope is that the pendulum of "secrecy for its own sake" swings hard and fast in the other direction.

Now more than ever, open government is in ALL our best interests, lest we suffer further bad decisions and unquestioned policies. Now more than ever before in our lifetimes, our vote stands as a loud and clear declaration that this is not how we...or our fore-fathers...intended our government to be run.

And if the pendulum swings as far the other way as it has THIS way, UFO disclosure may well fall within our grasp...be there anything to disclose.

Kyle King

UFOR BotW...#3

2006-07-24T09:59:00.000-05:00

[Click image to view full-size]

Robed and bespangled, our latest Miss Monday smolders despite the accoutrement, and positively glows. She casts her eyes into the distance, to peer into unknown realms...her domain of choice.

From a "Goth" shoot...not enough of those these days.

If she looks familiar, it must be a coincidence. :)

Seth "Shostaks" the deck...

2006-07-20T14:44:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read article]

Plucky Seth Shostak of the SETI Institute waxes defensive in a new article at Space.com. Offering up the most common criticisms of the SETI initiative, Seth provides brief rebuttals for his anti-SETI "top 4".

His list?

1) Our technology (radio waves) is too primitive. We should be using...among other things... "Hyperdimensional Physics".

2) If they were "out there" they'd "be here"....the "Fermi Paradox".

3) Alien avoidance of contact due to disdain of human motives and behavior.

4) We're not looking in the right place...such as the Zeta Reticuli system.

Let's take a look at number 1...We're not using the right technology...

There is no question that radio encompasses a very narrow band of the electromagnetic spectrum. Like looking for planets using visible light, the usable range of frequencies is infinitessimally small for any truly productive responses...unless we are really really lucky. Monitoring radio frequencies is barely more than the equivalent of hoping that aliens on other planets...like a cosmic Motel 6..."leave the light on for us".

Beyond that, any other form of monitoring is still limited by our own ignorance of how other worlds might communicate.

Seth takes an opportunity to mention "Hyperdimensional Physics". Here, Seth and I are in complete agreement. Of course, the most visible proponent of "HDP" is Richard Hoagland, so the chances of any advances on that front are hamstrung by the utter laughability of its major "fanboy". I think Seth included this simply to get a dig in on "Richard C". Deserved perhaps, but rather petty, IMO. Even so, Seth offers no rebuttal for the validity of HDP beyond his admitted ignorance of "what it is". Hmmm.

Number 2...If aliens were out there, they'd surely have visited here by now...presuming they are of an adequately advanced status to make the trip...so we're listening for someone who's not there.

Seth argues against this by using an analogy...there are no elephants in his parking lot, so should we presume that elephants don't exist, since they've had adequate time to "get here"?

Well, in this regard Seth's denial seems to ignore the evidence...as inconclusive as it may be...that aliens HAVE visited here, and perhaps ARE visiting here. Why would he ignore such evidence out of hand? Well...

If you hypothesize that aliens in fact ARE visiting, then one must presume that they do not use radio frequencies to communicate, else we'd be awash in alien broadcasts. Obviously, Seth cannot accept a hypothesis which invalidates SETI, so "they" cannot be visiting, can they? A rather convenient narrow-mindedness from a guy that listens for radio signals from aliens, no?

But my question is, how can Seth assert that the hypothesis that aliens use radio waves is more valid than the hypothesis that aliens visit here? If you take a brief look, the evidence extant for the former is far outweighed by that of the latter, no?

Perhaps, while in the parking lot looking for elephants, Seth should simply look UP. :)

Of course, he might state that the point isn't communication, but simply detection. Well, call me impractical, but spending millions of dollars to just "find a signal" without the further ability to actually communicate just seems ridiculous to me. And how could you even prove that the "signal" wasn't just interesting "noise" without continuing the "conversation"?

Number 3...Aliens avoid us because we're too violent, or primitive, or...

Seth claims that this is unlikely because OUR radio and TV broadcasts haven't had time to get far enough out there for aliens to have noticed us, much less to determine our tendencies and motives therefrom. Here is where Seth...and SETI as a whole...find an impassable chasm of logic.

If our signals take so long to get to any conceivably inhabited planet, this would mean that any signals we receive are centuries...if not millenia...old. If we were to reply using our same radio technology, we could not expect any response until we are long gone...presuming (implausibly) that our reply found the aliens using THEIR same centuries or millenia old technology.

If the effectiveness of our communication technology is so slow, why waste time looking for ancient signals from some faraway place since the data gathered cannot be acted upon in any reasonable time-frame? Seth's and SETIs argument actually invalidates their own mission.

At any rate, if alien civilizations have been and/or are visiting us, and obviously are not using radio to communicate, they would have very good reasons for not wanting to trust us, or even to announce their presence. Again, the hypothesis that aliens exist and HAVE been here negates SETI, so said hypothesis MUST be wrong, per Mr. Shostak.

And finally number 4...We're not looking in the right place, like Zeta Reticula...

Here again, Seth argues against this by using a tautology. He says that SETI HAS surveyed Zeta Reticula, and found "no one home". Let me break this down just a little...

SETI searches for primitive radio frequency transmissions from outer space.

Many people are convinced...Shostak notes the Hills (and Betty's star map) as an example...that alien life exists in the Zeta Reticula system, and that Zetans have been and/or are visiting the earth. These people claim to have been in contact with these Zetans both telepathically and physically.

Seth says that SETI listened for radio signals from Zeta Reticula and found none. He concludes thereby that there IS no alien life in the Zeta Reticula system. Plus...and importantly...he offers NO evidence to rebut the claims of those that are convinced that Zetans exist, and communicate, and travel here.

But how about this hypothesis...the Zetans have long since given up on the "snail mail" of radio or electromagnetic transmission altogether, in favor of a more effective system...a system like telepathy. The Zetans don't need to send out signals because they already KNOW we are here, and have been visiting for some time. The Zetans are skeptical of our baser instincts and tendencies and so stay fairly hidden from plain sight to monitor us without overt involvement. While the occasional sighting or experience is allowed or occurs by chance, the general concensus among Zetans is that they should remain a nebulous, "mythical" reality until such time as overt contact is deemed appropriate.

Now, answer this question. In light of the foregoing paragraph, do you feel that there is more evidence extant to support that hypothesis, or rather that put forth by Seth and SETI?

Which leads to this question...Why does SETI enjoy so much acclaim, financial support, scientific respect, and near adulation of its mission?

Perhaps...to paraphrase an infamous military man..."We can't HANDLE the truth".

Keep on listenin', SETI. Maybe one day you'll find an "elephant in the parking lot", after all.

[via Space.com]

To another year gone by...

2006-07-18T15:26:00.000-05:00

[Image to left taken in April, 1978...ouch!]

Well, it happens that sometime on July 18, 1960 marks the moment I first saw the light of day...well, besides the murky glow of the outside from the inside of mommie's warm, safe and secure womb.

1960 was to be the beginning of quite a decade here in America. The Cuban missile crisis, the moon landing, the Kennedy/King/Kennedy assassinations, the Chicago 7, Woodstock, LSD, Flower Power, Free Love, the British Invasion, the list seems endless.

And I was only 10 when it ended, ushering in the 70s...the deaths of Hendrix/Joplin/Morrison, bell bottoms, platform shoes, disco...well you know the rest.

So I stand here today...46 years adolescent...in a very strange new world. War, religious intolerance, misplaced moral outrage, political demagoguery everywhere, education in a dismal state, good health care exceedingly available only to a rare few, energy costs that dwarf anything seen here before, massive natural...and man-made...disasters in the news every...or every other...day.

And I dare to remain...upbeat!? What kind of fool must I be?

Well, I have the wealth that comes from loving and being loved by my two favorite people on this rock...my betrothed and my son...and I have friends...some that span 3 decades or more, and I have all my (albeit diminishing) faculties. I have all my fingers, toes and assorted limbs and organs...I even have my tonsils and my appendix. All I've lost are my wisdom teeth and the vast majority of my hair...and admittedly I shed a tear or two on occasion for the steady loss of that last. :( And perhaps I've lost a little youthful self-confidence..."VERY little", most of my friends would say. Fair enough. Regardless, I feel very wealthy indeed. :)

As I've noted to many before, I plan to be living well into my 150th year, so by that measure I'm just a presidential term away from the 1-third mark in my time on this mortal coil. A mere whipper-snapper still, in my view.

But the real reasons I find myself upbeat? The promises of which we stand on the very brink: Space travel in my lifetime; medical advances that could well eliminate disease, and deformity, and death from a host of environmental causes; scientific advancement in the elimination of many pollutants, new energy sources...or old ones brought to new and geometrically increased utility; changes in attitude; a renewed interest in the earth, its processes and our place in them; political winds shifting to a new...or ANY other...direction; and the knowledge that our younger generations...fraught with afflictions like video games, short attention spans, and increasing violence though they may be...will be FAR better prepared to face this uncertain future than was MY generation, or those before it.

I remain against all odds and common sense, in a word...Optimistic.

Perhaps I am further along toward old age than I think, and it is early-onset dementia that explains the couching of such an attitude. If so, fine. I accept that diagnosis, just as I commit to enjoying it for at least another hundred years.

My most fervent hope is that this decade...known as the "00s", the "aughts", or even "naughts"...ends with a whimper and not a bang, and that the damage done in this one is remembered, and serves as a lesson for all the decades to come. The millenium has not begun in so auspicious a manner. Let's hope that we can, as a species, do better.

I think we can...I think we can...I think we can. Lather, rinse, repeat...

To those that know, I Love you. To those that don't, I love you too!

Ok, then. Move along. Nothing more to see here...

[via my parents and everyone else who helped to make me]

UFO Reflections BOTW...#2

2006-07-17T13:09:00.000-05:00

[Click image for slightly larger version]

Stepping into the spotlight this week is a decidedly feline-esque lady from my extensive archives.

She purrs, growls and occasionally roars, in true "I am Woman" fashion.

And...as demonstrated here...can be quite a "handful". *ahem*

While she displays no stripes or spots (besides a few freckles), her quiet grace, lithe movement, and the aforementioned purrs, growls and roars bely the cat-like aspect barely hidden.

By the way, this image is from one of those old fashioned cameras...the kind that use film and stuff.

Believe it or not, it used to be the only way to get photos...and you often had to have a fairly open-minded clerk at the photo lab to get them home. LOL

Here's to this week's UFO Reflections Babe of the Week!

PS...any resemblance to last weeks Babe is purely intentional.

Until next week!

Dr. Maccabee...promoted!

2006-07-16T13:43:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read article]

Dr. Bruce Maccabee, a UFOlogical researcher for whom I have a great deal of respect in spite of a few "mis-cues" noted here before, has been deemed "the world's foremost UFO expert". While I doubt that Bruce himself provided that description, I do think it is a tad bit overstated.

A skilled optical physicist, it remains to be seen how he...or anyone for that matter...could be labeled a "UFO expert", since he has no more an idea of what UFOs are than anyone else.

Undeterred, the article then seeks to reinforce this assertion by adding that he,

"...works with the Roswell UFO Museum.".

Uh oh.

You want to talk about "guilt by association"? The Roswell "museum" is nothing more than a tourist facility with lots of books on hand and a couple of hokey dioramae depicting UFOs and aliens. No academic staff, no research projects or field investigations, nada.

After viewing the frame of the video on the page linked in the title above, it seems a fair preliminary conclusion that the "object" is a bird. Of course, we will await Dr. Maccabee's expert opinion before passing final judgment.

Just for reference, the location of the sighting is the Auckland Viaduct Basin...it looks like this. Can you imagine a bird living in a place like this? Call me "gull"-ible, but I think perhaps so.

If I were video-taping the Viaduct Basin and a pigeon...or pelican :) ...flew across the camera frame (something I feel might occur with great frequency given the locale), I would imagine a frame-grab looking suspiciously like this image. But I could be mistaken!!

I'm just saying...

[via Stuff]

Druffel's Klass act...

2006-07-16T13:10:00.000-05:00

As posted to UFO Updates by Heflin photo "caretaker" Ann Druffel...pictured here with UFO-denial maven Phil Klass...

Hello, all:

Dr. Kelson and I are gratebul[sic] that the Heflin photos are
receiving so much attention, but unfortunately the attention
contains a flurry of uninformed speculation among the logical
questions that are being asked.

[Which could be easily corrected by making the photos available. Why withhold them any longer? Seems like it would be very constructive.]

We want to be professional and scientific as Dr. Kelson
completes his analysis of the originals. Those who have specific
questions about the photos are welcome to send these to us, but
they must be specific, and if these questions are something Dr.
Kelson can address in his second paper he will do so.

[Specific question: on what basis do you withhold the photos since they
are NOT Dr. Kelson's property, and since you promised that you would
make them available for Ufological study?]

Releasing the original images or digital copies of same into the
public arena at this time would not be constructive.


All best regards,

Ann Druffel

"...would not be constructive."? I am mystified as to how making the original photos available for others (as promised) could be anything OTHER than constructive. Oh, unless she means it would not be constructive for Dr. Kelson's book sales? Sorry to seem...umm...skeptical of her motives here, but good Lord.

Now, how does this square with Druffel's supposed promise to Heflin that his photos would be made available for the good of Ufology?

And notice not a word on the time-frame for completion of this epic 6 year old (as of today) re-analysis. Perhaps he has to keep re-starting his re-analysis when a new re-vision to Photoshop comes out? Re-diculous! :)

Since this is one very prominent UFO case where the ACTUAL evidence is still in existence, it seems far beyond the pale for its "caretaker" to be so flippant about the need for transparency, availability, and integrity. And so obviously deferential to ONE scientists "needs".

Ms Druffel's post above raises far more questions than it answers, IMO. Shameful, really.

[via UFO Updates]

Global Warming of a different sort...and of decidedly HUMAN origin

2006-07-13T19:11:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read article]

As events planet-wide begin to turn more and more to war...continued insurgent strikes against American troops and increasing sectarian attacks in Iraq, the tension between Israel and the Palestinians, Russian and Chechen escalation, tensions rising between the US, North Korea, China and even Japan, and now with this offensive by Israel against Hezbollah militants in Lebanon intensifying with each passing hour, I think we need to pause for a moment.

Ask yourself...

How has the current way of doing things improved the lives of the inhabitants of this small globe?
For every advance it seems we suffer a three-fold setback.

How have we actually progressed as a species, other than to have created far more convenient methods with which to destroy one another, and the "moral" justification for using them?
The example we have set does not bode well.

How can we continue as a species to conduct ourselves in this manner?
We dare to export this method of running a world to other planets at our further peril.

Is the evolutionary end-game nothing more than that moment when a species gains the ability to cause its own extinction and a "just cause" for which to do so?
We may have little to fear from mere "climate-change" after all.

How long before we are ALL engulfed in this cycle of violence and face extinction by our own hands through ill will or mishap?
Our children may be the first in generations not to know a time without war.

How can it end when the institutions and powers that brought us to this place rule the world?
The profitability of war and an increasingly intolerant population seem to be convergent agents.

How can things change if the only way to EFFECT change is more death, destruction, mayhem and chaos?
Change = Chaos.

How is it that so much death, destruction, mayhem and chaos is being done in the name of God?
God seems to be a very minor actor in this play, if he is on the cast list at all.

At what point does the particular God to which you pray no longer matter?
Whichever one you choose...pray for the leaders; pray for the combatants; pray for the innocent; pray for mankind; pray for an end to this madness.

First known ET film footage missing!?

2006-07-13T18:47:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read article and image to see full-size version]

When Apollo 11 landed on the moon, many of us sat in front of the TV watching as Armstrong made the halting descent down the LM ladder. My dad let my brother and I stay up late to see it live (two days after my 9th birthday). As the first true film of Extra-terrestrial life in existence, this footage remains among the most significant in human history, if not in Ufological lore. :)

Unfortunately, the picture we saw on our TV screens was a pale imitation of the "slow-scan TV" (SSTV) signal seen by others due to "scan-conversion" for American TV. The image above is a photograph of the live footage in this format. This SSTV footage was recorded and stored in a facility in Australia.

More unfortunately, virtually ALL of this footage has come up missing(2MB PDF). Also, the only remaining facility which is capable of displaying this footage is scheduled to close soon!

Here's hoping that this historic footage is located and re-digitized for posterity!

[h/t to Slashdot]

Re-examining classic UFO cases slows UFOlogy?

2006-07-12T13:49:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read full post]
Bill Weber posts his reaction to the recent episode of Strange Days...Indeed.

Pertinent quote here:

Classic UFO cases are reexamined at their detriment without
any new facts or evidence being introduced because
agnostics fear being branded believers. I suspect new cases
aren't properly researched or reported for the same reasons.
What seems like idle chatter from this vocal minority is
actually very harmful, and effectively slows down Ufology.

First, "agnostics fear being branded believers"? I don't see Bill including any corroborating evidence to back up this rather odd assertion. I suppose it could be just chalked up to "opinion". And the "high strangeness" continues in the next sentence..."I suspect new cases aren't properly researched or reported for the same reasons.".

Per Bill, we are to believe that agnostic UFO researchers do NOT properly research new cases for fear of being ridiculed as "believers"? This reads as some kind of joke. As if calling ones self an "agnostic UFO researcher" carries no stigma at the outset?

Bill, even when you are a UFO AGNOSTIC in todays world, when you include the term "UFO" in ANY proximity to your name, you have already given quarter for a potential "belief" in UFOs and accepted the resulting potential ridicule for allowing for the possibility at all. Do you not see this very simple truth? The agnostic simply seeks more evidence, and how does he do that except to question cases...old and new, with fresh eyes, a fresh perspective, and a hunger for the TRUTH?

I cannot speak for all UFO researchers, but I sincerely doubt that they routinely fail to properly research new cases out of fear of ANYTHING.

How about a lack of good new cases? How about dozens of photos of blurs and bugs and balloons and birds touted as the next Roswell? How about the dearth of real "sink your teeth into it" cases.

The problem is NOT with failure of research...it is a failure to present compelling cases that warrant such scrutiny. Where is today's Zamora, Heflin, Trent, Trindade? Nowhere, unless you buy into lens flares, mylar balloons and blurry birds. Note that even a "believer" like Dick Hall will poo-poo an obvious photographic fake or misidentification in the absence of additional evidence. An "agnostic" is even more quick to dismiss any case that has nothing more than a blurry photo behind it.

As it sits, there are just not very many really good UFO cases turning up every day for serious researchers to spend time on.

