Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books 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 Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1997 -> Jan -> Here

From: btbmag@ro.com (Michael Malone)
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 10:58:24 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 15:36:38 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Backlash'

>Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 13:09:20 -0500
>From: "Steven J. Powell" <sjpowell@access.digex.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'Backlash'
>References: <2.2.32.19961231024809.0067e8f0@mail.globalserve.net>

>> From: btbmag@ro.com (Michael Malone)
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'Backlash'

>> This is something I have argued, screamed, yelled, cajoled, ridiculed,
>> and fought about for a long time.  In your eloquence, you have made
>> the point far better than I ever could.

 >> The fact that electronic monitoring devices fail IS an example of
>> "evidence."  Not all evidence is based on the senses of sight, sound
>> smell, taste, or touch.  In fact, the kind of statistical, anylitical,
>> reproducable evidence that could be obtained from electronic
>> monitoring is more valuable than all the current evidence we currently
>> have.

>Absolutely _FAR_ more valuable.

I was being polite.  If I wasn't being polite, I'd have said something to
the effect that "at least we would HAVE evidence."  I could think of nastier
things to say, but again, I am feeling rather polite.

>> If we had a subject, who honestly believes he/she has been the object
>> of abduction by an alien being, under electronic monitoring we would
>> could begin to process of determination for what was the experience
>> that caused this belief.

>Electronic monitoring could give us an enormous variety of hints.  Even
>if, as some naysayers believe, the aliens can zap out our equipment they
>(presumably) can't control  'nature' uniformly and simultaneously.

>By that I mean (just as an example) if we were independently monitoring
>for temperature and humidity (as examples) we would likely detect brief
>changes just prior to a blackout of the equipment.  If we could do even
>something as seemingly minor as that consistently we'd have very
>significant _direct_ evidence.

Furthermore, the "knocking out" of the physical equipment would, in and of
itself, be an alarm that other actions are needed.  NOW!

>> The protocals for such an expermient would have to be worked out.  It
>> would almost have to involve more than simple location monitoring.  A
>> complete, independantly powered, electronic monitoring system would
>> have to be established and placed on the subjects residence, or
>> whatever locations are the subjects belief that abduction occur.

>Multi-location monitoring could get expensive but we can dream about it
><grin>.

Yes, or at least Multi-location monitoring on the scale that is affordable
at a single location would be expensive.  Some basic, off-the-shelf
monitoring devices could be used.

>A high-capacity UPS could easily power a half dozen pieces of gear for
>over an hour, cutting the power wouldn't be a issue.  An electrical
>dampening field of some kind (microwave, magnetic) would have to be used
>to zap the gear attached to the UPS.  Ignoring for the time being that a
>field powerful enough to zap the gear would fry the contents of the
>room, includng the alleged abductee, we do know that such fields don't
>materialize instantly, they propogate and would have slightly different
>affects on different equipment at slightly different times during the
>propogation - this alone could be recorded.

>In other words, the gear would not all go off-line at the same time and
>knowing how each piece of gear responds to dampening fields we could
>reconstruct the source location of the dampening field.

Too true.

>> At the least, assuming that the subject is abducted from sleep and
>> from their residence, would be an internal house system that indicated
>> where the subject was in the residence; a system to determine the
>> vital signs of the subject, including but not limited to brain
>> activity; video and audio monitors of the residence; ambient air
>> readings; and a systematic method of turning the system on or off
>> without the subjects knowledge.

>All doable with off-the-shelf, relatively inexpensive technology.

And very little technical knowledge.  Any reasonably handy soldering iron
handler should be able to build these componants inexpensively and reliably
from mail order parts.

>> This would, of course, constitute the gravest possible invasion of the
>> life of the subject.  Keeping in mind that the research can not help
>> but influnce the observation, such a study would do more to ligitmize
>> abduction research than the current state of hypno-therapists have.

>This is definitely an invasion of the individual's privacy, but there's
>no way around that.  For obvious reasons we would want a way to allow
>the individual to turn on/off the gear (some of the gear) at certain
>times.

I also think that we, the researchers, should be able to turn the gear off
without the knowledge of the subject.  However, there would have to be some
strict times when the subject could not turn the gear off.  More
importantly, this invasion of privacy would have to have the assurance that
disclusure would be limited to relevant information.  We can't be telling
the world that our subject looks like Steven Segal but dresses like Mea
West.

>If somebody could demonstrate a consistency of something, _anything_,
>physically happenning tis would become the hottest science research
>project on the planet.

>> What suprises me is the complete lack of initiative shown by current
>> "leaders" to produce just this kind of evidence.

>When I'm in a particularly generous mood I'm completely surprised by
>that also <grin>.

Then lets be generous and suprised.  The alternative isn't pleasent.

--
Michael Malone
Kilo Foxtrot Four Mike Yankee X-ray