From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:24:45 EDT
Archived: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:21:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?


>From: Paul Scott Anderson <paulscottanderson.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:42:49 -0700
>Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:05:35 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?

>>I reject any earth-built theory re. the 'drones' because they
>>have no visible means of support or propulsion. That left some
>>other- worldly construction whose builders had a propensity for
>>advertizing on the craft's structure. Why? These aren't
>>airliners after all.

>>It seems that there are those out there who get a thrill out of
>>perpetuating hoaxes and photoshopping one up like the 'drones'
>>is much easier to do then stomping around a field with a board a
>>rope and a 100 foot tape measure.


>My point (again) was that some on the List seemed to reject the
>'drone' reports because they seemed too 'weird' and because the
>photos were assumed to all be hoaxes, the several other
>eyewitness accounts were ignored.

>Something as unconventional as the 'drones' should be treated
>with cautious skepticism of course, but when you have possible
>additional eywitness accounts going back at least to the 80s,
>they _must_ be taken into account as well.

>So far, the only researcher who has tried to do that is Linda
>Howe, as far as I can tell.

>Have any other ufologists bothered to do this and actually talk
>to any of these people, before making hasty conclusions?


>Paul Scott Anderson
>web.mac.com/paulscottanderson


Hi Paul!

When the story on the drones first broke I too found the subject
very interesting.

I sent the pics published to experts in photoshop and other
special effects software and techniques. The majority felt the
photos were not kosher. That didn't however dismiss the
possibility. When in doubt ask a scientist says I.

I did and was surprised to find there is real science behind the
probability of such devices. Long standing science behind it and
I posted those links on this list.

However, the problem I have with the drones story is its taken
leaps so far from the stable it's gotten uninteresting.

Ms. Howe is a delight. No doubt about that. A real pro, but this
story first has to establish that_there_are_really_drones_. So
far we have questionable pics, and some eyewitness testimony.

Not long after the story broke the subject of extratrerrestials
and back engineered ET technology, yadda, yadda, yadda.

For cryin' out loud, let the data reveal it. Let's wait 'til
more study on the photos and more solid, physical proof is
gathered before these leaps in speculation occur. They muddy the
waters and that's the reason the drone story has that 'you might
get cooties if you touch it' thing.

One sane step at a time when it comes to the fantastic.


Best,

Greg




Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast

See:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/