In fact, that is one BIG reason that old classic cases get rehashed ad infinitum...it gives UFOlogists something to freaking DO.

And finally there's this...

What seems like idle chatter from this vocal minority is
actually very harmful, and effectively slows down Ufology.

Bill claims that "idle chatter"...his euphemism for the re-investigation of old classic cases...is harmful, and "slows down" UFOlogy. Forgive me Bill, but slows it down from WHAT, exactly?

Where is UFOlogy heading in such a hurry that re-investigation of old cases is such an impediment? Legitimacy? Erm...no, legitimacy is ever elusive under the current paradigm, for a host of reasons that have nothing to do with "agnostic" critical thinking and a quest for truth. Is it slowing the general acceptance of UFOlogy? Of course not. If ANYTHING, it is quite the reverse.

By applying new techniques and new ideas to old cases, we learn how we can fool ourselves, or be misled, or how we can be right in some cases. Re-investigation does not imply that the initial investigatory conclusions ARE wrong, but that they MIGHT be, and it is worth the time to periodically make sure that the "canon" of UFOlogical history is not polluted with what turns out to be bogus cases. And in this process, the old cases are given new life and generate renewed interest...pro AND con.

Ask yourself this question...When you see a NEW UFO-related book come out, what are you more likely to see on the cover? "Balloon fleets", "lens flares", current UFO photos? Nope. You see a Heflin shot, or a McMinnville shot, or a Trindade shot, or any of several famous UFO photos which remain unexplained. Why is that, Bill? Are they slowing down UFOlogy by retreading those old tired UFO snaps? No. They are using the most COMPELLING images they can find to illustrate their subject...and those don't come from 2006, but rather from closer to 1965.

If anything, re-investigation of classic cases...BLUE BOOK level cases...HELPS UFOlogy retain some semblance of respectability and intrigue, and in fact shows others that UFOlogy ISN'T just a bunch of "believers", but also includes (and ATTRACTS) agnostics who have enough interest, curiosity and sense for the possible, that they are willing to "waste the time" doing all these calculations, re-creations, triangulations, and regurgitations, just to determine whether the case in question STILL stands up to current scrutiny. Amazingly, most of those old cases do.

For all the hand-wringing about the Zamora case, it remains unsolved. Same for Trent, Trindade and Heflin (for now), etc. Do you honestly believe that these re-investigations have been anything but GOOD for UFOlogy?

Opinions like Bill's are what is hurting UFOlogy. Treating old classic cases as if they are long since "PROVEN" is hurting UFOlogy. Excoriating researchers for deigning to use MODERN techniques to "second-glance" old cases is what "slows down UFOlogy". No, actually it brings UFOlogy to a screeching freaking HALT.

If UFOlogy fades into the sunset of popular culture without having ever answered the big questions, it will be in large part due to the harm caused by "believers" who insult "agnostics" for acting AGNOSTIC.

Is that a shame? HELL YES, it is a shame
Is it the fault of open-minded researchers who re-investigate "classic" cases? I daresay...HELL NO!!

[via UFO Updates]

Empty space has more than ZERO energy???

2006-07-10T12:51:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read article]

Lawrence Krauss, author of "The Science of Star Trek", took a meeting with some luminaries of several disciplines, and reached some startling conclusions. The talks ranged from the plausibility of the "multiverse" to the validity of String theory as a theory; from "cosmic natural selection" to the "energy of empty space being greater than zero".

These talks have a bearing on a number of current UFO theories including their origin(s), their means of propulsion, their possible goals in this "dimension", and the very meaning of human perception.

Heady stuff to be sure, but some very intriguing thinking by some very intriguing people. Worth a read by anyone who wonders how much "Science" really doesn't know. (Hint...a LOT!)

Oh, and they all got to ride in a submarine. Whee!

[via SlashDot]

UFO Reflections Babe of the week...#1

2006-07-10T11:35:00.000-05:00

[Click on image for full-size version]

Seeing as Monday is typically the least enjoyed day of most peoples' week, I offer up a little morsel of Monday "eye candy" I'll imaginatively call...Babe of the Week.

Our inaugural lass is a fiery redhead from Houston, Texas (born and bred). She's an Information Technology Project Manager by day, and a budding entrepreneur by night.

I'm also lucky enough to share a home with her. And it's to my great fortune that she enjoys being photographed.

So, congratulations to our first UFOR BOTW!

[Photo and post-processing by Kyle King]

"...help as best you can, and do no harm..."

2006-07-05T18:01:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read post in context]

The following was posted on UFO Updates way back in December of 2004. It was written in response to a post by James Smith, a fellow whom I admire for his rational and well-realized posts. To date, it is the post for which I have received the most private comments...both in quantity and in positive critique. I reprint it here however...as a mea culpa.

"...This List is a forum for those that do not accept the party
line. We are tasked with... and provided space for... discussing
the UFO question in a free-form and decidedly theoretical
context. Dreamers are not only welcome, but it is darned near a
requirement.

When we discuss, and find argument, the goal is to 'help those
around us as best we can', and this is accomplished by pointing
out the flaws in logic that stem from accepting the status quo
as the benchmark whereby to measure validity, or to show the
error of a flatly incorrect technical interpretation, vis a vis
Dr. Maccabee or Mr. Sparks.

But there's more... there is an emotional context for the
discussion as well.

While Dr. Maccabee can expound on the technical minutiae that
often prove a case, and while Brad Sparks can reflect on the
technical aspects of radar returns and decry the ignored pile of
hard data that is already available, and while Dick Hall can
recite chapter and verse a long list of very compelling cases,
and Stan Friedman can lecture ad infinitum on issues of saucer
crashes in the desert southwest, we all share an emotional
connect with the field.

Mr. Lehmberg is less bashful about it than most, and he has made
it plain that he no longer feels that casual dismissal is
innocent. That you and your comments represent what constitutes
the 'enemy' is not a result of his incivility, but a decided
policy of engagement. He no longer politely accepts the status
quo view, if he ever did. As he might himself comment, I admire
his pluck.

You might see Alfred, Bruce, Brad, Dick and Stan as disparate,
diverse voices. I see instead a unified front. Diverse in
expertise, disparate in writing styles, but all working to the
same purpose... to help those around them and do no harm.

The funny thing is, when dreamers dream, they harm no one. But
when a realist pooh-poohs a dreamer, the dreamer is cast aside
as so much detritus, until perhaps a later date when the dreamer
is vindicated. For the more passionate among us, your comments
literally mean war.

Like Roy Neary, we share a passionate belief in something we
know many do not. We seek to help those around us to see a more
expansive view, and to avoid the harm done... when we remain
silent. Like Roy Neary, many of us likely don't know exactly why
we are so... nor do we care.

When an argument is made, like yours, that bases progress on
practical realities, you are essentially advocating against that
passion as well as the opposing argument.

This is why you receive a response you find emotional. It is.

For decades these fine folks and many others have given much to
(in their minds)help those around them. I look at UFO photos to
find the good ones, and I let loose on the bad ones when I feel
strongly that it is a bad one. But I also keep looking, because
I believe very strongly that we do not know it all, and that our
mysteries are becoming more numerous and not less, and I believe
that most of us would agree that keeping this to ourselves...
not talking about it... would violate your rejoinder to 'do no
harm'.

I hope to help people see through the obvious fakes, the easily
identified, and the repetitively misinterpreted because those
pollute the channel of good evidence. I question and I argue,
not because I think the argument is weak but because only
through testing an argument can its strength be known. But
saying an argument here isn't real or practical is not
constructive, it is deconstructive, and in this forum, that
reads as destructive. Why? Because it doesn't help anyone
understand it, and it does harm to the debate, which is what we
have to work with in this forum.

If you want to help others and do no harm, perhaps you would do
well to take a step outside the box of engineering, cost/benefit
analysis, and idea space management, and question things more.
Perhaps your feeling that things cannot change would be found to
be in error. Perhaps if more and more reasonable practical
people like you dreamed more, what is practical and real might
begin to take on a different hue entirely.

The point of all this is to remind you that these are uncharted
waters... by design... and he that finds that 'here there be
monsters' should not be surprised to find so. He should also not
be surprised when his clearly demarked 'map' is considered
suspect out of hand.

Mr. Lehmberg is motivated by it, Mr. Hall and Mr. Sparks are
discouraged by it, Dr. Maccabee is unmoved by it, and Stan is
nothing if not resigned to it, but they all share a disdain of
it. The it is the assured expert opinion that labels their
efforts as outlandish, or that presumes a reality over which we
have demonstrated an infinite capacity to remain ignorant.

For my part, I think it is time indeed to stand for the 'other'
way of thinking, not because it is ridiculous and maybe wrong,
but because the reality in which I find myself today is all too
ridiculous, and in my view decidedly wrong. Acceptance is no
help, and does plenty of harm.

If we help you as best we can to convince you to make the leap,
to push the envelope, to dream for the sake of the dream, and
the sake of a possibly better future, we will have certainly
done no harm.

If you help as best you can to convince us to remain safely in
the box, to accept a reality we find inadequate at best, the
harm done is not easily measurable, if not altogether
incalculable.

The discussion here is not just talk. There are careers and even
lives at stake over this 'silliness'. You must accept that as
dispassionate as your posts may be intended, they are met with a
passionate retort because the passion is borne of years of
scorn, ridicule and dismissal. This is a burden which you have
not had to bear, comfort zones being what they are.

Please help as best you can, and do no harm.

Best Regards,

Kyle" [Emphasis mine]

I have spent far too much time lately poking Dick Hall and others for various minor specifics, while completely blinding myself to the greater goal..."help each other as best we can, and do no harm".

I fully stand behind the post re-printed above, and re-commit myself to the goals as stated.

Another 4th of July at war...

2006-07-05T16:51:00.000-05:00

"We are gathered here, friends," he said, "to honor lo Hoon-year Mora-toorz tut Zamoo-cratz-ya, children dead, all dead, all murdered in war. It is customary on days like this to call such lost children men. I am unable to call them men for this simple reason: that in the same war in which lo Hoon-year Mora-toorz tut Zamoo-cratz-ya died, my own son died.

"My soul insists that I mourn not a man but a child.

"I do not say that children at war do not die like men, if they have to die. To their everlasting honor and our everlasting shame, they do die like men, thus making possible the manly jubilation of patriotic holidays.

"But they are murdered children all the same.

"And I propose to you that if we are to pay our sincere respects to the hundred lost children of San Lorenzo, that we might best spend the day despising what killed them; which is to say, the stupidity and viciousness of all mankind.

"Perhaps, when we remember wars, we should take off our clothes and paint ourselves blue and go on all fours all day long and grunt like pigs. That would surely be more appropriate than noble oratory and shows of flags and well-oiled guns.

"I do not mean to be ungrateful for the fine, martial show we are about to see – and a thrilling show it really will be…"

He looked each of us in the eye, and then he commented very softly, throwing it away, "And hooray I say for thrilling shows."

We had to strain our ears to hear what Minton said next.

"But if today is really in honor of a hundred children murdered in war," he said, "is today a day for a thrilling show?

"The answer is yes, on one condition: that we, the celebrants are working consciously and tirelessly to reduce the stupidity and viciousness of ourselves and all mankind."

From Cat's Cradle
by Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

[h/t to The Rude Pundit]

"Star Wars Chess" anyone??

2006-07-05T14:05:00.002-05:00

[Click title to visit site]

Remember that cool board game they played on the Millenium Falcon in the original Star Wars flick? Well, you might get to buy one for your own star freighter...or your living room...if these guys at the "Japanese National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)" and Burton Inc. have anything to say about it.

Using laser beams, it creates "dots" of actual plasma in mid-air above the device. A bit rudimentary just now, but the future looks...erm...bright! :)

[via Technovelgy]

Heliodisplay: Minority Report-style display...today!

2006-07-04T15:01:00.000-05:00

[Click title to visit site]

io2 Technologies brings us the closest thing yet to the interactive "mid-air" displays shown in "Minority Report".

Using a thin stream of "altered air", the system incorporates a rear-projection system to simulate 3D, and includes an interactive system that allows the viewer to touch, move and otherwise interact with the projected images.

The title above links to the company "image and video" page, which includes a demo video clip of the system in action.

[via Technovelgy.com]

Ixtapa the presses...what's that?!

2006-07-03T12:17:00.000-05:00

[Click image to read initial post]

The image to the left was taken on a plane by someone who described it as something that zoomed up to the plane from a distance.

I can't say for sure but I think it is far more likely an object of very small size within inches of the camera and probably held by its left end.

Notable in the shot is the fact that the left edge of the object is out of the camera frame. Also, neither the top, bottom or right edges of the plane window are visible. I think this is likely a cropped section of a larger photograph.

One very good reason for cropping something out of a larger photograph is to hide something that would make the photograph less..."strange". Hiding the left edge would also make sense if there was a human hand holding the object at that point.

If the object was outside the plane and lit as it is, the sun would have to be directly above or behind the plane (ergo the photographer). But if the sun was behind the plane the plane would cast a shadow on the object, and in fact the entire object would likely be in full shadow. And if the sun were directly overhead, you would expect the bottom or underside of the object to be far darker than it appears. No, the light reflecting off the object appears to be coming from the direction of the camera...like a flash. The flash would not appear so bright on a large object some distance from the camera...especially after passing through the plane window. Far more likely that the object is inside the plane and illuminated by the flash, while the camera is focussed on the clouds below, causing the object to be out of focus.

Besides this, the object appears to be blurry not so much because it is in motion, but because it is too close for the camera to focus. Note that the left and right "edges" of the object are not "smeared", but simply blurred.

Also, note that the clouds in the distance are quite in focus and not so brightly lit. Again, this could indicate that the object is very close to the camera and that the camera flash was used.

My guess is that this is a crushed aluminum can photographed on edge while being held by the extreme left end of the can. Or perhaps a plastic wrapper which has been crumpled and photographed edge-wise and again held by the left end.

UFO from outer space? Unlikely, IMO. But let's see what an eminent UFO authority thinks of this very sincere-sounding sighting.

Per Richard Hall...

"That's supposed to be a real UFO? Give me a break! Better yet,
give me a couple of witnesses swearing statements that they saw
this thing in flight doing anything remotely UFO like. Then I
might waste 30 seconds taking a closer look at this... obvious
non-UFO until proven otherwise."


- Dick

Ouch. Well, I probably wouldn't ever say that something is an "obvious non-UFO until proven otherwise", since that's a rather ridiculously...err...illogical...statement. I mean, is there ANY UFO photograph that has been proven to be anything other than a "non-UFO"? Hmmm...let's see, have the (possibly hoaxed) Heflin photos Dick defends so vehemently been "proven otherwise"? Erm...no, not so much. :)

But hey, this is freaking Dick Hall we're talking about here, so it's a dang obvious "NO-FO" until "proven otherwise"...GOT IT?

LOL

[h/t to UFO Updates]

Craptacular site of the week

2006-07-03T10:21:00.000-05:00

Star Force, the DRM company who crashes your computer..."for your convenience"...now offers DRM protection for "e-books". These clowns are also known for threatening to sue its critics.

But they're turning their attention to E-BOOKS. Umm, yep, those text-based files that you can easily copy and paste, or screen-cap, scan and OCR, or recite to a voice-activated typewriter, or dictate to a typist, or of course whose DRM you can hack.

An excellent business model, indeed. LOL

What moronical "vision".

[h/t to BoingBoing]

Mother ship over Phoenix...next to plane???

2006-06-29T10:02:00.000-05:00

[Click title to visit site and view enlarged image]

The Coast to Coast AM website offers this gem of a "UFO" photo.

Jeff Weelwine, a guy who normally shoots photographs of "rock pictures", photographed this "mothership" over Phoenix.

Only trouble is, besides the open-shutter smeared image of an airplane, there doesn't appear to be a UFO in the photo.

The give-away is the dots of light. When a camera takes a photo in the dark of night, the shutter stays open for a significant time. When an airplane passes through the camera field of view, the steady-on lights of the plane create a smeared "bar" of light. However, the flashing or strobing navigation and safety lights create a repeating dot pattern in the photo. The reason the smear in this photo is fairly short is because of the rather bright lights of the city below. The camera shutter stayed open too long to "stop" the plane's motion, but not long enough to produce a streak across the entire sky.

A cool photograph, certainly. A UFO Mothership? Hardly.

[via Coast to Coast AM]

Straight from the "Abyss"...the wrist computer!

2006-06-29T09:39:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read release]

Remember the cool forearm-mounted computer used by Ed Harris to communicate with his crew-mates in the excellent film "Abyss"? Well, Eurotech, an Italian firm has unveiled what amounts to the same device...plus some enhancements over the "original".

It saves power by only working when the user looks at it, voice activation is coming soon, and the screen is a far cry from the text-only display in the movie version.

Open the pod bay doors, HAL!

[via Slashdot]

Another Heflin re-creation "hat" in the ring...

2006-06-29T08:37:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read post in context]

Frequent UFO Updates List-er Kelly Freeman offers his two cents on the re-creation of the Heflin UFO photos. Herewith his recent post...

Hello Robert, EBK and List,

I have only been following this thread
intermittently, but I am curious as to
whether or not anybody has taken the
time to try and simulate the Heflin event.

Has anybody actually gone to the location
of the sighting and tried to hoax the same UFO using theories
proposed in this thread? Would it, in fact, be possible at all?

A scientific approach would be to observe, theorize and test
that theory/theories under the same or similar conditions of the
event. I am not aware of it being done in this case.

If it has been done, what were the results? Any discussion as as
to whether the photos are genuine or not, IMHO, should be based
on those results.


Kelly

To answer your question Kelly, yes, there are at least three persons actively working on re-creations, albeit not at the actual location...Myself and "Viktor Golubik" (photographic re-creations utilizing same camera and film with a presumed "model"), and David Rudiak (a ray-traced 3D re-creation)

Kelly makes an excellent point, although I'm not fully convinced of his final graf. While re-creations can be very helpful in illustrating the potential ease of hoaxing a sighting, it is only a part of the discussion, and not necessarily THE point on which the discussion should be based.

Also, I don't feel that the actual location plays a significant role. Duplicating the time of day, the equipment, the direction in which the camera is aimed, and a variety of "model" placements will yield hard data regardless of the specific location.

