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 -> 1998 -> Aug -> Re: Why Migrains Don't Explain UFOs

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 23:25:23 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1998 08:02:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Migrains Don't Explain UFOs


>Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 13:29:22 +0100
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: John Rimmer <j_rimmer@library.croydon.gov.uk>
>Subject: Why Migrains Don't Explain UFOs

>Greg, you're father's sighting sound fascinating, and I'm
>certainly not, from several thousand miles away (?) and four
>years afterwards, try to offer any sort of explanation. But I'm
>struck by the same things your dad found curious: the object did
>not reflect the sunlight, and nobody else seemed to see it. This
>sounds like something other than a large, solid constructed
>object, but at this distance I have no idea what - should I?

John,

What my father meant by "did not reflect the sunlight" was that
even though the surface appeared smooth and metallic, it wasn't
shiny. One simply expects a metal object to "glint" somewhere on
it with direct sunlight being applied. I can't explain it.

As far as no one else seeming to notice, the others on the road
may have been thinking the same thing about him. After all, he
didn't pull over either. It wasn't until a little later after
reflection that the strangeness of what he had seen began to set
in. He still has not attempted to categorize it beyond the easy
elimination of known aircraft or natural phenomena. It was a
genuine UFO. How did you arrive at the conclusion that it
"sounds like something other than a large, solid constructed
object" after the description I gave? It wasn't specific enough?
OK...there was a date of manufacture stamped on the
bottom....that better? BTW, debunkers are constantly offering
explanations for sightings from thousands of miles away, many
years after. Why should this be any different? What is it about
a skeptic/debunker that uniquely qualifies him to explain
something he's never seen better than those that have, even if
they're lousy witnesses?

>Let's also be glad that Jerry Clark didn't go into police work.
>No doubt he would be prepared to accept the testimony of
>"individuals with high levels of civic responsibility"

It is my impression that Jerry Clark would dismiss UFO reports
if they occurred rarely, had little in common collectively, and
were only reported by drug addicts. I believe it's the sheer
quantity of very similar (and in some instances identical) cases
that catch his attention as well as the quality of the
witnesses. How many "individuals with high levels of civic
responsibility" must show up with the same story before you
believe it? Is there a number? Frankly, I'd prefer an officer on
the case who believes some people over one who believes none.

Greg