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 -> 1999 -> Nov -> Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@telus.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 09:54:45 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 01:00:07 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 99 10:46:14 PST

 >>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:01:06 -0800
 >>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0600 (CST)
 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>You missed the point entirely. Referencing legal standards in
 >>support of a position regarding alleged physical phenomena is
 >>totally inappropriate. As is referencing the results of opinion
 >>polls in support for the validity of such alleged physical
 >>phenomena. Why is a professed nuclear physicist arguing for the
 >>validity of physical phenomena, using standards any less than
 >>physical scientific standards which belong in the realm of
 >>physical science? and not legal standards which belong in the
 >>realm of social science? Is nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman
 >>telling everyone that ufology is a social science and now
 >>relegated to social standards instead?

 >Asked why he believed in a controversial phenomenon whose
 >existence many have disputed, a prominent scientist said the
 >following to Scientific American:

 >"Though ... I have never seen the phenomenon personally, I feel
 >that there is no question that [it] exists.  I have talked to
 >six eyewitnesses of the phenomena and think there is no
 >reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of their observations.
 >Furthermore, the reports are all remarkably similar and have
 >common features with the hundreds of observations that appear in
 >the literature."

 >Anybody care to guess who the scientist was and what he was
 >talking about?

 >Jerry Clark

The scientist was John Lowke, a plasma physicist.

He is referring to ball lightning.

If this was 1799 the reference might be to stones that fall from
the sky.

I think it most strange that the previously debunked phenomenon
of ball lightning has been used recently to explain UFO
sightings.

Gavin McLeod