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 -> Jul -> Re: Santilli Had Jeffrey 'Pegged'

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: XianneKei@aol.com
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 02:27:29 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 01:47:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Santilli Had Jeffrey 'Pegged'

From: Dave Vetterick <veterick@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 15:15:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 00:05:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Santilli Had Jeffrey 'Pegged'

> I'm glad to hear the signatures will be delivered as promised.
Respectfully,
> may I suggest you or Kent post a copy of the cover letter, if there was
one,
> accompanying the signatures be posted to this list.

There was a cover letter to the legislative rep at the White House as well as
one to President Clinton. I no longer have copies of the letters (they went
with the petitions) or I would certainly get permission to post them. Kent is
on a trip at the moment and when he returns I will ask about getting the text
posted to the list.

> Regarding your "due course" comment, I can't speak to that. However, it's
> certainly a good question which I'll defer to Bob Shell or someone else to
> answer if they so choose.

It really was more of a rhetorical question.

> I did not say Kent was guilty of being a debunker from the start. I was
> paraphrasing Bob Shell's comments which were as follows:

    "If you want to debunk something (Roswell) how about injecting
     a person into it, have that person use all the buzz words and
     make himself "Mr. Whatever"......then say the Air Force was right
     all along"

> Bob went on to say he wasn't accusing Kent of anything, but we should
> consider this a possible scenario.

You don't have to directly accuse anyone of anything for a statement or
thought to be "made."  The allegation Bob made was dealt with by several of
us, if I remember correctly. There weren't too many people who bought into
the idea that Bob tried to convey.

> Regarding Kents tactics now vs his paper on the AA film, in my opinion
> they are the same. As Kevin Randle and others have pointed out, and I
> fully agree, his arguments and logic on which he draws his conclusions
> are extremely weak and faulty.

I agree somewhat about Kent's latest paper, but I think his paper on the AA
film was brilliant and has not been refuted to my satisfaction.

> He makes what I consider to be walleyed assumptions which makes it very
> difficult to believe his intent is anything OTHER THAN debunkary. It is
> this same brand of quantum leap assumptions Kent tried to apply to the
> AA film, as alluded to by Mr. Santilli in his Feb. 20, 1996 letter.

Quantum leap assumptions in the SCAM article? I don't think so. He had some
things in there people didn't agree with (his thoughts on what life would
look like) but the interviews with 3 cameramen from WWII was not assumption.

> I believe Kent wants to get the truth, whatever that is, out of the
> Government just as we all do. However, he seems to go to extraordinary
> lengths to refute the very things which capture the public's interest,
> which is the most effective way to put pressure on the Government.

I agree that we must get the public interested in order to put pressure on
the government. But let's do it with the body of the evidence, rather than
specific cases. Roswell is far from the be all - end all UFO Case. Just
because people are interested in it, and just because it is popular, does not
make it real. And besides the government has made it's opinion of Roswell
pretty clear -- CASE CLOSED.

But take the thousands of pilot sightings, the hundreds of EM effect cases,
the ground trace cases and get excited and interested in those. Evidence
isn't just ONE case, it's the thousands of cases.

> His actions contradict what he says, thus the scorn. Why kill the Golden
> Goose that delivers the trump card of public interest and pressure
> regardless of whether or not you personally believe Roswell and the AA
> film are the real thing.

Because Kent is an honest man. He did whatever he felt was necessary to reach
his conclusions and made them public. I think he felt morally obligated to do
that. If it had been me, I probably would have sent the petitions in, with
little fanfare and not said anything other than they had been sent in, but
Kent is his own person. It was HIS Initiative. He paid for it and he can do
whatever he likes. He didn't come out with his opinion because he thought it
would make him popular, he came out with it because he BELIEVES he is
correct.

> Frankly, I for one am tired of waiting for another anything to drop out
> of the sky to prove intelligent life exists beyond our own,
> which ultimately is all of our objectives.

I don't have the need to prove it to anyone other than myself.

Rebecca