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 -> Nov -> Re: When SETI Gets An ET Signal!

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 08:45:14 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 12:52:06 -0500
Subject: Re: When SETI Gets An ET Signal!


>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 11:27:01 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: When SETI Gets An ET Signal!


>>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>>Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 21:30:43 EST
>>Fwd Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 09:00:07 -0500
>>Subject: Re: When SETI Gets An ET Signal!


>>Bravo. Don't forget, one hoax has already set SETI back 100
>>years.

<snip>

>Hi, Greg.

>If SETI's one hoax equals a 100 year set back, then no wonder
>UFOlogy is hard pressed to move forward. The hundreds of hoaxes
>it has endured over the years obviously adds up to a stunning
>10,000 year set back for ufology, using the formula you just
>provided.

>Just joking (as I'm sure your were?).

Don't be TOO sure Roger! :-)

I'm afraid I may have you at a disadvantage here.

I was paraphrasing the lamenting by one of SETI's spokesmen over
the recent hoax. Perhaps you weren't aware of the statement made
to the effect that if it was a hoax, it would set SETI back a
hundred years.

In a recent discussion, I pointed out what shaky ground SETI
must be on if a single hoax could have such a devastating
effect. I'm sure his concern was over future funding and not
public opinion, however.

>My previous post offered several counterpoints to, what I felt,
>was sincere but faulty logic on the part of you and Doc. I feel,
>as you do, that ufology is getting a raw deal as it relates to a
>lack of resources and respect within the scientific community.
>But slamming SETI, whining about funding and making it out to be
>the "competition" is counter productive. I find it interesting
>that the above post reflects more butt-slappin' and high-five'n
>than any real counterpoint to my views, either philosophical or
>scientific.

>Greg, you and Doc are intelligent people with obvious passion
>for your beliefs. You two can do better than that! Show me why
>you feel SETI is such a threat to ufology beyond a simple
>just-because type reasoning.

Uh, Roger, where have I indicated that SETI is a threat to
ufology?

I have expressed the opinion several times that ufology is in
far better shape, and has accomplished better results with far
fewer resources. Yes, I feel SETI is a waste of money, but you
somehow equate that with "whining about funding".

Anyway, my thinking was recently corrected by a SETI member as
to funding sources. SETI is at this time self-funded, much like
ufology, though it's a lot tougher to sell SETI books <snicker>.

By the way, I have never slapped, nor have I had the desire to
slap, Doc's butt. No offense Doc!

Greg