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 -> 1998 -> Feb -> Here

From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 1998 12:29:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 23:31:07 -0500
Subject: Re: 'UFO Sphere/Orb' over Brooklyn, NY


> From: werd@interlog.com [Drew Williamson]
> Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 23:14:38 -0500 (EST)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'UFO Sphere/Orb' over Brooklyn, NY

> >Date: Sun, 08 Feb 1998 13:49:05 +0100
> >From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca>
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'UFO Sphere/Orb' over Brooklyn, NY

<snip>

> >Hi Alex,

> >What happens is that some of the people who subscribe to the list
> >don't read all of the data that comes in but just target certain
> >areas. I find this a bit maddening because you have to keep
> >explaining yourself over and over, thereby making yourself look
> >defensive. I've had this happen to me more than a few times and I won't
> >waste my time on it.

> >The guy sez, he saw the thing then took a picture of it. Accept that
> >and move on, other wise you're calling him a liar. If we took that
> >attitude with all of our witnesses, and it got around, where the hell
> >would we be?

> >Don Ledger

> Don,

> I take strong offense to this response of yours. Perhaps it's
> just your need to vent frustration at your attempts at requesting
> information or help from an E-mail list.

Like that's never been done before. It didn't bother you any when
I sent you those Japan sightings. Thanks incidentally for your
stuff.

> Firstly, I am aware of all the circumstances surrounding Alex's
> claim. As I stated, I can only respond to the evidence provided,
> and, in my opinion as a professional photographer, what I see is
> a lens flare and all the incumbent circumstances that cause it.

Saw it where, on a grainy, scanned image?

> I don't have to accept anything, and I am NOT calling Alex a
> liar! Where the hell would we be if we accepted everything?
> Exactly where the state of "ufology" is today, with too many
> people who are already accepting everything at face value.

Nobody suggested you were Drew, but the witnesses take enough
crap as it is. They at least deserve a BIT of an investigation
before being jumped on.

> It has already been suggested by Bob that there may be two
> phenomenon at work. Alex admits at least the possibility that he
> may not have captured what he saw on film.

> I sure hope you used more critical faculties in writing your book
> on the Shag Harbour incident! Otherwise we may have to suffer
> through an account by a fisherman `Jones' who claims he saw pigs
> flying the craft before it hit the water.

> Drew Williamson

Now that's a cheap shot and you know it. Spending four years on
this investigation, and Chris Styles five and a half is hardly
just an account by fisherman Jones watching pigs flying some
craft. Apparently you and others ignored this one when it was
right in your face, even in the Condon report. It appears as well
that you have continued to ignore it if that foolishness is all
you can come up with.

Don Ledger