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 -> Feb -> Re: 'Electrically Induced Hallucinations'

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: "Steven J. Powell" <sjpowell@access.digex.net>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:45:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 11:21:39 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Electrically Induced Hallucinations'

>Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 09:43:24 -0800
>From: jan@cyberzone.net (Jan Aldrich)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'Electrically Induced Hallucinations'

>> > >By allowing dubious data into the equations.
>> > >The "correlations" only worked when the UFO data included
>> > >cases that occurred 6 months prior or after the seismic events,
>> > >and as much as 700 kilometres away,
>> > Uh-oh. 400 miles away is probably _way_ too distant,
>> > but I'd allow up  to a 100 miles, maybe 200 miles.

>JA:  Wrong!  Anybody hear of the inverse square ratio!  If
>there is an effect that large at such a distance someone--the
>theorist in this case--will have to demonstrate it.  You have
>fallen in the trap.  This is a "theory"  is conjecture based
>on bad science.  Allow?.... allow 100 miles?  I don't allow
>anything.  Show me!  If this effect is there, it is detectable.
>Good, detect it!

That's what I was mentioning to Chris.  How did the time and distance
windows become established in the first place?

It would seem to me that you start with a good understanding of exactly
what an 'earthlight' _IS_.  That would then describe their energy source,
duration, luminosity, etc.  From _that_ you could then establish a
reasonable time and distance window.

But apparently, according to Chris, nothing like this was ever done - so
its all hot air based on newspaper clippings!

I'm not doubting Chris but I want to hear that from Persinger's mouth myself.

>JA:  The theory and the theorist are both suspect.  If UFOs are
>caused by natural lasers, 100 foot diameter long lasting ball
>lightning,  electrified moon-dust, annhilation of antimeter
>"meteors", or TST, then these explanations not the last step
>in the process.  The theorist would be expected to be beating
>down the doors at the National Academy of Sciences looking for
>a multimillion dollar grants to do further studies.  However,
>these little theories are *only* used to debunk a UFO sighting
>after the fact.  This appears to be the theory and theorist's
>only function.  There is no attempt to advance scientific
>knowledge.

Well, I obviously already have an opinion but I'm going to try to withhold
comment until I learn a wee bit more and until I get some confirmation
directly from Persinger.

>If TST exists the way the theorist claims, it could be a possible
>indication of earthquakes.  Considering some of the current
>rather "far-out" correlations that are being studied  (ie
>the number of lost pet advertisements in the newspaper.);
>CSICOP and Persinger should be beating the drums to do an
>UFO-earthquake study.  In reality they do not have any such
>confidence in their theory.

Has CSICOP itself _ever_ done a study???  Anyway, that's beside the point.
We're taling about something that is concurrent with seismic activity (I
think) and probably not much of a precursor to seismic activity so I doubt
(I think) it would have predictability value.  I'd like to be wrong about
that one though.

>TST works for
>CSICOPs.  Nobody asks, if the this effects are so prevasive
>why we don't have people seeing trees outlined in fire, or
>effects at ground level, balls of light seen it the middle
>of the city or inside buildings?  Why do people feel like
>they have been abducted only, how about other sencarios?
>Good grief!

Well, at _most_ TST (or some variation) _could possibly_ explain some very
short duration, very non-distinct, DDs and/or NLs.  At _most_, and even
that remains to be proven.

>To say as some, apparently have, that we should exclude single
>witness observations because they might be TST is ridiculous.
>The UFOs _might_ be dust motes floating in the eyes which was a
>very popular theory for the first three years of the UFO era.
>_Wrong!_

>In the same vein it is said we should exclude NLs.  Because
>they are hard to trace down and are probably "conventional"
>anyways, just put these reports in the "Too Hard" box.
>_Wrong, again!_  I _hate_ NLs, they are and always have
>been DLs to me.  However, to exclude them:  No.

>We should be prepared to run screens where pattern searchs
>are done without one witness sightings and/or without NLs.
>However, to throw them out because you "feel" they are not
>relavent is wrong.

C'mon, I never meant to actually throw them out.  Only to pre-screen them
from a first-run analyses of patterns/trends.

Does it make sense to include Fred's sighting of a tiny dot of light
darting around for 30 seconds in the same database as the Cash-Landrum
event?  What possible meaningful correlation can we get from_that_
combination?

It _does_ make sense to analyze single-witness reports as a unique
category, and also to compare patterns/trends between that category and
others for correlation though.

>Since we seem like electrically induced hallunications so
>much, how about a new theory:  drug induced hallucinations.
>After all, a good part of the population is taking legal or
>illegal drugs.  How about interactions between ordinary
>drugs and food?  How about just the interactions about among
>foods?  Of course, in the early ufo era almost everyone felt
>compelled to make a statement about their drinking habits.
>I am sure CISCOP would buy this one too.  They're easy.
>Probably easier than selling tickets on the recue craft that
>will take away the select away when the world shattering
>events start to occur.

Hahahahha!!!

You forgot bovine flatulation!