Think about accident re-creations for aviation, automobile liability cases, or presidential assassinations. None absolutely require the original location as long as all other conditions are accounted for. The exception would be when the specific location includes landmarks or conditions which cannot easily be reproduced. I don't think the "Myford Rd. at Walnut Ave. intersection in Tustin, California" necessarily qualifies. :)

Also and VERY significantly, the location bears little resemblance today to the location as it appears in Heflin's photos, as seen in the current "Google Earth" image above.

Again however, Kelly does make an excellent point.

[via UFO Updates]

More Heflin UFO photos?

2006-06-28T13:05:00.000-05:00

[Click title to visit site]

The photograph at left is from a website (linked to title) which adds this caption...

"...Hat UFO flying over a boat -- Rex Heflin, 1967..."

I have no idea if this caption is accurate, but the image is plainly from a "Fox Family" Television broadcast, and most likely from a television screen or videotape frame-grab.

While this is the only site I have found that posts this image, if the caption is correct and Rex Heflin indeed took this photograph, it certainly seems odd that one guy managed to photograph the same (or very similar) UFO over the course of two years. (The 'famous' Heflin UFO photos were shot in 1965).

If this is indeed a Rex Heflin photograph, either Rex was one lucky fellow, or he carried train wheels and fishing line around with him on at least a couple of occasions.

Anyone know anything more about this photo or a Fox Family special in which it might have been shown?

[via Google Image Search]

Bassett "hounds" public and govt. for attention...

2006-06-27T10:38:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read full post]

Stephen Bassett: a "top dog" of exopolitics; self-proclaimed "Jack Abramoff" of UFOs; organizer of the X-Conference; and so on, had to reschedule the X-Conference to "sometime in 2007".

I don't know what your take is on the whole "exopolitics" carnival, but with luminaries (e.g. MoonBats) like Michael Salla and this Bassett fellow heading up the show, it doesn't take a P, an h OR a D to realize these guys are out...to...lunch.

Not sure about that? Try this "manifesto" on for size. These clowns hold these "truths" to be self-evident...hang on to something...

1) There is an extraterrestrial presence engaging the human race.
2) Many people in the government and the military are well aware of this.
3) Many of same have begun to speak out publicly.
4) The United States Government continues to maintain a truth embargo and
deny the issue.
5) This truth embargo is no longer acceptable and must be resolved in
favor of the public's right to know.
6) Extraordinary technology which could save countless lives and solve
major problem faced by all nations remains hostage to this truth embargo
and to those leaders who do not trust their own citizens and place the
development of weaponry above all else.

Yowza...they're all BOZOS on this bus. I'm just guessing it's a "short" one. :)

I could accept that there are some tidbits of information the Feds might be holding back on UFOs, but to extrapolate that to the above laundry list of ridiculosity is a tad beyond the pale, IMO.

I suppose you could equate the "Truth Embargo" with Stanton Friedman's "Cosmic Watergate".
But I'd buy a sample cup of Stan's Koolaid before I'd even THINK of buying into this mess of pseudo-outrage. Such absurd "indignation" should be reserved for the many "Supermans" and "Napoleons" populating our nations' wackatoriums...not splashed across the internets for real people with real life issues to have to digest.

And our Congressmen...and -women...are whacked out enough without having to listen to this drivel.

It seems though that the public...and the government types that Stephen has in his sights...have wised up a bit. The ol' "X-men" are having a dickens of a time putting together their next conference.

Hopefully lack of interest will eventually show these guys that their unique brand of interplanetary "detente" is a bit...umm...premature. Or is that immature?

Move along...nothing to see here. LOL

[h/t to UFO Updates]

Shapers of the Future...Nathan Myhrvold.

2006-06-26T13:13:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read Business Week article]

Former Microsoft "brain" and creator of the vaunted Microsoft Research think-tank, Nathan Myhrvold now heads up Intellectual Ventures, his tech startup, and plans to be the first successful "invention capitalist".

Gathering luminaries in various fields for brainstorming sessions, he hopes to amass a portfolio of patents and patent-holders to spur innovation, improve the world on a number of fronts, and to...umm...make LOTS of money.

Nathan is a mathematical physicist, a gourmet cook, studied cosmology at Cambridge Univ. with Stephen Hawking, sponsors archaeological digs, and combines these diverse interests with business know-how and contacts that are the envy of any Wall Street wannabe.

When future history books are written, don't be surprised to find Nathan Myrhvold's name prominently featured.

And if you get an idea for a paradigm-shifting new invention...give Nathan a call.

A sure-fire Shaper of the Future!

[via SlashDot]

The Simple Life...

2006-06-25T09:45:00.000-05:00

I'm not a big fan of labels. I think they over-simplify the complexity of human thought and endeavor, and tend to force people to take a position in a discussion with which they do not necessarily agree.

But, some people think that discussions are less likely to get "personal" or "nasty" if everyone takes a position that is easily "categorized". In other words, please tell me where your "limits" are so I can know in advance how best not to "exceed them", lest I offend you.

Dick Hall, UFOlogical luminary, makes a very similar statement to the one made in the first paragraph above in his essay "Conceptualizing UFOs". Therein he writes...

"...various labels and epithets often have been
substituted for rational discussion in characterizing our
philosophical opponents. No doubt this is due to the
frustrations of trying to deal with a complex and unorthodox
subject that has little recognition among scientists, the news
media, or other important opinion-makers in society. What does
it mean to be "pro-UFO" or a "believer"? How apt are the labels
"debunker", "scoffer", or "skeptic" as applied to those who
disbelieve in UFOs and/or profess strong criticism of the views
(not to mention the motives and intelligence) of "believers"?..."

Unless I misread, Dick is basically saying that labels are not conducive to reasoned debate. This is something with which I strongly agree. If however I misread, the content which follows the above thesis by Dick can be better understood.

The reason for the essay it basically to explain that the pejorative labels are a substitute for rational discussion, so what does he offer in contrast? Uhh...he deigns to create for us a new set of LABELS which will end the acrimony and allow reasonable people to debate reasonably...if they will only adhere to his labels and stay in their respective "categories"...debate-wise.

Gee, do I smell hypocrisy? Or did Dick fail to read his own words?

He mentions that these labels should not be used in a pejorative manner. My, there's a tautological comment in just a few words...

Labels are by definition pejorative except in the most rare of cases. For example, if you were to call Ann Coulter a "conservative" to her face, she would likely smile and offer to buy you a drink. Likewise, if you were to call Michael Moore a "liberal", the same might occur.

But those who are not represented by those two extremes of philosophy neither deserve nor require either of those particular labels...or ANY label.

Only someone of limited intelligence requires convenient labels to engage in civil debate. Similarly, those of limited intelligence are least likely to maintain civility in the absence of convenient labels.

Dick Hall's essay perpetuates what is most wrong with the UFO debate landscape today.

And his wrong-headed attempt to "pigeon-hole" everyone into neat categories reveals
either:
a severe ignorance as to the nuance and gray area that define the human condition except at the very extremes thereof,
or:
an intelligence so limited that it absolutely requires such "pigeon-holing", lest the complexity of the debate lead to misunderstandings and ill feelings.

I'm not sure which, but neither possibility speaks well for Mr. Hall.

Please take a few moments and read the essay, and see if you don't agree.

Labels ARE pejorative. Critical thinking people don't need them because it is the LABELS that create the conditions for derisive, dismissive and incorrect judgment. Labels dilute, labels misinform, labels obfuscate truth, labels LIE.

Labels are for simpletons. That's why only the most extreme among us deserve them...and are PROUD of them.

Surely anyone who claims to be a student of logic and science would heartily agree. In fact, as Dick Hall once said, "...Labels and epithets often have been substituted for rational discussion in characterizing our philosophical opponents."

Dick, I couldn't agree more. Too bad you didn't just stop right there.

Martin Shoughs his stuff...

2006-06-25T01:26:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read post]

In a post fraught with irony, Martin Shough tosses off on Dick Hall's recent "anti-techie" post, offering a point by point refutation that makes me quite proud. Mirroring the very points I made in response to Alfred Lehmberg (in my previous post), he lucidly draws the very same disturbing conclusions that I did.

I noted in my comments that I had originally written 12 paragraphs in rebuttal to Dick's post, but then thought better of it on the advice of my "better half". Well, luckily my feelings have all been quite soundly expressed in this excellent facsimile by Martin.

I couldn't have written a more cogent or appropriate response myself.

Of course, Dick also mentions thatt he'll retreat to his bomb shelter, as if to deflect any reaction as the mad bombings of crazed "techies". Clever.

Odd that Martin again makes an unsupported...and untrue...association between me and the anonymous poster that asked me to help him make a point, but no matter. In his/my posts it becomes very obvious that both Martin and myself and other "techies" are interested in the TRUTH, while Dick is quite obviously interested in something "else".

Martin, Dave, Victor, et al and I do not agree on everything, or perhaps not even most things, but I feel quite confident that we agree on searching for the truth wherever the search may lead.

In the end, I have 3 words for Martin Shough...

What. You. Said.

Oh, and two more...THANK. YOU!

[via UFO Updates]

The Self-destruction of the UFOlogical Elite?

2006-06-24T08:12:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read post]

This has been a truly remarkable couple of weeks. Science-y fellows who dismiss others because they hold differing views; pundits grasping real issues and tarnishing them with their "taint"; and now this...

Richard "Dick" Hall, former member of NICAP and once a hero to aspiring and established UFOlogists everywhere, has issued a statement on the recent Heflin case dustup, and his comments very simply mark the end of an era.

If the following comments are an honest accounting of the NICAP investigation...and Hall's opinions...of the Heflin case, please leave a comment as to whether or not you agree.

I present the Hall comments in red...followed by my reaction.

Don,

I find this whole model train wheel obsession quite amusing, but
we must let the techies do their thing. David Rudiak, Viktor
Golubik, and Martin Shough all strike me as quite sincere and
fair-minded, but I note that they have a hard time getting
together on basic technical data, much less overall research
methodology.

Just like all techies I have known in the past, they tend to
think that their photoanalytical skills provide a magic short-
cut to truth without regard to witness information or thorough
case investigation. Their motto might be, The Truth is In There
(in the pictures themselves) and I will find it, with which I
emphatically disagree. (I'm going to post this message, then
scurry for the bomb shelter.)

As I told Viktor in private (he didn't buy the argument), the
last thing a hoaxer using a model train wheel is likely to do is
to allow a skeptical TV producer to interview him in his home
and show him his model trains. That just makes no sense at all.
Further, as I have tried to point out a couple of the NICAP
investigators spent a lot of time in Heflin's home, got to know
him very well, and knew about all of his hobbies and interests.
Again, a hoaxer using a model train wheel would not likely be so
open about his interest in model trains.

Finally, I am not aware that anyone has made an effort to
retrieve Dr. Robert Nathan's research papers on the case from
1965 and later. Maybe they are not available, I don't know, but
his work seems to be rather airily dismissed as unimportant. He
was not just some stumblebum amateur. I quote from two NASA
press releases:

JPL, NASA, Aug. 9, 1966. JPL COMPUTER PROCESS BRIGHTENS SURVEYOR
MOON PICTURES. Re: the "sparkling success of Surveyor I in
taking television pictures of the Moon's surface....These
sharper prints are produced by a computerized system which
corrects distortion and improves resolution in original
photographs taken by television cameras. The system was
developed by Dr. Robert Nathan, who led the JPL video fdigital
(computer) data research for NASA. Robert Selzer was in charge
of Surveyor picture enhancement." (Is he--Selzer--not the guy
now re-examining the Heflin photos for the JSE paper?)

JPL, NASA, Oct. 25, 1985. "[NASA] has presented an award of
$20,000 to Dr. Robert Nathan of Jet Propulsion Laboratory for
significant scientific and technical contributions in the field
of imaging." The award was for his "Combined Technical
Contributions to Planetary and Biomedical Image Processing and
Scientific Data Analysis Techniques....In 1976, seeing the need
for more advanced technology, he developed techniques to reduce
computer time by [a] factor of 100 and established Very Large
Integrated Systems use at JPL and emerged as leader in VLIS
implementation."

Nathan, who originally was very skeptical, found no evidence of
a string or hoax -- twice. In fact, all the techies can do to
resolve photo authenticity is find clearcut and unequivocal
evidence of a hoax. They cannot prove that a photo is genuine.
That sort of proof lies in the character and background
investigation and the preponderance of evidence. So the Truth is
not in the photois themselves, unless and only if the photo is a
demonstrable fake.

Cheers, Dick

Would someone please tell me after reading this why ANY credible scientist would associate themselves with UFOlogy?

I leave it to you all to comment on the post above. I am simply at a loss.

[Thanks Anne, for convincing me to keep it short. :) ]

[h/t to UFO Updates]

Maussan hoax? And HOWE!!!

2006-06-23T01:39:00.000-05:00

[Click title to view report]

Linda Moulton Howe brings us a report of a "floating horse" in Milan. The story comes via UFO/paranormal sensationalist Jaime Maussan, which may affect the potential validity (or invalidity) of the story for you.

I try to keep an open mind about my list of UFO/paranormal sensationalists. Your mileage may vary. LOL

At any rate, the question was raised whether the object might actually have been a horse-shaped mylar balloon. I have taken the liberty of cropping such a horse balloon and super-imposing it over the frame shown on Moulton Howe's "Earthfiles" web site.

The similarities seem rather startling...well, as startling as a horse balloon can be.

What seems most sad about this story...besides the webspace devoted to it...is that somewhere a child is without his/her horse balloon. Bummer.

My opinion? Horse balloon...until some evidence is presented to the contrary.

[h/t to Coast to Coast AM]

"...not a simple answer..."?

2006-06-22T21:09:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read article]

Leonard David posts an interesting article at Space.com, and includes comments by a number of big names in the space/UFO game...Seth Shostak, Ted Roe, Kevin Randle, and Bruce Maccabee among others.

Shostak predictably plays his rational dry "science-y" part, deducing in part that current UFOlogy is "argument from ignorance". Ever the fence-mender and concensus-builder, that Seth. LOL

Odd that the "hypothesis" underpinning his SETI project has even less supporting evidence than the much-maligned extra-terrestrial hypothesis (ETH). At least the ETH-ers have photos, video clips, and eyewitness testimony to wave. SETI just has money...LOTS of money. Oh well...

Randle laments the fact that UFOlogy is basically down to a "rehash the old trash" game these days. The current imbroglio over the vaunted and near-discredited Heflin photos would seem to bear out "Randle's Lament".

Maccabee offers up a stalwart if hackneyed defense, implying that the lack of hard UFO evidence is partly "Air Force tradition", and partly the reluctance of science to delve into the field.

While the tradition argument seems pretty weak, there is in fact evidence that science might be starting to take a different look at the UFO enigma.

NARCAP head Ted Roe suggests that using the approach that UFOs...or UAPs...represent a threat to aviation is one way to attract science. I heartily agree. Ted's idea is the most exciting point in the article. By shifting the emphasis from "weird lights in the sky" to potential electromagnetic and other types of "threats" to general aviation, we invite science to help SOLVE A REAL PROBLEM, rather than look at photos and movie clips, or listen to breathless sighting reports.

Ted's idea is nothing less than a "paradigm shift"...something I and several others have advocated for a very long time. I think his idea has tremendous potential to help redefine UFOlogy as a serious scientific line of inquiry.

The most odd comment in the article comes from Dr. Maccabee.

When asked "Why is there precious little to show [the] world of science that UFOs merit attention?", Bruce responded in part...

"Obviously there is not a simple answer...".

Actually there IS a simple answer. And while it may not be THE answer, it is very likely NOT one Dr. Maccabee or other ETH adherents would like to hear.

The TRUTH remains elusive.

All in all, an excellent thought-provoking article. Kudos to Leonard David for a reasoned and balanced approach, and a nice...if brief...capsule of the range of thought on the current state of UFOlogy.

Druffel speaks on Heflin photos: NO!!!

2006-06-22T04:16:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read full post]
UFO researcher Ann Druffel responded to frustrations among researchers that she was refusing to allow researchers access to the Heflin Polaroids. I have copied the full response below...

I wanted to explain again that Dr. Kelson
is writing a second paper on his re-analysis of the Heflin photos,
with expanded information on the enhancement results, besides those
given in the 2000 JSE paper.  A scientist has every right to keep
his data to himself until he's finished his work, and this is all
that Dr. Kelson is asking.  (By the way, Dr. Kelson's first name
is Eric, not Ed.)

When Bob Wood wrote you that "the original Polaroids are 'in
principle available for research under controlled conditions'"
he meant that after Dr. Kelson is finished with his second paper,
the originals will be available to be viewed at my home. I promised
Rex Heflin that I would preserve them for perpetuity for the use of
the UFO community, so I could not let them out of my own archives,
although they will be available for study, as Bob Wood says, under
controlled conditions.


All best wishes,

Ann Druffel
anndruffel.nul
www.anndruffel.com

[EMPHASIS AND TEXT COLORING MINE...KK]

Please note the text bolded in red. Ms. Druffel claims that the high resolution scans currently being used by Eric Kelson constitute "...his data". Well, that is certainly so, if he was responsible for the scans.

However, the original photos themselves are not "his data".

Next, note the text bolded in blue. She wont allow the photos to be seen at all until after Kelson's paper is released.

Ms Druffle further claims that she "...promised Rex Heflin that I would preserve them for perpetuity for the use of the UFO community...".

How can refusing to allow access until after the Kelson paper in any way mesh with her promise to Heflin?

How could allowing additional researchers to re-scan the photos in Ms. Druffel's presence in any way violate her supposed promise?

If she feels that allowing other researchers to have access to the photographs before Kelson's reanalysis is complete is somehow counter to the search for truth, I'd be mighty interested in hearing her reasoning on that issue.

Otherwise, I think we can only be left to believe that the search for truth is...for Ms. Druffel...wholly dependent on whose "truth" one is "in search of".

Why should the community have to wait for yet another reanalysis to have access to data which was purportedly "preserved for the use of the community"?

Is Kelson's report more important than getting at the truth?

Will Kelson's report presumably to be the "last word" on the Heflin subject?

Will the Kelson report be for sale?

Guess we'll just have to wait for the steward to address those questions.

What a shame. Maybe Heflin picked the wrong "preserver".

Hmmm...or perhaps he picked the "right" one.

More Heflin fun...

2006-06-19T14:11:00.000-05:00

Notable quotes from Updates...

"...Since the facts of Riddle's story are fully consistent with
seeing a copy-cat hoax there is really no "need" for Heflinites
to question his reliability..."

