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 -> 1999 -> Jan -> Here

From: Rebecca Schatte<xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:40:11 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:30:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Guilt By Association?


>Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 20:13:58 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Sean Jones <seanj@tedric.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Guilt By Association?

>Hi Errol, Hi All, esp Bob Shell <G>

>With the "Tent Footage" fully debunked by Tim and Phil, the
>Alien Autopsy must also be fake/hoaxed/bogus purely because it
>came from the same mill does it not?

Not necessarily, but in this case, the AA has not been shown to
be what Santilli has claimed.

>NO!

>This is guilt by association. Many people on this list have
>criticised Gary Alevy specifically for this "crime".

Leaving Gary out of this for the moment, shouldn't our
suspicions be raised just a little, were it not for all the
other problems with the AA?

>As far as I know, ( I will stand corrected if someone can show
>me the evidence) the actual Alien Autopsy film has stood up to
>all the scrutiny but due to the extremely dubious way it was
>made public was immediately frowned upon by many big names in
>Ufology (capital U?). So straight away the smoking gun was cast
>into shadow.

First off, we should have been dubious from the beginning. Being
dubious is not necessarily a bad thing.

>I often wonder how many people consider the AA to be genuine but
>are afraid to say so for fear of ridicule? After all it is easy
>to mock than support is it not?

I think that people who genuinely believe in the AA film (the
Michael Hesemann's of the world) aren't afraid to be ridiculed
for their opinions.

>Is it not possible that the AA _is_ a genuine artefact but it
>was deliberately released in such a manor as to cause conflict
>within the ranks? I was once told by a certain person a few
>years back that the people who orchestrated the release hold
>critical information that used properly could prove _or_
>disprove the AA as genuine.

Of course the people who released the AA hold all the cards.

>I wonder is it time to take a vote people? All those who believe
>the AA genuine hold your hands up, OK now all you who think its
>fake hold your hands up.

I raise my hand up for FAKE and that is based on the dubiousness
of its release, the cast of clowns who represent it, the
conflicting stories which have been told, and because Theresa
Carlson proved it to my satisfaction with her tireless research
into the AA.

Check out:
http://www.uforeport.com/carlson_1.html

Rebecca