Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1997 -> Dec -> Re: 'The X-Factor' (issue 25) - Question to Corso

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 16:56:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 18:24:48 -0500
Subject: Re: 'The X-Factor' (issue 25) - Question to Corso

>From: XianneKei <XianneKei@aol.com> [Rebecca Keith]
>Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 02:09:35 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject:  Re: 'The X-Factor' (issue 25) - Question to Corso

>From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 17:30:35 -0500
>Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 23:28:51 -0500
>Subject: Re: 'The X-Factor' (issue 25) - Question to Corso

[. . .]

>I think you are missing the point that I am obviously not making.
>Why do we have to find a motive for Corso? Sure, his actions beg
>for a reason. If we can't figure out the reason, does that mean
>that the book must be true?

>Maybe he's just a man with some sort of complex or syndrome. Not
>being a mental health professional, I'd hate to speculate,
>however, delusional does come to mind.

>The point is that it isn't really necessary to go to any great
>lengths to try to make excuses for this man Corso and/or his
>co-author Birnes. Neither of them included one iota of
>documentation for the claims they made. Why must we look for a
>motive? We should we waste our time?

Good point.  You review the claims, look at the evidence, dismiss
what isn't supported and move on.  Some may want to give the
story credibility based on his military background, and I have to
question what his motive would be to concoct this story.  But
there is certainly no direct connection between his documented
military history and the allegations he has made.

I make no excuses for Corso, but merely have an explanation that
has been given for some of the nonsense I've seen in the book.
If one could question Corso regarding all of the discrepancies
that would perhaps clear up some of the issues, but that's not
likely to happen.  I would agree that without further supporting
evidence, we should only acknowledge the allegation and move on.

>>>> But without knowing what
>>>> Corso's notes contained, it is impossible to determine how much of the
>>>> story that is told is from Corso, and how much was "filler" created by

>>> Corso had notes? He claims to have notes. He must not have had
>>> very good ones, as some mistakes were made. Obvious mistakes to
>>> people who know when buildings were built and when people died.
>>> Maybe not so obvious to the general population, but ones I can
>>> check out, once pointed in the right direction.

>>> Maybe Birnes couldn't read Corso's notes and that's why these
>>> mistakes were made? But I wonder why the mistakes weren't
>>> corrected from the proof or even later editions. Surely, Corso
>>> has read the book and should know these details are wrong.

>> I wasn't aware that a second printing had taken place, but you
>> may know more than I in that regard.

>There is a version of the book out that does not include the
>Thurmond forward, doesn't that mean it went into additional
>printings?

I haven't been checking copies I've seen in the stores in my
area, but I know the publisher had agreed to remove it.  That
would indeed be the second printing.  If someone has contacts in
the printing industry, it would be interesting to see the number
of copies printed.

[. . .]

>My point about the notes (in my assumption you were speaking of
>the type notes I refer to above and not the notebook he had in
>Roswell several years ago) is that there is NO proof that Corso
>has notes from his military days. There is no need to speculate
>about how Birnes may or may not have interpreted those notes
>because there is no proof that they exist.

Of course, we could really be talking about notes about his
military days that were written many years later.  His notes
would still be annecdotal unless we have additional evidence that
can be derived from them.  As you've noted, the incorrect
information in the book shows that the notes weren't accurate if
they did exist, with numerous dates and other factors reported
incorrectly.

>Bob Shell remarked the other day that it was not up to him to
>reform ufology. I happen to disagree with him. It is up to all of
>us who want to see the study of UFOs advance to reform this
>field. We need to stop making excuses for people who tell stories
>without offering proof. It is a waste of our time to chase down
>the claims of people who refuse to offer documentation for their
>claims.

I have no argument with that, but I'm not sure how you're going
to develop a common consensus on what will constitute "proof",
and some will always be willing to accept the claims of others.
I'm not even sure we could come up with a good consensus on how
we define the "field" of "Ufology".


Steve