Who could these "Heflinites" be? The "convinced", perhaps?

Say it ain't Shough!!

Also, comments have been made that Riddle might have been shoughn "copycat" photos, while offering ZERO evidence that this is the case. But it "helps" the "Heflinite's" case. Hmmmm.

Also, after being strongly criticized for not performing my own re-creation experiments...which I was initially hoping would be done by some of the folks who claimed to already OWN the camera in question..."some" now claim it would be a waste of time except to shough that the Heflin photos could be duplicated, or to support Heflin authenticity by shoughing that a string WOULD be visible.

I don't know about you, but if the Heflin photos could be "duplicated" using nothing more than the same camera, similar conditions, some fine thread and a model train wheel, I think I would find the veracity of the Heflin photos...taken by a man now asserted (and not challenged) to have had model trains in his possession...very much in question. One of the tenets of the scientific method is repeatability. If I hypothesize that Heflin thought he could perpetrate a hoax using one of his train wheels and his camera, repeating the experiments would have something very close to "probative value". At least it would to me...an unconvinced Non-Heflinite. :)

Besides, if my experiments and Victor's turn out to very closely approximate the Heflin photos, I will feel quite confident that the Heflin case is a hoax. The Heflion photos will have failed the "walks like a duck" test, and once more, the most likely explanation will be presumed to be the correct one...until someone comes up with a good reason to think otherwise. At least it will for me.

It would SURE be good if Ann would just allow the precious images to be re-scanned with modern equipment, in her presence, for the good of the research. It would go such a long way to laying at least some of the questions about this case to rest.

Of course, any or all of this may not be enough for Heflinites or others who are "convinced".

Shough-nuff! LOL

Updates feedback...

2006-06-19T08:32:00.000-05:00

Martin Shough responds to my email to the UFO Updates List. As I told you, an anonymous poster asked that I send the images I'd collected to the List, which I did.

Of course, I forwarded the blog address rather than just send the images, in the interest of full disclosure. Martin Shough felt compelled to reply, and was apparently offended or thought all my comments were directed at him.

Martin makes some excellent points, although in several cases he is mistaken. But no matter.

He is right in saying that many of his points were first brought to light by him. I never claimed otherwise, but I have managed to insult him. Whatever. Unfortunately, I don't write to please Martin, or anyone else.

His comments are linked to the title of this post for anyone to read. I urge you to read the post. [But please ignore any "...anger, antipathy, dismissal, and just plain rudeness ... " you find therein. LOL]

At least he agrees with the important issues...which I never doubted.

If you are interested in this case, and care to see the results of my re-creation...watch this space. I am bidding on the camera and film now, and will be visiting a local train shop today to compare wheels for a suitable candidate. It will be interesting to compare results with Victor...

And Martin...you had the idea FIRST! LOL

Condon Report includes Heflin Photo re-creation...

2006-06-18T03:15:00.000-05:00

This image is from the infamous "Condon Report" on UFOs.

It is a photo taken at the same location as the Heflin photos, but is of a lens cap suspended by a fine thread just outside the vehicle.

Apparently the Condon investigators actually attempted to re-create the photos.

I think they did a pretty good job considering that they didn't have a "model train wheel".

Still, it's a fairly accurate reproduction, and I don't see a suspension thread evident, although admittedly this is a web graphic of a copy of a Polaroid photo...just like the images the current researchers are using.

Oddly, the person who currently holds the actual Heflin photos...former NICAP investigator Ann Druffel (an author of the re-investigation of the case in the '90s)...will apparently not release the photographs for re-analysis. Supposedly she and others plan to re-re-reanalyze the photos.

Hmmm.

At any rate, in the re-analysis available here...mention is made of the photo you see above. But while the analysis correctly states that the Heflin photos would likely be highly over-exposed, quoting the report...

Paragraph 1

"It is important to note that the Polaroid camera used to take these photographs used a unidirectional automatic light sensor to set film exposure. The shaded interior of the truck likely led to a low-light reading and inadvertent overexposure of the first three images. Such an overexposure would “wash out” important contrasts in the relatively bright sky but not obliterate them."

...the report claims there IS no suspension thread, stating...

Paragraph 2

"The first important observation that can be made from these enhancements is that no supporting strings or wires are evident in the background sky around the object in any of the photographs (Figures 14 through 16). Since the enlargement and enhancement clearly show the grain in these photographs, further scale-stretch enhancement would be unproductive. Prior claims of a supporting wire in the Heflin Photo 1 were likely due to problems introduced during multiple-generation reproduction and/or handling of intermediate generations."

...However, these two paragraphs are contradictory. If the over-exposure is capable of "washing out" contrast and sky detail, it is certainly capable of washing out a suspension line. Such a line would be far enough away from the camera to be at the scale of the film grain (this is ASA 3000+ film!!) And it could easily be of LOWER contrast than clouds to the background sky, so these two statements clearly contradict one another.

The report later bypasses this paradox to dismiss the Condon recreation seen above, stating...

Paragraph 3

"...our state-of-the-art computer enhancement has failed to reveal any sign of a string or other supporting mechanism, thus verifying NICAP’s original analysis and the analyses of other early researchers who studied the photos. Our own enhanced version of the same area puts to rest William Spaulding’s contention that the Heflin photos were hoaxed by photographing a small model hung on a string. It also renders unacceptable William Hartmann’s “replication” of Photo 3 in the 1969 official report of the Condon Committee (Condon, 1969)."

[Emphasis mine...KK]

Unfortunately, the re-analysis' "enhanced version" does no such thing. The lack of an evident suspension line is explained in their OWN report...see Paragraph 1 above.

This case is beginning to look more and more like a hoax which has been "washed out" by NICAP itself!

I certainly wish Ms. Druffel were willing to allow these photos to be "independently" analyzed using CURRENT "state of the art" analysis.

Might save everyone a lot of time and trouble.

Heflin UFO available for sale??? [UPDATED]

2006-06-17T07:28:00.000-05:00

[Click title to see catalog page]

The title of this post links to a site which sells model locomotive wheels in the 1/32 scale. Note any similarities to the Heflin photos?

Another "Anonymous" posting has been submitted to UFO Updates regarding the Heflin photos. While the post is getting run through the ringer by Martin Shough and others, the protestations seem rather flat compared to the relative ease of testing the points brought forth by "Anonymous". Why waste a bunch of time claiming "trigonometric" inconsistencies and just test the claims?

To the left you can see an example of a model locomotive drive wheel (the larger wheel). Note that the wheel is not symmetrical, but has an "eccentric" hub and a counterweight built into the rim. (Shough claims the object in the Heflin photos is not symmetrical). Hmmm. Shough inadvertently SUPPORTS the train wheel explanation, perhaps? LOL

This is standard design for steam locomotive drive wheels.

Note also the smaller wheel, which seems more in line with the appearance of the Heflin UFO. While it does not have the asymmetrical hub or counterweight, it does have a hub which protrudes very slightly above the plane of the wheel face. Shough claims that the "flange" of the wheel is "narrower" than that of the object in the Heflin photos.

Well, since the photos are overexposed, determining the actual dimensions of the object is rather difficult, but Shough forges ahead and makes rather precise measurement calculations based on his PERCEPTION of the object as if it is represented accurately. This is simply not meritorious based on the camera used and the photos themselves...no matter how much you enlarge or "enhance" the photos. The object is very brightly lit and overexposed (just as the sky and background are overexposed), therefore the edges and true dimentions are distorted beyond any certainty. Yet this does not deter the "convinced", apparently.

In the Heflin photos, the object...like the sky...is highly overexposed due to the camera being in a dark truck cab. Thus the "gleam" evident on the object is "brighter" than it would actually have looked to the unaided eye. This alone could account for the perceived asymmetry. Keep in mind the film used in these photos was ASA 3200!!! Admittedly the aperture was very small, but this would still result in a VERY overexposed pohoto if taken from the interior of a dark truck cab, as the camera attempted to record a "good exposure" of the entire scene.

This camera was an amateur "point and shoot" type designed to produce a pleasing exposure in a wide range of conditions. It was built to take a "good" photo in almost any conditions. This is elementary photography, not sophisticated in the least. And overexposure is exactly what you would want if you were attempting to hide a suspension thread. Hmmm.

If one were to take one of these wheels and a Polaroid 101 camera and attempt to reproduce the photos...accounting for general weather conditions, time of day, and approximate scenery and perspective...I'm fairly confident that the results would be pretty consistent with the Heflin photos. But it could also rule out the wheel explanation altogether...or at least with high confidence. But no one seems to be interested in doing that. Instead we get trig calcs based on inaccurate photographic evidence and blustery accusations based solely on the anonymity of the witness. This is UFOlogy today? How impressive.

Why not just test the claim? I can only think of one reason...

It appears that these investigators are starting to get far too defensive of their hard work, rather than keeping an open mind and testing what appears to be a quite simple explanation. Several of them claim to have the SAME camera model in their possession and the film is in fact still available, or a reasonable facsimile. Note this link...ASA 3000 is pretty darned close. High speed black & white for the 101 camera. Twould seem a simple thing to try, eh? But nope...we get flailing numbers, anger, antipathy, dismissal, and just plain rudeness.

Again, why?

[UPDATE] - After reading an Updates post from Don Ledger asking why I "dragged him into this", I reviewed the List posts on this topic, and realized I had mistakenly included his name in this post. I have edited it to remove his name, and I apologize for the error. I have always held Don in high regard (as with Martin), and do not wish to leave any erroneous comment here regarding him.

Johnny-Cab...available NOW!

2006-06-16T12:31:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read article]

The Kenguru, pictured above left in yellow, is a new vehicle available in Hungary for wheelchair bound drivers.

For those of you who are fans of "Total Recall", you may find this vehicle as being VERY similar to the "Johnny-Cab"...pictured above right in white. :)

Especially after Ah-Nold's character rips the "Johnny" out of the "Cab", you're left with pretty much what is the "Kenguru".

Art imitates life imitates art...and stuff.

[h/t to BoingBoing]

Heflin case...the sad state of "modern" UFOlogy...

2006-06-15T08:50:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read post]

With great sadness I present the post linked to the title above.

For someone of the "stature" of Richard Hall to take the testimony of an anonymous informer regarding the Heflin case, and declare that...

"Unless and until this person and/or the
alleged other people come forth, identify themselves, and
explain how they know this, I am going to call him
Mr. Anonymous Liar."

...we have surely reached a new low point. This reaction from someone who says he developed the NICAP investigative protocol?

Luckily, a couple of more contemporary researchers made the rather "logical" suggestion of hunting up the man referenced in the anonymous posting. In fact, it appears that the source of the actual "train wheel" story is very much alive and will likely be contacted for his current feelings on the subject.

You'd think it would be Dick Hall leading the march.

Sadly, this kind of verification apparently no longer fits in with his "protocol".

And to call someone a "liar" because they do not come forward? Well, if that is part of the protocol, is it any wonder that people are reluctant to dispute the "sacred cow" cases?

Sad.

Heflin case...HOAX??

2006-06-13T09:00:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read post]

Well, might we have a solution for the Heflin photo case? According to an anonymous post to UFO Updates, the object is in fact a model train wheel, and the smoke ring in the final Heflin image is from an airshow. Let's take a look, shall we?

First, here's a comparison of model train wheels with two of the Heflin photos... and then a comparison of the final Heflin image and an airshow photo (including the aircraft which created the ring).

Not conclusive, but mighty compelling justification for a re-evaluation, wouldn't you say?

All I can say is...Hmmmmmmmm.

[h/t to UFO Updates]

Tim plays the "Shell" game...

2006-06-10T13:50:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read post]

Tim Shell once again puts into print (at UFO Updates) the opinion of MANY interested in UFOlogical progress.

PLEASE read this excellent essay! Just one excerpt...

"...I still find among the older researchers a definite predisposition
toward wanting these UFO things to be Bug-Eyed Aliens from Mars,
or something from a pulp magazine from the 30's-50's. "If it's
unknown, it must be aliens from another planet." Well, that
hypothesis didn't pan out any better than the others, did it? So
in a lot of ways the previous batch of researchers really
dropped the ball. They got side-tracked and obsessed with cases
they thought had "undeniable proof," and wasted a lot of time
and effort."

There is hope for UFOlogy, and Tim and others like him constitute the vanguard, IMHO.

Bravo, Tim!

[via UFO Updates]

Stan Friedman drinks the Koolaid...and drains the cup.

2006-06-08T03:56:00.000-05:00

In a moment of intellectual "acid tripping" beyond belief, Roswell (and supposedly "Real") researcher Stanton Friedman said this at UFO Updates...

"...Thousands of abductees and physical trace case witnesses from all over the world describe beings that don't look like Earthlings and vehicles that look and act like no known Earthling produced vehicle. Therefore they were produced somewhere other than earth which means they are of ET origin..." WTF!!!!!!?

Now, I don't care if you believe, don't believe, or have no opinion on the subject of UFOs, this is the most ludicrous assertion I have yet to hear from someone who is a respected member of the UFOlogical community.

As if there can be only one of two possibilities as to the source of UFOs...contemporary human constructions, albeit secret, or extraterrestrial objects...such an assertion is so beyond the pale, one wonders what Stan is smoking these days...or if his medication has simply run out.

Eugene Frison, Tim Shell and Bob Shell very rightly take him to task at UFO Updates (Eugene's reply is linked from the title of this post), but what is conspicuous is the silence from the rest of the community.

The schism between the "old guard" and the new in Ufology is becoming clearly...and embarrassingly...obvious.

A sign of a desperate attempt to remain relevant...and a sad one at that.

As with all things human, decay, decline, and denial...ultimately...desolation.

None shall dare to get your back on this one, Stan. And no one should. Game over, I'm afraid.

Unbelievable but inevitable I guess.

A non-UFO moment...

2006-06-08T03:40:00.000-05:00

As we celebrate the killing of a human being...Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi...and we surely will celebrate, please take a moment to read the article linked at the title of this post.

Sidney Blumenthal reveals that George Bush...SENIOR...attempted to have Defense Secty. Donald Rumsfeld replaced, but was rebuffed by reigning monarch G. W. Bush.

The article goes into great detail about not only this episode, but also into the larger story of how this conflict has gone so wrong so quickly...and so predictably.

That ALL the President's men said this was a fool's errand...save a few neo-con NON-MILITARY suits in the White House...speaks to why the elder Bush felt compelled to once again exert a little parental control over a rebellious child.

Please read it, and whenever someone tells you we could never have predicted the current state of the Iraqi conflict, pass them the link.

It is not sensational, it is not an anti-Bush diatribe. It is the plain truth, supported by the words of actual participants on the ground...American and other coalition participants.

UFO...NO! GI JOE!!!

2006-06-07T01:00:00.000-05:00

[Click title to read article]

Next time you see a flying triangle in the sky, it might be just a special forces dude doing his thing.

This uber-cool getup is the latest thing in paratrooper hotrodding.

German company ESG has created these carbon-fiber "mono-wings" to allow paratroopers to drop from a high-altitude aircraft 120 miles(!!) from their target, carry 200 lbs. of gear inside the mono-wings, and deploy a typical parachute once the target landing zone is reached.

The next step per the company is the addition of small jets to increase range.

As Will Smith said in ID4..."I gotta get me one of THESE!!"

No word on when they will be available for the general public...yeah, right. :)

[h/t to C2C AM]

Selby, England..."Malibu" UFO...?

2006-06-02T00:01:00.000-05:00

Will Beuche catches one on Updates...

Commenting on this photo (the one on the right), he finds it a little similar to something he found at Amazon.com (similar to the one on the left).

Nice catch, Will!

But the story said the photo was taken as the "UFO" hovered above a beauty salon. Well, if it was hovering ABOVE the salon, where was the photographer located to get this angle?

Looks like the photographer must have been in an adjacent UFO hovering just above this one to get this shot.

One thing "intrepid" investigator Russell Kellett said is likely accurate..."We know it's not simply plasma...". I couldn't agree more, Russell!

I imagine the salon owners lament the "craft" leaving, what with the loss of the nice landscape lighting and all...

[h/t to UFO Updates]

Stan Friedman...on Stan Friedman...

2006-06-01T20:18:00.000-05:00

I am treading on thin ice here...I just read the following on UFO Updates...

Stan Friedman wrote:

May I respectfully suggest my Review of Case MJ-12, a 28 page,
January 2003 paper. It is posted on my website at:

www.stantonfriedman.com

Or available from UFORI, POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958.($4.00)
Including S and H) Either way it would be much easier than going
back through UPDATES and contains material that is not on
Updates. It is far more than just opinions.

It contains evidence that Kevin's statements are often flat out
wrong.It also shows that a number of Tim Cooper's purported MJ-
12 documents are emulations.

I would also suggest the new Chapter of TOP SECRET/MAJIC

which deals with many specific objections. I wonder how many
people on this list who claim that the arguments are just
dueling opinions have looked at the facts that are
presented.Phil Klass said PICA type wasn't used . I provided a
number of examples.

Many said TOP SECRET Restricted wasn't in use. I provided a
statement from the GAO that they found a number of examples.

Some complained that all TS documents required control numbers.
I provided both examples and statements from an archivist at the
Eisenhower Library that they had many such. Kevin didn't like
the use of Admiral Hillenkoetter as opposed to rear Admiral. I
provided strong evidence that the use of generic ranks was quite
common etc etc etc. These aren't opinions. They are facts.

Stan Friedman

What is interesting here is that the things Stan says here are all correct...they are facts. They are things he responds with when people claim the MJ-12 documents contain errors that prove they are fake.

However, as a response to someone saying he is not convinced that MJ-12 is real, this is intellectually dishonest.

Now, I respect Stanton Friedman immensely. But these words were in response to someone saying he has not been convinced of the validity of the MJ-12 story. I also have not been convinced.

When I say that I am not convinced that the MJ-12 documents are real, and that I require proof before I accept them as real, I am making what I believe to be a reasonable request.

So, what does Stan say to that? All he can say is as above...that he has proven that the types face was in use, the paper was in use, the words were in use, the watermark is correct, the classification was in use, etc.

My queston is..."which of these statements proves that the MJ-12 documents are real?".

Well, none of them.

My next question would be, "Where did these MJ-12 documents come from?"

Stan would have to answer, "They appeared in the mailbox of a film producer".

I say, "Well, I cannot accept any documents you got from a mailbox from some anonymous person as real".

