Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Navigation UFOs Paranormal People Places Area 51 Random Top 100 Catalog What's New Search... ...for this word in: Page Titles Page Contents Book Title/Author Help New Catalog Items (Random Selection) Lost Cities and Ancient Mysteries of Africa & Arabia (new trpb) /c/childress/ - $14.95 The Game of the Foxes: The Untold Story of German Espionage in the United States and Great Britain During World War II (used hc) Ladislas Farago - $12.00 Exceptional Children: An Introduction to Special Education/Fifth Edition (used hc) William L. Heward - $12.50 The Unofficial Guide to Las Vegas (used trpb) Bob Sehlinger - $3.00 UFO Sightings (new trpb) Alan Baker - $10.36 Mere Creation: Science, Faith and Intelligent Design (new trpb) /d/dembski/ - $24.95   Other New Items | Main Catalog Page | Subjects   2000+ new & used titles, including hundreds you won't find at Amazon! Log-In Here For Advanced Features Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> May -> Here Our Focus

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 12:26:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 07:53:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Biological Evidence Of An Alien Entity?


>Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 22:22:32 -0400
>From: Paul Badger <pbadger@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Re: Biological Evidence Of An Alien Entity?
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: IUR: Biological Evidence Of An Alien Entity?
>>Date: Wed, 26 May 99 09:38:07 PDT
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>The incident turns out to be more than just another
>>intriguing, unverified story. To all indications, one of the
>>alien entities left biological evidence of her presence behind,
>>evidence which Chalker took to a group of qualified scientists
>>for DNA analysis, with surprising and remarkable results.  The
>>scientists' report, which follows Chalker's article, raises a
>>host of extraordinary and suggestive new questions.

>>This explosive case is bound to be the focus of discussion and
>>debate in the weeks, months, and maybe years to come, and it's
>>something every ufologist should read.


>Jerry, thank you for telling the list about this latest article.

>I haven't read the article, but from the brief reference made to
>it on the CUFOS website, I get the impression that the point of
>the story is that the hair alleged to have been left behind by
>the entity has human DNA, albeit very rare, and not a DNA that
>is unrecognisable and thus "alien". Am I right?

Hi all -

I have read the article, and Paul is essentially correct here. The
DNA is rare but it is human. There is nothing on the hair or the DNA
to PROVE that it was of extraterrestrial origin. Bill Chalker is to be
applauded for his work but we are still confronted with unidentified
scientists and unidentified laboratories doing the work.  I also
understand why those in the scientific community do not wish to have
their names associated with UFO research, but the point is, we
do not know who they are. I mean this as no criticism of Bill Chalker
because I understand what being associated with UFOs can mean
to a scientist, especially with CSICOPians out there.

>If so, I can understand the interest in this case because it may
>raise questions like, "Why do entities repeatedly claim to be
>trying to merge alien and human DNA when an entity turns out to
>have human DNA after all?/do we have a shared ancestry?/are
>these entities human after all and just claim to be alien?".

>But to ask such questions, one has to accept the claim that an
>entity made a visitation, and accepting the claim that a hair,
>with provable human DNA, was actually from an entity. In other
>words, aren't we still in the area of "intriguing, unverified"
>stories? If the DNA analysis of the hair pointed to a mystifying
>DNA matrix that the team of scientists had never encountered
>before on this planet, then I would agree that we would be
>getting into the area of scientific evidence of unusual claims,
>and thus the case would be indeed "explosive". But what's to
>stop a skeptic laughing at this case and saying, "Big deal! They
>got a human hair and are trying to claim it's from an entity!
>They've proved nothing!"

This is the whole problem with abduction research. The
"explosive" evidence is not. We are confronted with a strange
situation, and had the hair belonged to a more common genetic
category, there would be no discussion of it. However, it is
still human and only becomes interesting when coupled to the
story told by the abductee.

>I apologise in advance if this case has more scientific evidence
>than I realise at this stage, with my not having access to the
>article, and for basing my interpretation on a paragraph on the
>CUFOS website, but you've got to agree that when you describe a
>case as "explosive", a guy's gotta be forgiven for being
>impatient to know what it's all about.... <g>

I have read Bill Chalker's plea for additional money to assist
in the research of this sample and I believe that we should
support it. An address was supplied in the IUR article and I,
for one, plan to send in a donation.

KRandle

PS: For those interested, THE ABDUCTION ENIGMA, the book about
alien abduction I wrote with Russ Estes and Bill Cone is now available
in hardback.