UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jul > Jul 17

Re: 'Sturrock Panel'

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 19:04:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 08:31:50 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Sturrock Panel'


>From: Francis Ridge <slk@EVANSVILLE.NET>
>Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 07:54:45 -0500
>Subject: Re: 'Sturrock Panel'
>To: PROJECT-1947@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

>>Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 23:58:50 -0400
>>From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Sturrock Panel
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Dear List Members,

>WARNING LABEL! <G>

>The following is what makes Ufology worth pursuing and is not for the
>closed-minded:

>>James Easton:

<snip>

>>'abductions by aliens and the ongoing hybrid program'
>>'crop circles'
>>'alien implants'
>>stigmatists
>>MJ-12
>>Ed's numerous, amazing, 'Gulf Breeze' photos
>>'men in black'
>>'black helicopters'
>>'men in black in black helicopters'
>>contactees
>>'cattle mutilations'
>>'Star Elders'
>>Whitley Streiber's 'experiences'
>>Reverse engineered, captured alien technology
>>Meier's numerous, amazing, 'flying saucer', photographs
>>Chupacabras
>>'Roswell'
>>The great NASA cover-up of [insert subject here]...

>>Etc..

>>No?

>Nope!

>With:

>1) 106,000 sightings on computer (UFOCAT)
>2) 3,000-plus sightings from aircraft (Dr. Richard Haines)
>3) 489 radar cases, many radar/visual (Dominique Weinstein)
>4) 363 radar cases, 76 as R/V!!! (US Air Force records)
>5) 5600 trace cases, 4104 with UFO sightings!!!! (CUFOS)
>6) 185 E-M cases involving aircraft (Haines)
>7) Over 500 cases E-M effects with UFOs (CUFOS)
>8) Many hundreds of just GOOD close encounters
>9) And 701 Blue Book unknowns of various types

>If you're honest and want to get to the bottom of the UFO, you
>must face the facts.

>Francis Ridge


Indeed.  However, I would add that if any hard evidence in
support of the subjects mentioned above were to surface, I would
certainly expect that to be reviewed by the scientific community
as well. There are certainly many belief structures within this
genre, and attempts to reduce the entire subject to its lowest
common denominator seems a bit self-serving (IMHO).

Steve