Stan's reply might be, "Well, the documents pointed to another document...the Cutler-Twining memo...which was found in an archive just as the mailbox documents said!!!".

I say, "Wow...now we're getting somewhere. What does the Cutler-Twining memo say to prove MJ-12 is real?".

Stan might respond, "Well, it says nothing about MJ-12, but instead says something about when Cutler would be in his office, and what should be done with his paperwork while he was out."

Oh.

So, in light of this we have the following...

A bunch of documents (on film...not the documents themselves) appear in a mailbox. I cannot accept these documents as real since their provenance is unknown.

We have a document that WAS found in an archive that has nothing to do with whether MJ-12 was real or not, but instead addresses a side-issue that is all but unrelated...UNLESS you accept the "mailbox" documents as real.

We have NOTHING else.

So I ask, is it reasonable to remain unconvinced that the MJ-12 documents are real?

I would say it would be unreasonable to be convinced otherwise.

Now, since these documents were received there have been other documents supposedly related to MJ-12, but Stan is convinced that THEY are fakes. Okie dokie. So he admits that there ARE fake MJ-12 documents out there, but that HIS are real. Hmmm.

There have been no more documents to corroborate the existence of MJ-12 that are not of similarly questionable provenance. If someone in the military "leaked" the mailbox documents, why has he or his confederates not released more? Surely he could not have thought that these documents alone would be accepted at face value, and presumably he risked freedom and perhaps his life to "leak" them.

Now, there is also this detail. A military man named Richard Doty talked to one of Stan Friedman's associates about faking some UFO documents to create "buzz" that might get some official documents released in rebuttal. This conversation was BEFORE the mailbox documents were found. Plus, this military guy was based in New Mexico, and the mailbox documents were postmarked from New Mexico. Hmmm.

Is it possible that the mailbox documents were fakes?

Yes.

It is posssible that Richard Doty provided the mailbox documents?

Yes.

Is it possible that whomever provided the mailbox documents also planted the Cutler-Twining memo to help "prove" the mailbox documents were valid?

Yes, especially if he was involved with military intelligence and disinformation programs (which Doty was).

Is it possible that MJ-12 was non existent and was never real?

Yes.

Most important...Can Stanton Friedman prove that any of the above statements are false?

NO.

So, when someone claims not to be convinced that MJ-12 is real, what leg does Stan have to stand on when he asserts that such a claim is "research by proclamation"?

I don't know, but I will say that if he were the Emperor he'd be a little chilly...

If you have proof that MJ-12 is or was ever real, I'm ready to hear or see it. However...

If all you have is the mailbox documents, the C-T memo, the EBD, etc, etc., you haven't convinced me.

And if you want to call that proclamation, you're just being obtuse. Or intellectually dishonest.

Open Minds Uncover the Serponic Reality...UPDATED!!

2006-06-01T14:35:00.000-05:00

I've been spending some time perusing a few forums lately regarding the Serpo story. For those of you who have been spared the gist, you can catch up (or not) at serpo.org.

Anyway, after someone was able to get some identifying information on the "leaker" called "Request Anonymous", the disclosures stopped. Then a NEW leaker popped up saying that Serpo was all disinfo, and that the REAL story was about something called Seinu.

Then, another poster started a new web site to debunk the Serpo story altogether...

So, the forum that brought the story out was "Above Top Secret" (ATS), which eventually killed the thread to prevent promoting what they deemed a hoax. Another forum..."Open Minds" (OM) picked up the thread. I joined, and was summarily banned after my first post due to apparently questioning the validity of the subject. "Open Minds" indeed. LOL

So, the folks that dug up the scoop on "Request Anonymous", started their own forum, "Reality Uncovered" (RU), where the discussion has moved to the involvement of Richard Doty, the existence or not of Anonymous #1 and #2, and how UFO hoaxes can generate income or not.

Whatever your take on Serpo, Seinu, etc., the discussions are occasionally interesting, and some of the participants take this stuff REAL seriously.

Caveat Emptor, but it's a fun diversion...especially for those interested in the antics of folks like Doty, who are infamous in UFOlogical circles.

Anyway, it's been a hoot.

And, while on the subject of forums, please take a minute and check out "UFO-Planet". I spend far more time there than at the others, and the conversations are friendly, and the folks are curious, curteous, and cool. Tell Martin I sent you!

====================================================================
UPDATE!!!

In an epiphany, it would appear that "Reality Uncovered", and indeed perhaps the entire Serpo saga might be part of a "no nukes in space" scheme involving "Dr." Carol Rosin. Rosin is one of the Greer Disclosure clowns who seems to make a habit of being around when luminaries die (Werner von Braun and Tomothy Leary to name 2).

Rosin claims that von Braun told her that the military would create fake terrorist threats and asteroid threats and evil ET threats to convince people that weapons were needed up in space.

Rosin claims to be working against weapons in space. But, by heading up an organization like hers...with her "reputation", it seems more likely that the military and/or government might be propping up this organization in order to make being "anti space weapons" seem "kooky". In other words, I am beginning to think that Serpo was created to form factions between those that are "FOR" Rosin's ideas, or "AGAINST" them.

In the end, rational folks would side with weapons in space rather than be labelled a kook.

Seem at least as plausible as the govt. making people like Bob Lazar look credible at first and then to be made to look like a kook to keep people from "falling" for UFO/alien stories.

At any rate, I have severed ties with all of the above sites...except UFO-Planet. I like it there...no Rosinite clowns, and little of the melodrama. Whew. LOL

[h/t to ATS, RU, OM, and UFO-Planet]

More Heflin fun...

2006-05-30T15:43:00.000-05:00

On the left above is a cropped section of Heflin photo #2. It is cropped from a 600 dpi resample of the large scans from the Druffel, et. al., re-analysis posted here.

The image on the right is the same cropped section with Adobe Photoshop's "Emboss" filter applied.

When a photograph is blurred, or sometimes when over-exposed, detail can often be recovered using an emboss filter. While it can also result in false information, it can be useful. As with the sharpen filter, when the emboss filter is applied in an "excessive" amount, subtle details which were barely (or not at all) apparent in the original image can emerge.

If you look at the image on the right above, I think there is an apparent straight-line feature running from the object to the door frame. Now, this image is oriented as it was in the original photo, so there is geometry that can emerge as a result of the "grid" pattern of pixels. In other words, the apparent filament in the image could easily be a by-product of the pixelation of the scan, and could be misleadingly enhanced by the embossing filter.

BUT, I think it is noteworthy that we are assuming (for sake of argument) a hoaxed image using a model and a suspension line, and under this type of filtering we see a vertical straight-line filament appear...just where it would need to be. Note that there is not a similar feature anywhere else in the image. Note also that while the filament is not exactly lined up with the center of the object, the distortion of the filtering involves two copies of the image being offset, so that the filament might not be located exactly, but its "impression" can still be accurate.

I will add that I did nothing more to the image than what I described. Just cropped the resampled image, and applied the emboss filter at near maximum level.

Food for thought? Or just empty carbs? You be the judge.

Dave Rudiak chimes in...

2006-05-30T13:27:00.000-05:00

David Rudiak, a frequent (and very competent) contributor to UFO Updates, offers some experimental evidence to support his contentions on the Heflin photos. Unfortunately, his experiment leaves at least one very important detail out of the equation.

Dave creates a color field on his computer and then overlays several threads over it to simulate different suspension means, assuming that the object in the Heflin photos is a model. He then shoots a photograph of the field and the thread, to see whether the thread can be resolved. Trying different thread types, he reaches the conclusion that yes, the thread would be resolvable.

However, in the Heflin photos, he is sitting inside a truck...in dark shade...when taking the initial 3 photos, and in each of these photos, the entire camera frame is dominated by the darkness of the truck interior. In the simplistic auto exposure system of the Polaroid 101, the scene is light-averaged. This means that the exposure is set based on the average lighting in the scene. So, when the photos were taken, the camera would attempt to make both the interior of the truck and the scene outside as visible as possible. Well, this makes the scene outside highly over-exposed, as the camera attempts to balance a good photo of the interior with a good photo of what is outside. So, if the object was a model suspended outside, any suspension thread could easily be hidden in the highly over-exposed exterior light. Since the maximum level of "white" is finite for a camera, once the exterior reached this level, the thread could easily be "engulfed" in this glaring white.

Similarly, the object itself would appear highly over-exposed, meaning that to a person standing outside the truck, the object would have been significantly darker, and the apparent "glare" spots on the object would have been far less prominent. I don't know if that fact has any bearing on what the object might have been, but it is notable that the object does not look in the photos as it would have appeared to anyone outside the truck.

Again, the lack of a discernible thread does not rule out hoax, especially if the over-exposure of the exterior is what caused a suspension means to be rendered invisible. But the framing of the photos, coupled with the position of the object in the photos, leads me to suspect hoax.

I will add however, that in this case the exterior scene isn't over-exposed to the extent of maximum white, so if the scene is darkened and contrast-enhanced, a thread or some impression of a thread might become visible. As I presented in my previous post, there does seem to be an "impression" of a thread visible, but this is based on a very cursory examination. I found similar "impressions" in the other images of the object as well, but this one seemed the most clear with unaided eye.

The mystery deepens. Perhaps we are on the verge of some real findings in this case. Another example of how applying more advanced technology on older cases can actually illuminate and in some cases, provide solutions.

Bob Shell on the Heflin photos

2006-05-26T14:15:00.003-05:00

[Click title to see post]

Bob Shell adds his 2 cents on the Heflin photos, but misses a primary point on the lack of a suspension thread in the photos.

He claims that the only way for a suspension thread to be invisible at such close range (5 feet or so from the lens) is for the thread to be non-reflective and very thin.

This is actually not true. While it is much easier to "hide" a thread when it is very thin and non-reflective, it is not necessary. What is important in the Heflin photos is that they were taken from inside a dark truck cab. The Polaroid 101s automatic exposure would average the scene lighting and expose accordingly.

So, as the majority of the field of view is dark, the camera would over-expose, which causes the sky to become very uniform, and any suspension thread is over-exposed to invisibility just like the clouds in the sky.

So even a fairly thick suspension thread could be hidden by ensuring that the images are more dark than light.

And when looking at the images, what strikes me is that in each of the object photos, the object is NOT centered in the frame, as a human instinctively seeks to do, but the camera remained well within the truck as if Heflin did not instinctively move as close to the window as possible to get the object centered in a field of sky.

Look at each of the photos 1-3 in succession...you see the object very near the top of the windshield in photo #1...Why didn't Heflin lean forward to allow the sky to fill the frame with the object in the dead center? Well, I know that if the object was hanging from a fishing pole, it would possibly show the pole, and if I filled the frame with the bright sky, the exposure would be such that the thread would be quite visible.

Same with the other two object photos...object is very near the door frame, and not centered. If Heflin had leaned out the window to get the big sky and the object centered in the frame, we'd see the thread, and maybe the pole. By staying well within the truck and centering not on the object but the windowframe itself, he insured that the exposure would be over-compensating, and the thread would vanish.

This would mean that the object itself would be actually much darker than the photo indicates, and would enhance the "shine" noted in photo 1. This item could have been a pork pie hat dangling from a fishing pole with plain old fishing line or kite string. No fancy tungsten wire required.

Note also that once the model is no longer required...in the final "smoke ring" photo, that Heflin has moved outside the vehicle and we see the smoke ring centered in the frame with big sky all around...just like you'd expect.

For what it is worth, the images above were done using the large images in the Re-analysis cited before, with levels adjusted to enhance the contrast. I think there's a case for a filament between the object and the window frame. You be the judge...

I think we can chalk this up to hoax unless some compelling evidence comes forth to refute these conclusions.

[hat tip to UFO Updates]

Replicant Redux...

2006-05-25T03:17:00.000-05:00

I was blog-surfing and came across a comment on ABC News' Brian Ross' blog. The comment was fine, but the commentors signature was what caught my eye...

"Teach your children Spanish and your grandchildren Chinese."

Now, I realize the irony expressed, and it gave me a chuckle when I initially caught it. But a few minutes later I found myself thinking back to that really odd "Hispanic/Oriental/African" dialect spoken by the "street people" (and by the cop character played by Edward James Olmos) in Blade Runner.

Blade Runner is one of my all-time top 10 films, and the texture of it seemed so freaking presciently accurate that I think I remember that "texture" more than any individual performer or performance. The unique "street-talk" was definitely part of that for me.

At any rate, today it seems quite reasonable to recommend teaching ones children Spanish. Of course, I live in Southeast Texas, so Spanish is a no-brainer. And it certainly seems plausible that in the next generation or two, we'll be becoming WAY more familiar with Chinese people, language, and culture.

Philip K. Dick, Ridley Scott, and Syd Mead RULE!! So why not a hybrid Latino-Sino-Afro slang dialect?

[via the web]

Paul Kimball on Coast to Coast AM tonight!!

2006-05-23T23:20:00.000-05:00

Blog brother and all-around renaissance guy Paul Kimball will guest on C2C this very night...about an hour from now.

Outlining a few cases and hyping the upcoming filmwork no doubt.

This is a rare opportunity to hear a "new voice" in Ufological discourse, and a refreshingly independent and frequently unorthodox voice to boot.

This is "must-hear" radio!! LOL

And FYI...of the two rugged, pointy-topped icons in the photo above, the one on the LEFT is Paul...LOL

stream available here

[POST-SHOW UPDATE]
Paul was an excellent guest. Some might think that his position makes him a poor "promoter" of the UFO field, but you'd be wrong. By appealing to the "center" of the debate, he was able to generate real excitement with his retellings of the RB-47 case, appealed to budding Ufologists with his reference to the online Blue Book Archive, and showed respect for the "wizened elders" (Hall, Friedman, Clark, Sparks) responsible for the body of reference and research extant, while still plugging a few "rising stars" of the field (Redfern, Bishop, Wise).

A bravura performance...KUDOS!

[hat tip to Coast to Coast AM]

Tim Shell: 3rd Dimensional Heflin

2006-05-22T21:38:00.000-05:00

[Click title to view Tim's 3D image]

Tim Shell grabs a couple of the famous Heflin photos and creates a 3D anaglyph image. (He erroneously calls them analglyphs, but hey, maybe he's just de-TAIL oriented...)

The Heflin photos are considered among the best examples of UFO images. I have a fond attachment to this case because it was the Heflin "profile" photo...on the cover of "Is Something up There"...that first got me interested in UFOs.

The intriguing thing about the profile shot is the swirl of dust on the ground directly beneath the object...apparently giving some sense of distance and scale to the object.

Of course, I eventually realized that the swirl is DIRECTLY beneath the object, while the underside of the object is at an angle pointing at an area some distance from where the dust swirl is located, which seems to indicate that the swirl is a separate event, or an event incorporated into the image on purpose. But who knows...it still looks pretty real to me, even thought the shape of the object seems a little "boxy".

Tim takes the fact that Heflin photographed from two horizontally discrete spots, and builds his anaglyph to determine any depth cues that might be present.

Unfortunately, the result is that the object appears to exhibit a precision of lateral movement in relation to the camera that is highly suggestive of an object which is small and VERY close to the camera.

Conclusive? Hardly. But Tim is doing the kind of thing that makes UFOlogy so interesting. He has a skill, and he applied this skill to the UFO case, and actually acquired new information. Debatable information, but definitely information.

Tim deserves kudos for his work here.

For the record, Tim, I agree with your analysis regarding the change in perspective versus the non-change in object size. You seem to have produced compelling evidence that the object was in fact more likely attached to the truck than to some unseen alien propulsion force.

While I'm disappointed at the prospect of having to concede the Heflin case, I applaud your ingenuity!

Sallllll-UTE! LOL

[hat tip to UFO Updates]

Rick Nielsen consolidates into a consistent whole!

2006-05-22T15:17:00.000-05:00

Posted by Rick Nielsen to UFO Updates...my comments underlying parenthetically...

[And no, this isn't the same Rick Nielsen, but it's a badass photo, no?]

The Current Situation: If We Can Defend Humanity, Let's Do So

There is much credible scientific research published with
accurately deduced conclusions. I list the following, not
because they are the only ones worth considering, but because
they are reliable, concisely expressed, and made freely
available for public review. These also make it easy for someone
like me to consolidate into a consistent whole.

(This first paragraph is a mess...Of course "there is much credible scientific research published with accurately deduced conclusions". Like saying the sky is often blue. He then says he's listing the following because they are "reliable, concisely expressed, and freely available for public view". What exactly is "reliable" about any scientific conclusion? He ends by saying these qualities make it easy for him to "consolidate into a consistent whole". Man, I bet THAT wasn't pretty!)

In his standardizing works, Stanton Friedman (Thanks, Stan!) has
determined the following:

"As a nuclear physicist who has had a serious interest in flying
saucers since 1958, [he has] reached four major conclusions:

(First, why is it necessary to include the fact that Stan Friedman is/was a nuclear physicist? Does that background make him a more "legitimate" researcher of UFOs? Why do we not see..."As an ironworker who has had a serious interest in UFOs since 1958...? Means about the same doesn't it?)

1. The evidence is overwhelming that Planet Earth is being
visited by intelligently controlled extraterrestrial spacecraft.
In other words, _some_ UFOs are alien spacecraft. Most are not.

(This is an opinion disguised as an "accurately deduced conclusion".)
The evidence is overwhelming to a very few that Earth is being visited by ETs. To the vast majority some weird shit goes on sometimes, but not to the extent of "overwhelming evidence" of ET craft flying around.)

2. The subject of flying saucers represents a kind of Cosmic
Watergate, meaning that some few people in major governments have
known since July, 1947, when two crashed saucers and several
alien bodies were recovered in New Mexico, that indeed SOME UFOs
are ET. As noted in 1950, it's the most classified U.S. topic.

(Again, this is an opinion, not a conclusion. The evidence that supports this view is suspect at best, and relies on data from the very source of the "Cosmic Watergate". How can you trust data from the very body you most mistrust? And, whenever you learn that something is your governments "most classified topic", please consider for a moment that that is what THEY want you to believe...see the paradox?)

3. None of the arguments made against conclusions One and Two by
a small group of debunkers such as Carl Sagan, my University of
Chicago classmate for three years, can stand up to careful
scrutiny.

(This is commonly called a "feint". No one can effectively argue that some UFOs are not of ET origin, or that the government isn't covering up knowledge about UFOs, because one is unable to "prove" a negative. Also, why is the fact that Stan and Carl were classmates relevant to the conclusion? If it isn't, then why the name-dropping?)

