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 Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1998 -> Jul -> Here

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:19:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 09:41:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study


>Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:50:44 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

<snip>

>One of the comments that I found especially interesting came
>from Prof. Sturrock. He gave a short list of things that they
>considered "evidence," and among them was photographic and
>videotaped material! The only qualifier (if it could be
>considered that) was that he stated that modern analysis
>techniques allow them to make good determinations as to the
>authenticity of a given photo or tape. I found the fact that pix
>and vid's were included on his short list as encouraging as the
>panels findings.

During the brief interviews that he took part in, Sturrock also
indicated that we know much more about some natural phenomenon
that might be interpreted as "unknowns", and mentioned one of the
photographs they had examined as possibly being the result of
such discharges.  Has there been any comment from those who may
have presented the material to the panel?

>> But of course members of CSICOP and other debunker-types
>>will attack the panel and its conclusions strenuously, as usual.

>Yeah Jim, but at least this time they are argueing with Ph.D's
>and scientists. Those are the very guys they claim to defend and
>represent. It'll be like watching the Pope go to war with/
>against God!

Of course, scientists have been known to have severe
disagreements over their theories and general acceptance in the
scientific community (however, that's defined) may not come
easily.

The JSE Report is, IMHO, a good first step and one that should
have been taken a long time ago.  But we still have a long road
to travel.

Steve