UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jul > Jul 8

Re: Mexico City Fake

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 02:43:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 09:10:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Mexico City Fake

>Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 20:30:21 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Mexico City Fake

>>Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 14:41:11 -0700 (PDT)
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Mexico City "Fake"


>>A related phenomenon is the relative motion of the implant behind
>>the ear of Whitley.  It knew just when and how far to move to
>>escape the scalpel, and its motion had to overcome the opposing
>>force of friction, just as tiny imposed motions of the video
>>camera would have had to overcome, or somehow negate, the
>>camera's inertia.

>>This solution has the advantage of not ignoring the supportive
>>witness testimony, and acknowledging the relevance of your study
>>correlating the UFO's brightness with its distance.

>>Jim Deardorff

Dennis writes:


>Your "solution" also has the advantage of being ad hoc, post
>facto, and totally gratuitous, not to mention mere wishful
>thinking. Just can't give up on a case, can you, even when the
>evidence for a hoax stares you in the face.

Geez Dennis, if I can pull your fangs and talons out of Jim's
throat for a moment, what "evidence" for a hoax are you talking

All Bruce or Jeff have said is that Sanio has found what he
'thinks' is evidence of a hoax. I never got the impression from
-anything- that has been presented that anything -conclusive-
has been proferred! There may be -strong indications- or 'reason
to suspect, but nothing -conclusive.-

>Just more clever
>manipulation (or introduction of "confusion") by the ubiquitous,
>omniscient, omnipotent aliens. Next thing you know, they'll be
>photographing themselves on peoples' camcorders without the
>latter being turned on, maybe even without a cassette in the
>chamber -- just to confound the skeptics, I suppose. After all,
>they can do anything, right? Were they jumping up and down to a
>different beat for everyone else who might have been
>photographing them at the same time, or did they just dictate
>that they would be filmed by only one person in Mexico City (with
>a population of about 14 million or so) at a time?

Ya know, I was gonna include in my original post the possibility
that the propulsion system of the craft (if it is a powerful
'magnetic field generating' system of some kind) might account
for differences in the appearance of the immediate edges of the
object as opposed to other objects in the cameras field of view
that were not generating such intense magnetic fields. I left it
out because there's just no way to know what kind of propulsion
system is being used and I felt it was a purely speculative
point and one which could never be answered authoritativly
unless we capture a UFO and reverse engineer the thing! I opted
to keep my questions to Bruce centered around evidence of
tampering and the possibility that the optics themselves may
have been responsible for what Jeff was seeing.

Jim's only 'crime' was in asking questions that took into
account the ETs themselves. No reason to drag the guy over
broken glass for it. Your arguement would be stronger if you
addressed Jims' points with logical and well thought out answers
rather than simply letting him have it with both barrels!

>You're a real piece of work, Jim. Ever thought about having
>yourself checked for an implant -- or a brain transplant?

No Sasquatch, _you're_ a real piece of work! Jim is just an
honest guy asking (what he believes to be) honest questions.
I've never seen him comport himself in a manner that would
warrant the kind of attack that you have launched. If it was me
you were chewing on however..... well that's a different story.
I've been a bad boy! <EG> Not Jim though, he just doesn't
deserve it.

>Dark Cloud

Yeah! Lately for some reason. I hope all is well with you and
your's Sasquatch. Your posts have been sounding a little ragged
around the edges lately. Not up to your usual standards!


John Velez