4. The Flying Saucer story is the biggest story of the
millennium: visits to Planet Earth by aliens and the U.S.
government's cover-up of the best data (the bodies and wreckage)
for over fifty years.

(My trouble here is that in Conclusion 2 it says that a few people in "major governments" have known since 1947 that some UFOs were ET, and then here it is the US Government which is covering it up. What about the other "major govts"? Is the "Cosmic Watergate" an American issue or does EVERY major government cover up the UFO truth?)

"The problem is _not_ that there is not enough evidence to
justify [his] conclusions; but that most people, especially the
noisy negativists, are unaware of the real, non-tabloid
evidence."

(This statement is at best disingenuous...another way of saying that "if you don't believe me, you're simply ignorant of the facts". In other words, "only a fool could disagree with me". Tsk, Tsk...that hundreds or millions of people could look at the evidence extant for ET craft flying around our skies for at least 60 years and find it lacking is now "ignorance"? While many people believe that some UFOs are from elsewhere, it is quite a leap to say that anyone that doesn't agree simply hasn't read the non-tabloid literature. And here we have an example of Stan's creative euphemisms for those with which he disagrees..."noisy negativist". I can only presume that this moniker describes anyone who disagrees with the conclusions listed above.
Well then...where do I get my "NN" t-shirt? LOL)

Dr. David M. Jacobs' research has also brought us much
information. (Thanks, John Velez!) Speaking of the motives of
the TRUFO pilots, (Thanks, Dr. Maccabee!), Dr. Jacobs writes:

(Ok...so here we have already concluded that some UFOs are indeed of ET origin, so we can move right on ahead to the motives of the UFO "pilots"!! Whee!)

"The common goal is the physiological exploitation of humans for
the purposes of their breeding program [for the purpose of
creating a race of human/alien hybrids]. One must keep in mind
that people are physically missing from their normal
environments, other people some times see them being abducted,
and they [the abductees] often desperately wish that they are
never abducted again.

(If the purpose of UFO pilots is to create a race of alien/human hybrids, why would they need more than a few humans...high failure-rate? Incompetent aliens? If the hybrids are being created, why aren't they reproducing on their own? Sterile?)

We now have thousands of - alien - abduction cases. We know a
tremendous amount about them. We know that when an abductee
describes the shape of a certain instrument, what that
instrument is used for even though the abductee does not. People
do not tend to talk in terms of symbols. They describe real
events that have befallen them.

(We have thousands of abduction cases, and we know a tremendous amount about them...about the cases, the people claiming them, or the abductors themselves?
How do you know that the instrument the abductee describes is what you think it is? How do you KNOW? "People do not tend to talk in terms of symbols"...WTF? People talk in symbols every hour of every day...we build our whole lives around symbols...we dream in symbols, we teach symbols. What a ludicrous statement. "We describe real events that have befallen us"...yup, sometimes, except when we get really excited, or when we're sleeping, or when we are very upset, or when we're in a life-threatening situation, or when we're...uhh...breathing. Ask ANY attorney how reliably people tend to describe real events that have befallen them. You will find that WE are often the worst witnesses to what happens to US!)

We know that they - i.e., human/alien hybrids - are not here -
i.e., living on Earth. My guess is that the majority of them
live on some other planet or wherever. I also think that a
significant number of them reside on UFOs where there task is to
assist in the abduction and breeding program. It is also
important to say that the abduction phenomenon takes place in
real time without any time-space alterations as far as we can
see. But you have to remember that we are dealing with a
superior technology."

(Yikes...a phrase like "My guess". Geez whiz...you guess they live elsewhere. But some live in their saucers to help with the abductin' and breedin'. And this is a gem..."It is also important to say that the abduction phenomenon takes place in
real time without any time-space alterations as far as we can see. But you have to remember that we are dealing with a superior technology". My, my bullshit meter just went off-scale...If the aliens have superior technology, how in the hell could we presume to "see" whether aliens manipulate time/space"? This pair of sentences should illustrate the complete buffoonery afoot. Or, would someone please decipher the meaning of those two sentences...? "It is important to say that abductions happen in real-time as far as we can see. But you have to remember that we are dealing with a superior technology". Yes, and? Is there a point hiding stealthily in that vacuous collection of words?)

Aliens are piloting the TRUFOs and abducting and exploiting
human beings for their own purpose and benefit. We can conclude
that the aliens hate humans and should be seen as enemies.

(Rick's beverage of choice is apparently Koolaid. And, if we "abduct" and "exploit" cattle for our own purposes and benefit, can we conclude that we hate cattle, and are their enemy? Or should the cattle see US as enemies? Or...oh, holy crap...let's just move on.)

With all this in mind, shouldn't we humans unite to defend our
people and our planet, to the best degree possible? With all our
flaws as a people, including recent regional suffering and
personal hardships, even including the quibbling squabbles on
this list, speaking of all humanity, I still choose humanity.

(Well, thank heavens Rick still chooses humanity. The "hybrid-breedin TRUFO pilots" probably would throw him back anyway)

The aliens are attacking individuals in secret. Space-based
defense systems won't combat that. And aluminum hats only help
those who sell the foil. Since the attacks are individual, does
the defense have to be? I have no idea if such a defense is even
possible. But if an appropriate program can be developed, it
should be. And since secrecy is so important to the aliens,
exposure of some type might be a good line for development.
(Thanks, again, Dr. Jacobs!)

(OK...the aliens are attacking in secret, but we have thousands of abduction cases, and we know a tremendous amount about them...erm, ok. And since secrecy is so important to the ETs, we should expose them, dammit!! Wow Rick, you've really spent some quality time working this all out, huh?)

If there is a way to defend against the systematic invasion and
exploitation of human beings by aliens, let's find it and use it.
What say ye all?

( Well, I dunno...Koolaid stands...lucrative tinfoil sales...no-doze? *sigh* Okie Dokie, Smokie!)

[I imagine many out there will accuse me of "consolidating into a consistent 'hole", as well. LOL]

Pot, meet kettle: Dick Hall jumps the shark...

2006-05-22T13:36:00.000-05:00

In the current UFO Updates thread "Re: Specific Cases In Condign Report?", Martin Shough...a likable, respectable, and well...able UFO researcher, takes UFOlogical luminary Dick Hall to task for claiming that reading, examining, and pondering the UK "Condign Report", is a waste of time.

Dick has lamented dozens of times the fact that many people would feel that UFOs are real phenomena if only they'd read the compelling reports with an open mind, and not dismiss them out of hand.

[NOTE: Photo posted as found...unaltered]

But now, in the face of Martin's efforts to distill the report for whatever real benefit there may be therein, Dick claims that the entire report is a study in pseudoscience. He bases this opinion on a reading of the "Executive Summary", rather than the entire 3 volume report, which includes over 400 pages.

Whatever you may think of Dick Hall, this is simply hypocritical. If people took his UFO books and read the table of contents alone, and formed an opinion that any further reading would be a silly waste of time, I feel confident that Dick would cry foul, and claim DEBUNKER! By the way, why is the Debunker Guidelines page titled "Meet Richard Hall's cats"? LOL

Dick also added to the confusion by saying that Martin was wasting his time, but that his observations were of value. WTF?

Dick also slyly attempted to pawn his entire argument off as "humor". But any reading of his initial post on the thread reveals very little to be construed as humor, unless derisive humor is your cup of tea.

In the end, ANY documentation of government interest or involvement in UFOs is of value to the community. Money was spent, research was conducted, and effort was expended to produce this taxpayer funded report. It reaches no firm conclusions, but only attempts (badly IMO) to suggest how some UFOs might be explained.

I think its value is in what it does NOT say...that all UFOs are explainable.

In the end, we have a government...a world power...officially claiming that they really just don't know what UFOs are for sure. If this isn't worthy of close scrutiny, I don't know what is.

I applaud Martin and the other who are "wasting their time" to take a closer look at the details...wherein lies the devil if I am properly informed. LOL

And a big fat raspberry to Dick Hall, who should be encouraging the dissection of ANY and ALL government commentaries on UFOs, and not waffling about "jokes" or "wasting of time" or "valuable observations".

After all, did he dismiss the "Condom" report after only a cursory glance at the summary? Not damn likely. In fact, most UFOlogists say that the contents of the Condon report contradicts the Summary. Obviously, someone(s) had to READ the entire report to determine same. Even if the summary rings hollow, shouldn't UFOlogy scrutinize it just in case the summary doesn't exactly fit the report itself? Wouldn't you, of ALL people in UFOlogy, be the first to suggest that the summary may well be non-indicative of the report contents?

Finally, does anyone else see the Magonian argument made here?...that Dick feels suitably schooled on the UFO subject that he can arbitrarily dismiss anything that doesn't jive with his "beliefs"? This knee-jerk repulsion of anything that even hints at being anti-ETH. Pelicanists must be chortling at this turn of events.

A scholar is considered so because of how he uses his amassed knowledge, not the mere fact that he has amassed it.

And once someone is convinced that he has amassed sufficient knowledge that he does not need any more, he has surely become something other than a scholar, no?

I respect you, Dick, but this is beyond the pale.

[via UFO Updates]

Creative Hallmarks...

2006-05-20T13:41:00.000-05:00

Just read the following on UFO Updates and had to post and comment...Victor Golubic is a good researcher who posts fairly regularly on Updates here lately. But recently...

Victor Golubic says -
"One of the hallmarks of creativity is to be able to take in the sum total of something, realize the immediate insanity of it, and not get caught up too unnecessarily in the fine details that rattle around in a Hollow container devoid of any shape or final meaning. "

Realizing the immediate insanity in something, and avoiding getting caught up unnecessarily in the details of said something is a hallmark of creativity? Really? And the fine details are those that rattle around in a "H"ollow (don't know why hollow needs to be capitalized) container devoid of any shape or final meaning?? Does ANY of this have anything to do with creativity?

Oh, and then this...

"However, some like to get caught up in the insanity of something and we call them comedie - though they're just as brilliant. :)

So...if you like to get caught up in the "insanity of something", we call that comedy which can be just as brilliant...but presumably not creative?? Are we contradicting here? Can someone please explain what these words are supposed to mean? Sounds like nonsense to me.

Well, at least Victor isn't aiming to offend...

"I'm not attacking anyone here and value all opinions greatly and we all fully realize our dilemmas."

I'm glad he's not attacking anyone, because I'm pretty sure they would have NO IDEA they were being attacked...LOL But maybe I'm wrong...dunno. And"...we all fully realize our dilemmas..."?? I think that's some kind of code phrase...like "ever pick yer feet in Poughkeepsie?". Yup...I think so...

I think comedy can be very creative. I think dwelling on the minutiae of a subject and divining the truth therein can be very creative. I think that people who dwell on the big picture to the exclusion of the details are typically not very creative. I think someone creative once said, "the devil's in the details".

IMO, creativity is an ability to forge new thoughts and ideas from the ore of previous thoughts and ideas...and...refine and shape those thoughts and ideas between the hammer of intellect and the anvil of perception. It can be for any or all of the senses, and perhaps none. It can be for any or all people, and perhaps none.

Creativity is pretty cool until people start to apply "hallmarks" to it, and attempt to apply values to it.

I'm curious what Victor meant, as for the life of me I cannot decipher this post at all.

I think he may have been trying to insult someone, but I just really can't tell. HELP!?

[via UFO Updates]

Fence to keep aliens out?

2006-05-20T12:59:00.000-05:00

[Click title to view article]
So the Senate thinks a 370-mile fence along the US/Mexico border is just the thing to keep the "aliens" out?

Fences, walls...hmmm, haven't we tried that idea before?

What was it that Reagan said just before the Cold War ended? Something about a wall? Maybe just a Pink Floyd reference...

Well, at any rate, this design to the left looks pretty effective. The plain sides provide space for artistic beautification, no?

I should add one recommendation...whenever your country decides that a barrier to prevent aliens from coming in is a good idea, I think another really good idea is to learn how to climb barriers.

One can never be too sure whether a fence is keeping outsiders out...or insiders IN. And our govt. has been building some pretty elaborate "guest villages" lately.

Hmmm..."That government oppresses best which oppresses least"...or something like that.

NASA asks for help...NEO/NET very much alive!

2006-05-18T08:35:00.000-05:00

NASA has issued a request for papers describing or discussing alternative methods of detecting and deflecting Near Earth Objects which pose a threat.

As UFOlogy shuns astronomy (a la SETI), and struggles to find relevance in the 21st century, is this the outreach that could finally bridge the gap?

Could UFOlogy embrace the UAP/NEO field as a way to garner broader participation, appreciation, recognition?

Is the search for air-...and space-borne threats what may finally unite the various "factions" within UFOlogy, and in fact the larger scientific community?

Might the equipment, minds, and money of the scientific establishment finally find its way into the eager hands, hearts and heads of UFOlogy?

Could the melding of the search for ET, the watch for threats, and the science of avoiding catastrophe lead to a scientific renaissance...or even a "new" science?

Naa...

Invasion repelled?

2006-05-16T11:15:00.000-05:00

ABCs alien invasion series, aptly titled...err...Invasion...is rumored to have been cancelled. The season (and apparently series) finale airs Wednesday night.

Now, I know this show doesn't rise to the significance of the Condign Report, or any of a number of "serious" UFO topics, but as a sci-fi TV fan I'm disappointed.

The series touched on several aspects of UFOlogy that have been popularized of late.

From water-borne ET beings and craft to alien/human "hybrids", from government cover-up to military complicity, from whistleblowers to blogging, Invasion incorporated all these and more.

I for one will miss the show, and particularly Dave Groves (played by Tyler Labine, pictured above). His "blogger cum conspiracy theorist cum anti-alien hero" character was what drew me to the show in the first place. The remainder of the cast includes a couple of comely lasses...never a bad thing in the sci-fi game...and some really bad folk.

In the scheme of things, not a big deal. But now my Wednesday nights are lamentably a little more "free".

[via Sci-Fi Storm]

More meanderings...

2006-05-13T10:29:00.000-05:00

The newly released British MOD "UAP" report on the findings of Project Condign, could prove revelatory when the full report comes available on the 15th of May.

But whence the name "Condign"?

Merriam-Webster defines "condign" as an adjective meaning "deserved; appropriate". Hmmm...my understanding was that the projects name was chosen at random.

Peculiar choice if you ask me. Of course, anytime a government agency claims that a data-gathering project was given a name chosen at random, one should take that with a grain of salt.

What's in a name?
===================================================

Denny Klein believes he has found a way to sublimate distilled water into a gas that defies standard models of electrolysis. He further claims that his discovery allows for real-time conversion of water into usable engine fuel. He further claims that the energy required to produce the new gas is not more than what is produced.

What struck me as odd is that the scientist who discovered this has a familiar name...Ruggero Maria Santilli.

Yup, we know that name. While there may be no connection whatsoever between Ruggero and Ray, I wouldn't be surprised if a movie comedy about a car that runs on water comes out in the near future. LOL
===================================================

Until next time...

Meanderings...

2006-05-12T07:24:00.000-05:00

UAP...the term some (including Paul Kimball) prefer to UFO, suffers one little problem. It doesn't "mesh" well with additional acronymical brethren. To wit...

MUFON works..."MUAPON" reads like a Tampax product for mathematicians.
(Although I tried for a while to figure out how to work BRAN or CORN or even COSMIC into MUFON
...BLUEBERRY MUFON, anyone?)

Both Paul and myself have mentioned the rather unfortunate
"UAPologist"...it has its own derisive invective built right in!!

UFOnauts (pronounced "Yew-Foe-Naughts") is far easier on the tongue than "UAPnauts".

How about Grass Roots Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Large-scale Instrumented Network Group
..."GRAUPLING"??

Or maybe Synergistic Terrestrial UAP Logistical And Foolproof Instrumented Network Group
..."STUAPLAFING"?

My favorite? Grass Roots UAP Network of United Technology Specialists
..."GRUAPNUTS"!! Somewhere Ewell Gibbons is smiling...

Most appropriate? Networked UAP Research Organization
...NUAPRO. (This has a built-in homage!!) Yup, that one might work...

But I'm afraid that UAP may just not have the panache required for wide-spread acceptance. Of course it is possible that panache (and maybe even widespread acceptance) is not required and in fact might be undesireable. Staying "under the pop culture radar" might have helped UFOlogy, in fact.

---oOo---

The guy...Gary McKinnon...accused of hacking sensitive American military and other computers to death (to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars) faces extradition to the United States to stand trial. Saying he was looking for UFO information, and that the computers into which he "hacked" were simply machines which had unchanged "default" passwords, he seeks to avoid extradition since he might find himself hanging (in the figurative sense) at Gitmo with his ter'rist pals for an undetermined period, he plans to appeal extradition to the High Court.

My question is...if this guy was able to log into sensitive government computers with zero hacking skills, shouldn't we be giving this admittedly harmless dude a freaking medal for exposing yet another example of federal incompetence BEFORE some nefarious plot exploited this incompetence?

Imagine what a REAL terrorist hacker might have accomplished...my guess is that not a few govt fellows had a group sphincter-bunching.

---oOo---

UFO Updates has a thread running about the "Gumment UFO cover-up" wherein Dick Hall and Jerry Clark decry the "vast conspiracy" angle. Presumably (and arguably) the Feds are too incompetent to have kept their secrets under wraps for this long.

No word from Stan Friedman at this time. After all, if our Air Force was engaging in dogfights over US soil (a la Frank Feschino) including "shoot-downs" on both sides, what would have been required to keep THAT secret for all this time but a "vast conspiracy"? I'm thinking that it would be a little more difficult than hiding a few bodies and "discs".

But we've been told before...Eisenhower, Clinton, et. al...of the existence or the threat of a secret government inside the government, suffering no oversight, with its own agenda and an unoffical budget. These weren't conspiracy theorists making these claims...

So who's right here?

---oOo---

I just read Stan Friedman's latest paper. Is it just me, or is the old "Silly Effort to Investigate" moniker he coined for SETI getting a little hackneyed? After all, while Stan sits in a chair in the desert rehashing old UFO stories, SETI researchers sit in front of some of the most sophisticated gear on earth...DOING something. They have engaged the popular culture in a way that seems legitimate and useful (SETI@Home), and they attract great minds, gobs of money, and gigantic machinery to further their goals, and they have produced nothing of any significance to date. So who's really being "Silly"? No offense Stan...your dogged determination in leafing through untold thousands of pages of archival data is nothing to sneeze at..., but why the snarking? Unseemly IMO...particularly in a paper that claims a vast cover-up.

In the end, when you make claims about hidden UFO data and then call SETI "silly", when SETI enjoys great public support, you risk "alienating" the very people who you seek to inform. Unless your "preaching" is intended solely for the "choir"...

---oOo---

Until next time...keep looking up, but watch your step!

MSNBC poll says UFOs exist...or does it?

2006-05-10T09:15:00.000-05:00

MSNBC.com, sometimes referred to as a news source, ran a live poll about UFOs which seems to indicate that the majority of those polled believe that UFOs are real. But let's take a look at the phrasing of the poll...

The British Ministry of Defense confirmed that a secret study completed in December 2000 had found no evidence that "flying saucers" or unidentified flying objects were anything other than natural phenomena. What do you think?

- UFOs certainly exist. There's no way we're alone in the universe.

- UFOs might exist. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

- UFOs are pure science fiction.

- I'm not sure.

OK. Statement number one found the majority in agreement...40%!! Man, seems pretty impressive for the pro-UFO camp, eh? But, in reality, statement number one is actually TWO sentences, isn't it? Let's take a look at that second sentence...

"There's no way we're alone in the universe."

I am confident that the vast majority of people believe this sentence. By tagging that sentence on to the previous sentence, and placing it at the end of the statement, is it any wonder that the majority agreed with that statement?

This also seems to indicate that when people think of UFOs, they think of spaceships from outer space...alien spacecraft. When the statement is phrased in this way, you may very well disagree that UFOs are certainly real, but you likely very much agree that we are not alone in the universe. So, the statement actually infers that if you believe we are not alone in the universe, then you obviously believe that UFOs are real. This is hogwash. Even though the majority agreed with this statement, less than half of those polled actually agreed with it. My suspicion is that if the statement had not included that second sentence, we may have seen even less agreement.

Now, the second statement sounds a bit more balanced..."UFOs might exist. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." But this statement is troublesome, as well. If I agree that UFOs might exist, am I agreeing that some UFOs are alien spacecraft, or am I agreeing that there are some flying objects that we have not been able to identify? Adding the sentence about absence of evidence seems to legitimize agreeing with the previous sentence, but it really has nothing to do with whether there are UFOs, since we all know that there are things that fly that we cannot identify. So the second sentence seems to imply that if you agree with sentence two, you must agree with sentence one, which again is illogical unless the premise is that UFOs are alien spacecraft. This statement found 32% of those polled in agreement. Less than a third.

The remaining statements are definitive, one sentence statements. Statement 3 is basically, UFOs don't exist except in science fiction. Well, this is patently false, since military, civilian, and commercial airline history all include stories of unidentified flying objects. So, if you agree with this statement, you must be saying that you don't think UFOs are alien spacecraft. 24% of those polled agreed with this.

And finally, we have "I'm not sure". A paltry 4% agreed. Of course, people who take polls usually have an opinion on the subject of the poll, so there's no surprise that very few had no opinion.

In summary, this was a very flawed poll. The clear intent of the poll phrasing was to elicit more agreement with statement one or two, and only a narrow-minded skeptic would choose statement 3. And most that aren't sure simply didn't take the poll.

There's nothing new about skewing poll questions to support a thesis. It happens in political polling all the time.

But as a method of determining what people think about UFOs, this poll is useless.

A far better poll might have been phrased this way...

Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements, with 1
representing total disagreement, and 5 representing total agreement...

1. UFOs are alien spacecraft from another planet, dimension, or some other place.

2. UFOs are misidentified or misunderstood phenomena, but they are not alien
spacecraft.

3. There isn't enough evidence available to determine what UFOs are. Just because we can't
explain something doesn't mean it's from elsewhere.

Now, where do you stand on THIS poll? I'm guessing I'd get an awful lot of 5s on that last statement...and a lot of 3s on the first two.

At least we would learn something from it, unlike this MSNBC mess.

[hat tip to UFO Updates]

Puzzling curiosities...

2006-05-09T14:42:00.000-05:00

Make Magazine is my new favorite mag of all time, and they've only published 6 issues! (Sorry Playboy...). One of the primary reasons to love it is that the mag introduces you to so many cool thinker/creators (i.e, MAKERs). This week, the online venue of Make has a podcast featuring Lee Krasnow.

Lee Krasnow creates tactile puzzles. He makes them out of wood and occasionally metal parts, with a simple table saw jig. Some of his pieces are simply incredible. View the podcast to see some of his stuff, and of course visit his website at www.pacificpuzzleworks.com

Download the video podcast...plays on Windows or Mac or... :)

[via BoingBoing.net]

UFOs explained!! They're...uhh...Plasma-tic!

2006-05-08T08:34:00.000-05:00

Apparently, back in 2000 the British DIS (Defence Intelligence Staff) produced a report which explains UFO sightings as natural processes, some of which admittedly are more theoretical than proven...hmmm...just like the explanations that some UFOs are from elsewhere which are more theoretical than proven.

The report, which was deemed "Eyes Only" at the time, has now been made public through the efforts of Sheffield Hallam University lecturer David Clarke, and researcher Gary Anthony.

Well, we know that there are things "up there" that we can barely explain. Years ago there were sightings from the shuttle of odd colored lights appearing atop storm clouds. Scientists began to use "eyes in the sky" to search for these elusive phenomena. We now call them sprites, and we know little more about them now than we knew then. But we know they are there.

So, my inner devil's advocate feels compelled to offer a few observations...

1) If ionospheric plasma is not well understood, isn't it possible that they are by-products of a more anomalous cause? After all, many UFO researchers have suggested that ET craft might utilize or produce plasma as a result of their propulsion or movement through the atmosphere.

2) The report includes this statement..."No evidence exists to suggest that the phenomena seen are hostile or under any type of control, other than that of natural physical forces." Fair enough. But it also states, "People who claim to have had a "close encounter" are often difficult to persuade that they did not really see what they thought they saw". It sounds to me like they really mean, "What evidence exists that suggests these objects are hostile or under some kind of control, is due to the sightees being unable to be persuaded that they did not see what they think they saw". Does anyone else see the tautological nature of these statements?

3) The report also offers this..."Local [plasma] fields of this type have been medically proven to cause responses in the temporal lobes of the human brain. These result in the observer sustaining (and later describing and retaining) his or her own vivid, but mainly incorrect, description of what is experienced." But it also states this..."The method of formation of the electrically charged plasmas... is not fully understood." Ok, lets review...we don't know how these plasmas form, but we know that they can affect the mind of the viewer. And we somehow know that the viewers description must be "mainly incorrect". If this is so, how can we trust that the scientists studying plasmas aren't "mainly incorrect" in their explanation of such plasmas? Are they immune to the effects?

So, if these theories are right, we have little to fear from these plasmas unless we fly into one. But what if the plasma, and the mind altering, are effects of interaction between ET craft and the atmosphere and humans?

Oh right..."there is no evidence to suggest"...and we come fully 'round the tautoligical circle. How comforting.

One wonders if the report was secret for so long because it was just embarassing...

[hat tip to UFO Updates]

Space ship lands in Waterloo Place, London

2006-05-04T13:25:00.000-05:00

To mark the beginning of a four-day "art production", Royale De Luxe planted the ship, and in the ensuing days, a 42 ton mechanical elephant and a female puppet will figure into the festivities.

More information can be found here.

[via BoingBoing]

Friedman vs. Clancy: Not Tom...the Other Fiction writer.

2006-05-04T09:14:00.000-05:00

One of my UFOlogical heroes, Stanton T. Friedman, has sliced and diced the new book, "Abducted: How people Come to Believe They Were Kidnapped by Aliens", penned by self-styled "UFO/abduction expert" Susan Clancy.

Man, I'm not sure Stan has had this much fun in a long time.

Clancy, clearly uncomfortable with the "reality-based community", strikes out on an adventure ripped from the headlines of her own fevered imagination to comfort herself and others with the good news that alien abductions...and yes, UFOs...are nothing more than the by-product of indigestion or sleep disorder, or even fraud.

Stan takes the book apart in what can only be described as scientific fashion, pointing out the alarming number of factual errors and pronouncements regarding such abduction and UFO cases.

"Confirmatory bias" is the catch-phrase which best sums up Clancy's effort.

Speculative fiction also comes to mind.

Writing such as Clancy's should dovetail nicely with the thought-set of the intended audience, since such folk are also seemingly just as comfortable with the "no global warming, WMD WERE there, Iraq is doing fine, Iran has nukes" kind of "reality".

Kudos to Stanton for pointing out that Clancy the "emperical Emperor", wears no clothes.

If you need to read only one line of a book to see its true color, try this one...

"Even better, alien abductees were people who had developed memories of a traumatic event that I could be fairly certain had never occurred." [emphasis mine...KK] WTF???

Such a ridiculous statement simply and decidedly disqualifies Clancy as a scientist, and paints her book as pointedly unscientific. For shame...and the Harvard Press printed this tripe?

So this passes for science in the "new reality" community? I am shocked that our current administration hasn't tapped Ms. Clancy for her "expert analysis" skills.

Susan Clancy...the thinking neanderthals' Ann Coulter.

Stan Friedman just proved once again that it is far easier to "talk the talk" than to "walk the walk".

Keep on walking TALL, Stan!

[hat tip to UFO Updates for the link]

Bubble boy trains for life under the ice on Titan...

2006-05-03T13:34:00.000-05:00

Erstwhile "magician" David Blaine marks another spot on his path to being able to live under about ANY conditions. He's spent 30+ hours standing on a tall pole, 44 days living in a dangling cube, had a pickup truck roll over him, and now this...

Plunked down in the middle of New York City, Blaine is attempting to spend a week or so inside a transparent sphere. With air, liquid nourishment (and liquid waste removal) provided via a tube (hopefully not the same tube), Blaine will somehow have to sleep without drowning, or stay awake without going totally insane. Ooops...might be a little late there...

I've followed Blaine since his "street magic" days, and this is at least the "prettiest" of his hijinx. Insert your favorite "snow globe" joke here.

A quiz

2006-05-02T18:19:00.000-05:00

Ok...I'll play...

This from Mac Tonnies via Paul Kimball. The Me A-Z Meme...

Accent: American midwest. I took Speech and Debate in part to lose my "North Dallas drawl".

Booze: Very sparingly. I'll generally get a Long Island Tea and slug it down...that's all for the night.

Chore I Hate: Anything financial or dealing with banks.

Dog or Cat: Cats...intelligent, independent, indifferent.

Essential Electronics: My kick-ass PC, my big-ass TV, and my bad-ass stereo...in that order.

Favorite Cologne: Patchouli oil or Obsession, depending on whether I'm wearing a Dashiki or a button-up shirt.

Gold or Silver: Gold

Hometown: Dallas, Texas

Insomnia: Sure. Sleep is over-rated. Don't buy into the pro-sleep hype.

Job Title: Ex-IT consultant, currently photographer.

Kids: One rather cool 17 year old son. Plays sick guitar.

Living arrangements: Living...in the house my wife and I bought when we were married...with my now ex-wife and 17 year old son..

Most admirable traits: Memory for details (warehouse of useless information); helpful; vocabulary.

Not going to cop to: an interest in "robot porn".

Overnight hospital stays: Never once.

Phobias: Heights until I went para-sailing...that was the big one and it's gone now. Not fond of roller coasters or other amusement park death-traps. LOL

Quote: I'm talking and I can't shut up.

Religion: Raised Baptist; cured in college.

Siblings: I have a half-brother.

Time I wake up: 6AM unless I can claim a good reason to sleep in.

Unusual talent or skill: I play the doumbek (a middle-eastern goblet drum). I can also recite the complete script of Firesign Theater's "Nick Danger: Third Eye" in the Adventure they call "Cut 'em off at the Past", complete with character voices...even Nancy.

Vegetable I love: I think artichokes (and garlic) were left behind by the Gods themselves.

Worst habit: Cigarette smoking and procrastination, if quitting cigarette smoking counts.

X-rays: My teeth. Oh, and I once had a tiny camera on a flexible tube shoved up my nose. I have the videotape...compelling set design, but the acting is rather flat.

Yummy foods I make: Broiled marinated chicken breasts with roasted garlic and almond spinach; donuts; pancakes; smoothies; and of course sirloin steak on the grill.

Zodiac sign: Cancer.

Wow...I feel somehow cleansed. Confession good for the soul, indeed. LOL

Peace out, y'all.

Methinks thou dost...

2006-05-02T15:40:00.000-05:00

An article in the LA Times goes into some (sarcastic) detail about the (in)famous "tinfoil hat". The article actually serves as the introduction to a more in-depth article and video due this weekend covering "the Retro UFO Convention at the 'Integratron' in the Mojave Desert".

The reporter appears to have a particularly light-hearted approach to the UFO subject, but take a moment and look at the event the reporter is actually covering...the Retro UFO convention at the "Integratron"...oh yes...the "device" built by George van Tassel, a rejuvenation machine. Oh boy.

The convention...a UFO convention, holds a "tinfoil hat" CONTEST. So, Mary Rinehart, our intrepid reporter did "as the Romans do" and entered her own creation, garnering 3rd place honors. LOL

Now, there are several ways to react to this kind of article. The knee-jerk reaction, exampled here courtesy of UFO Updates' Irene Rome, is anger and intolerance. This ironically shoehorns nicely with another Updates post wherein noted skeptic John Harney decries "...the strong emotional reaction to the suggestion that there is nothing to the UFO myth apart from popular belief and personal subjective experience"...

Where John is incorrect is when one considers that there ARE UFO events that defy any terrestrial explanation. One can argue whether the witnesses were mistaken, or that others have seen similar things that were eventually explained, ad infinitum, but in the end even the most staunch realist must admit that there are unknowns up there...whatever their source.

But Irene epitomizes the mind-set that John decries. The article in question is a report on an event of singular silliness...and that extends to the organizers of the event, otherwise why on earth hold something like a tinfoil hat contest? The kitch on display in photos from the event, from silver face-painted fat bald guys, to talks on the "angel/ET/astrology" connection, the Arcturian alien tribes, etc. Wow...what a serious UFO gathering that was...

So, Irene, let me ask you something. When someone writes a tongue-in-cheek story on the SETI initiative, in essence ridiculing it, does Seth Shostak run to the first available forum and renounce the waste of space"? Nope. Why not? Because when you do that you actually lend credence to the article in question. You "give the story legs". And the more debate you generate over the validity or invalidity of the reporting, the more you ensure two things. You miss the point of the article, and you keep the article itself "alive".

The point missed? Well, the event was ITSELF tongue-in-cheek. A tribute to the "retro" aspect of the UFO phenomena. Remember when martians were something to giggle about, before the advent of "Independence Day"? Remember "My Favorite Martian"? This event was all about the naive frivolity that attended UFOs in the 50s. So, Mary's article was most appropriate for the venue, and she would not have bothered to make a tinfoil hat at all if the event wasn't sponsoring a contest. So, if you want to blame someone for her waste of space, blame the event organizers. Mary simply played the news hand she was dealt.

Keeping the article alive could be harmful to serious UFO research, but in this case it doesn't really matter. It's a funny article about a bunch of funny people. Criticizing the article is just dumb, IMO.

But Mr. Harney hit the mark with his indictment of "emotional reactions". When someone ridicules evolution, or ridicules SETI, or ridicules any theory or theoretical endeavor, the best response...the intellectual response...the unemotional response...is no response at all.

Or maybe just a little "LOL".

Good night Irene, methinks thou dost protest too much. [Man, from Ledbetter & Lomax to the Bard in one sentence...sheesh]

Random notes...

2006-05-01T11:09:00.000-05:00

Musings on a cocktail napkin -

...The govt. has been saying it has no secret UFO info, and most UFO researchers state they are lying. If the govt. tomorrow announced that UFOs are real, would those researchers believe the govt. was now telling the truth?...

...Many UFO researchers seem to feel that instrumented field data-gathering is a waste of time or that it could never get funding or earn legitimacy. My question to them is, "Compared to what...the CURRENT methods of UFOlogy?". I cannot understand the objection to attempting to gather more than anecdotal or archival data....

...From this moment, today, the best way to attempt to divine the truth of the UFO enigma is to move in two directions...backward, to glean whatever tidbits of solid data are to be found in newspaper archives, libraries, and other sources of the past...and forward, to new ways to monitor the skies, capture information about the things flying around in them, and perhaps to catalog the findings so that some reasonable hypotheses may be formulated and experiments conducted to support (or not) those hypotheses...

...Why are there not many more UFO sightings these days, with relatively high-quality digital cameras available in myriad forms, and with security cameras becoming more ubiquitous every day? Are the better quality images simply revealing the mundanity of the vast majority of sightings, or are the UFOs reacting to our better "eyes" by moving just out of their view? Or did the UFOs just get bored when we failed to nuke ourselves into oblivion, spoiling their eagerly anticipated fireworks show?...

...Should UFOlogy NEED photographs or videos? Can we ever really trust them? Wouldn't radar returns, IR radiation readings, spectrographic and magnetic data do more to depict a true UFO than a blurry photo or a herky-jerky video clip? Heck, couldn't the same be said for eyewitness accounts? SETI garners more legitimate press, and far more scientific acknowledgement than UFOlogy ever has, and yet they have not one single coherent signal to show for it. Perhaps the reliance on anecdotal and photographic evidence actually hinders the field...?...

...With UFO organizations like BUFO, is it any wonder that UFO researchers are treated like lepers by the mainstream scientific community? Should we expect otherwise?...

Hmmm...last call...I'm outta here.

John Harney appeals to "al Qaida"...

2006-04-29T12:29:00.000-05:00

Well, Harney wants to write an essay on the "myth" on which UFOlogy is based...

Casting about for comments, Harney attempts to compile some sort of dossier to disprove the validity of UFO research, and presumably to discount ALL UFO sightings as the old swamp gas, venus, balloons, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

While UFOlogy creeps forward, accruing a new compelling case here or there, Harney and his ilk are stuck in the 50s, with no useful new information to dispense, and little more than a romp through debunking history.

If Harney truly believes UFOlogy is a waste of time, what does that say about his wasting blog-space to explain WHY it's a waste of time? What a pathetic purpose, indeed.

Why don't you just pack your toys and go home until you have a new trick? When you've found the smoking gun that explains ALL the questionable cases, I'll be all ears.

Do you honestly have anything NEW to say on the subject? Didn't think so.

At least al Qaida ("the base") can rest easy knowing the pundit is alive...and excreting. :)

Updates Update...

2006-04-27T01:43:00.000-05:00

My take on a few subjects under discussion at UFO Updates...

Greg Boone posits that we might be less bigoted today than back in the 40s. His example is a dark-skinned alien landing in the South of the 40s, and the likely trouble in which he would have found himself...

Well, discounting the possibility that even the most primitive 40s alien might well have been armed and amply able to defend himself, I wonder if Greg is right?

I wonder how long an alien would last if he landed his saucer on the White House lawn tomorrow afternoon and emerged with brown skin, a beard and a scarf on his head? My guess is he'd not make a third step, unless he was armed and amply able to...well, you get the idea.

Perhaps we've not changed quite so much after all?

=====================================================================================

James Smith continues his seemingly futile arguments for hanging it up on getting truth from power, and using our own collective power to investigate the UFO phenomenon with a civilian monitoring program.

Rob Kritkausky chimes in with news that inadvertent data had in fact been collected by such field monitoring equipment, albeit not purposed for UFO monitoring.

First, I find James to be quite accurate in his appraisal of getting "truth" from the government. Even if the Preznit, the cabinet and the Joint Chiefs got on their knees with bibles akimbo swearing that aliens are here, I'd still first check to see where we were in the news cycle, the status of imminent elections, and current severe weather updates. In other words, I wouldn't trust them...for one second...out of hand. I'm utterly done with that. Pete Townsend said it well..."We won't get fooled again".

Secondly, I think Rob's report lifts up another very interesting point, perhaps unwittingly.

If there are field research vehicles and stations out there...for non-UFO purposes...that are, as a by-product of their monitoring, getting useful or at least intriguing data useful to UFO research, does it not follow that a large-scale civilian effort along the same lines but targeting UFO activity specifically would have a fair shot at collecting useful data?

One thing is for sure...if we do not undertake such an effort, we surely will never know any more than what we pry from the military/government, which we already know we cannot blindly trust. Those that are getting the intriguing data now have no incentive to publicize, lest they be branded as UFO whackos or some such. Remember they are NOT UFO researchers. And if todays UFO researchers continue to do what they have done up to now, what can reasonably be expected to change in the field beyond the occasional questionable document or new theory on an old case, and the passing of more venerable researchers? Not much, unfortunately.

The legacy we pass on does not have to be...nor should we want it to be...simply the furtherance of the same old cases. That has its place, but it cannot remain the sole plank of the UFOlogical platform, because it is incomplete, and inevitably unsupportable. There must be an evolution...a shifting from the more simple to the more complex, as in any system. Stasis is death. We should encourage and foment the remaking of the field...a field inclusive and respectful of its past, but incisive and expansive about its future. Taking that "next step" toward acceptability, and ultimately legitimacy.

So, who to man such an operation? Only the thick-skinned researchers who have already numbed themselves to the "taint"...and/or their protege/interns are suitable. Think younger Stan Friedmans, or Dick Halls...the next generation?

Imagine having these guys do a series of talks at the conventions, but aimed at younger audiences. A program designed to get kids hungry for the research, solving the mystery, showing them the past, the present and the future of UFOlogy...as it could be...with their involvement and interest. Wanna legitimize UFOlogy? Get kids interested in the field in a tangible, tech-y way. Home-brew Doppler radar? Low-tech spectrum analyzers; clustered, networked, real-time communication grid; instrument kits for electronics students or science fairs; etc...all can be catalysts for change in the field.

In the end, James' larger point is that re-investigating old cases does little to advance our knowledge or progress to the truth. I am not sure that this is so, but I AM sure that if it is the ONLY approach UFOlogy will utilize, then James is destined to be correct eventually, if not already.

As a collective, we can only look at, review, rehash, and re-examine the past. But we can CREATE a future...the future we want, as a collective. We can legitimize UFOlogy through actual hard, instrumented science aimed at the sky, and by channeling our intense curiosity into the future of the field...as well as the past.

It's really not a money issue. A few salesmen, a truly comprehensive arrangement of instruments for the stations (mobile or fixed-location) on a strict diet of low-cost, high efficiency gear, and some willing zealots to monitor same, is doable, marketable, fundable, and ultimately supportable. People really want to know the truth, and will spend a little of their money to help if they believe that the cause is real.

Anyone who thinks otherwise just isn't paying attention...and should probably focus on rehashing and re-examining old cases. It's a big pool, and some rightly stay in the shallow end. :)

=====================================================================================

Oh, and the Alien Autopsy hoax was finally confirmed by the perp, as if there was really ever any doubt. As a student of special makeup and optical effects since 1976 vis a vis going to high school with twins Bret and Bart Mixon, and being transfixed by Rob Bottin's work in American Werewolf, and Rick Baker's, Doug Trumbull's and Tom Savini's work, the AA body never looked like anything more than rubber to me. Every effects artist who's seen the footage concurs...and for the same very basic reasons.

But now we get the real story, and finally all is mum now since Errol quashed the thread. Excellent decision. It really has nothing to do with UFOs, after all. :)

Ta ta for now...

A study in contrasts

2005-11-28T18:22:00.000-06:00

The image on the left was taken in August, 2004. The image on the right was taken yesterday.

Nothing much to say...a picture is worth a thousand words...two pictures?

I will say that the photo on the right looks for all the world like someone being sworn in...as in court. Hmmm...

Back again...

2005-11-28T14:33:00.000-06:00

It has been a month or so since my last entry, save for these two earlier today, and I thought I'd up a sample of what I've been doing.

As my ex-wife/current sig-oth is a belly dancer, she often attends workshops by visiting dancers. As a man with a camera, I feel I should be there to capture whatever seems "capturable".

This is Bozenka, a dancer from northern California. She was a delightful teacher according to Anne, and she was a delight to photograph, according to me. :) I actually photo'd this show a while back, but my most recent shoot...this past Friday...was of a friend and included some rather risque shots that aren't exactly for public consumption. It was a great shoot, though...thanks Shelley! ;)

Anne, Kevin and I will be winging to California on the 1st of December to accomodate some business...and to visit my brother Dane. He is a painter, musician, and sometimes producer in San Pedro. He currently plays old Dead and Stones songs with a band called Plastic Cactus. Sweet!

At any rate, after our return on 4Dec, I'll be back to updating this diary on a regular basis.

Paul Hellyer asks for Govt. UFO hearings...

2005-11-28T14:21:00.000-06:00

Paul Hellyer, a former Canadian Minister of Defense, says UFOs are as common as airplanes...
(Click title to read article)

Hellyer has been described, sliced, diced and minced over at Paul Kimball's blog to a degree which precludes any additional editorial value I might lend, but suffice it to say that this guy appears to be after headlines rather than disclosure.

Or perhaps he is just looking for a little representation for his "space brothers", who have admittedly been rather neglected in official lawmaking...publicly anyway. *wink*

[via Yahoo News]

SCOTUS UFO...Identified!

2005-11-28T13:34:00.000-06:00

Bowling ball sized chunk found to be from...Vermont.
(Click title to read article)

In a rather unavoidable illustration of the crumbling facade of Supreme Court authority, the facade of the Supreme Court building crumbled...just where "Authority" is represented...and a bowling ball sized chunk of marble fell to the steps used to enter the building.

While no one was injured, several people were "bowled over" by the irony... :)

[via Yahoo News]

Has the Internet invalidated UFOlogy?

2005-11-09T20:01:00.000-06:00

Doug Kern asks about the Emperor's clothes...

With the numerous benefits of the internet...increased knowledge, instant news, digital imagery in real time, and accesss to information...why has the field of UFOlogy failed to find validation?

This article by Douglas Kern raises some very pertinent questions, while refraining from passing judgment on the question of aliens and alien visitation.

I have also wondered why the proliferation of inexpensive film and digital cameras...and the instant availability of their product on the web...hasn't resulted in an explosion of UFO images and videos. So many other activities have been scrutinized in this way...terror bombings, "off-the-record" political statements, etc. ...why should UFOs remain as elusive as ever?

Doug provides some suggestions...very sobering suggestions, which anyone interested in the UFO phenomenon should read with an open mind.

If nothing else, Doug provides any non-UFO believer ample reason to question the validity of the pursuit.

[via Coast to Coast AM ]

Google maps tied to NUFORC sighting data

2005-10-11T14:44:00.000-05:00

Google Maps is being leveraged for UFO sighting data visualization by UFO Maps.

To the right is a portion of the September map...

Just another cog in the civilian tracking of UFOs, and a welcome one.

(via BoingBoing)

Coalition of the...puerile?

2005-10-05T21:47:00.000-05:00

So, after building a nice, diverse, thought-provoking blog coalition...a reasoned alternative to the so-called "Collective"...a failure...we are now going to see "improvement" thanks to the likes of Rich Reynolds and Chirstopher "Robin"...uhh I mean JAY...?? Yeah, yeah...so what's the punch line?? ;)

Coalition...yeah, like as in the famous "Coalition of the Willing"...all 2 of them and whomever they can coerce into a photo-op.

When "Dick" writes, I typically wince because he has stated in public forums that his goal is not solving, illuminating, expanding awareness of, or in any way enhancing the debate over UFOs. Nope, his goal is to raise hackles, to stir the pot, and generally bare his fatuous arguments for all 3 of his adherents to see. And his writing reflects the vacuous goal he has set forth. Never a cogent argument, only dissonant prose dressed as compelling, but at the end of the day garment-less.

Christopher "Robin"...uhh I mean JAY...ok, I'm just gonna call him Pooh from now on...is another beast entirely. Endowed with an ego that far outstrips his testicles or it's own justification, Pooh waxes on and on about how everyone else does nothing, is worth nothing, has nothing to say...all while contributing nothing. Pooh gives his all...NOTHING. Pooh is what he writes...nothing.

The UFO Bog Coalition took a step down when it involved the RRR Group in the first place, and this new episode simply illustrates this in a most salient fashion, indeed.

And just to be accurate, a group which breaks away from another group to form a new group is not a "coalition" anyway. Look it up. What you have created is just another failed "collective" of inanity and zero interest.

Congratulations Dick and Pooh...you are the winners. And it only cost whatever credibility you imagined for yourself before, and any relevancy you might imagine for yourself going forward. Well done. Anyone who had any reasons left to read your garbage now has none. Perhaps the silver lining after all...

Ufology is better off with you guys over in the corner polishing something anyway.

It's what you do best, or at least better than anything you've written..."collective"-ly. :)

Terry, it is a shame, but no matter how nice the neighborhood, there's always a couple of parasites who feel the need to urinate in the pool. I don't blame you for giving up "drinking the water". And Dick and Pooh will simply find another pool in which to relieve themselves. Spoilers, not builders. Some coalition...

sheet-waving deemed a success!

2005-09-23T22:27:00.000-05:00

Well, the effort appears to have paid off. We found that once the rain started, the sheets were useless for waving, so we came up with the idea of starching the sheets to keep them a little stiff. We gathered up the starch amongst us, but apparently starch just isn't as popular as it used to be.

We all ran back to our houses to get potatoes. After a mini-marathon potato slicing session, we immediately rubbed down the bedsheets with the potato slices, and were able to stiffen the sheets enough to be effective "air-movers".

Click image for larger version.

We caught this shot as the sheet-waving seemed to create furrows in the clouds...

Blowing off Rita...

2005-09-23T19:18:00.000-05:00

Our neighbors and ourselves have embarked on a bold scheme to divert the hurricane.

We have gathered all our old bedsheets and are outside in shifts waving the sheets in the direction of Louisiana. Hopefully, the combined air current will move the storm further to the east, and away from Houston...but this side of New Orleans. We'll see how well it works. Keep everything crossed...

Special thanks to the big Samoan guy at the end of the block...I think that big persian rug will move a LOT of air...

Stay tuned...

Rita location - 6:30PM Houston time

2005-09-23T18:37:00.000-05:00

Here she is...using Google Earth to track the storm...

Click the image for a larger version

5:20PM

2005-09-23T17:48:00.000-05:00

Starting to look a little grim...5:20PM

3:20PM

2005-09-23T17:01:00.000-05:00

This guy did a pretty poor job of window-boarding. Yikes...

"Lovely...Rita" - Meet her, mate. :)

2005-09-23T16:04:00.000-05:00

The storm is closing in, and I took a walk to see what was up. These were taken around 3:15PM. Sept. 23, 2005.

This is looking northeast, where the winds are coming from at the moment. 3:15PM.

Keyhoe's seminal book now in public domain!

2005-08-30T06:35:00.000-05:00

Donald Keyhoe's book "The Flying Saucers are Real" is available from Project Gutenberg!!
(Click title to read book)

Anyone who professes an interest in UFOs either has read or MUST read this book. Keyhoe's deadpan...so much like his later incarnation Fox Mulder...lends his narrative the spare, gravitas-laden air of Joe Friday, while still maintaining a sense of wonder.

This is the book that more than any other encapsulated the themes we still debate today.

It is as relevant today as it was in the 50s.

Go. Look. Read!! :)

[via Sacred Texts]

[Photo courtesy of HallRichard.com]

Katrina...and the waves...!

2005-08-28T05:37:00.000-05:00

Hurricane Katrina rocked southern Florida, and prepares to rock Louisiana early Monday.
(Click title for current NOAA IR satellite image of the Gulf of Mexico)

Upgraded to a category 4 storm this morning, it is expected to attain category 5 prior to landfall.

If this storm continues its present course, it could mean a very grave situation for New Orleans. With the storm pushing 20-50 foot waves ahead of it, and with the heavy amounts of rain associated with this storm, New Orleans could be irreparably swamped. Remember that New Orleans is below sea level and has gargantuan pumps which keep the city from flooding. A failure of these pumps...or their being overwhelmed...would produce a huge environmental disaster in addition to destruction of property and potential loss of life.

Say a prayer for those in the path of the storm.

Note my house on the map...[gulp] :)

[via NOAA-GOES web site]

Chekov Checks in...again!!

2005-08-28T00:40:00.000-05:00

A fan series...Star Trek: The New Voyages...has secured Walter Koenig to reprise his role as Ensign Pavel Chekov in an upcoming episode.
(Click title to visit site)

In addition to Koenig, the script was penned by none other than worshipped Trek scriptwriter D.C. Fontana!

Koenig's youthful yet no-nonsense portrayal of Chekov tangibly helped to break down ethnic and cultural barriers as "detente" was getting underway. Roddenberry's goal of creating an "integrated" cast was achieved with remarkable vigor, and Walter Koenig deserves a large share of credit.

He also became somewhat of a sex symbol. :)

Ahead warp factor one, Mister Chekov!

[via SlashDot]

Science threatened by religious fundamentalism? No way!!.......WAY!

2005-08-23T18:01:00.000-05:00

Sometimes it takes someone "outside the box" to see that the box is full of holes.
(Click title to read article)

Christian conservative didn't used to mean anti-science ideologue.

Welcome to the New America...where killing for God is ok, where creationism is a school subject, and where science is cast aside in favor of dogma, regardless of the facts.

Maybe it's time the Chinese made their move.

[via BBC]

Christian Fundamentalism...good?

2005-08-23T16:25:00.000-05:00

If you think loonies like Pat Robertson are "lone nutters"...read this post from the Daily Kos.
(Click title to read post)

It is becoming an indoctrination, and if it is apologized for, we lose the game altogether. Unfortunately, in America it only takes one or two loonies...and an acquiescent Congress...to change policy.

The Christians who are embarassed by Robertson don't have Pat's VOICE. And how did he get it? The dollars of regular American Christians...thousands of them.

For a Christian to badmouth fundamentalist Islam, and then to issue a "fatwah" on foreign leaders...gee do you smell hypocricy? Well then, why aren't Robertson and the other Fundies castigated in mainstream press? There sure seems to be enough ink to go around about that "activist" mom who was "lucky enough" for her son to die in Iraq..the better to fuel her activism.
How disgusting...

Oh yeah...they "report"...We decide. Riiiiight.

[via The Daily Kos]

Thou shalt not...Uhh, Pat?

2005-08-23T06:19:00.000-05:00

Pat Robertson advocated...ON THE AIR...the murder of a human being.
(Click title to read article)

This is a "man of God" who represents the conservative Christians of this nation?

I am at a complete and utter loss for words.

[via Yahoo News]

Going...Going...Gonzo!

2005-08-23T01:30:00.000-05:00

Hunter Thompson...father of Gonzo journalism...was seen off the mortal coil with a bang.
(Click title to read more)

Thompson, who was found dead Feb. 20, 2005, of an apparently self-inflicted shotgun blast, had requested that he be cremated, and that his ashes be shot from a cannon...

From Thompson's "Wiki"...
=========================On August 20, 2005, Thompson's ashes were fired from a 150-foot cannon in the shape of a double-thumbed fist, as he wished, to the tune of Bob Dylan's Mr. Tambourine Man. The ashes were fired in a private ceremony and the cannon will remain as a memorial. There is talk of a public party sometime in the summer of 2006. Johnny Depp, who portrayed Thompson in the movie adaptation of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, announced he financed the funeral, according to Anita Thompson. Depp told the Associated Press, "all I'm doing is trying to make sure his last wish comes true. I just want to send my pal out the way he wants to go out." [1]

Depp also reportedly owns the gun and ammunition used in Thompson's suicide.

The plans for this monument were initially drawn by Thompson and Ralph Steadman, and were shown as part of an "Omnibus" program on British television (BBC), titled "Fear and Loathing in Gonzovision". It is included as a special feature on the second disc of the Criterion Collection DVD release of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

"If that's what he wanted, we'll see if we can pull it off," said Douglas Brinkley, a friend and now the family's spokesman.^{4============================}

So long Hunter...and check in every now and then. :)

[Photo via CoasttoCoastAM; Wiki via Wikipedia]

UFO-Planet.net - polite discourse and reasoned debate.

2005-08-21T14:33:00.000-05:00

For those who tire of the posting and updating delays at UFO Updates, you might make a stop by the ufo-planet.net forums.
(Click title to visit site)

Posts are updated in real-time, you can get notification when someone posts to a thread to which you've subscribed, and the forums are nicely segregated by subject matter.

With posters ranging from Paul Kimball to Alfred Lehmberg, there's something for everyone.

The folks play nice, and they'll soon begin holding online chat Q&A sessions with UFO researchers.

Tell Marty I sent you! :)

[via my list of interesting sites)