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 -> Sep -> Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Don Allen <dona@amigo.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 23:31:54 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 10:52:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 12:43:56 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>From: Jerry Black <blackhole60@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 22:13:35 PDT

Hi Bruce,

 >>>William G. Hyzer, with all of his sophisticated equipment, has
 >>>proven that there was no luminosity coming down the road,
 >>>contradicting Jeff Sainio's contention with 12-years of
 >>>experience in the field of photographic analysis.

 >Note here that Black refer's to Sainio's detection of luminance
 >along the road. Sainio worked with the original negative, Hyzer
 >with a copy. Sainio's analysis was completely independent of
 >mine. He has shot down a number of UFO photos an videos (as have
 >I), but he was not able to punch holes in Ed's photos.

 >Sainio told me he was particularly impressed with the fact that
 >Ed, the notorious hoaxer he was supposed to be, would allow the
 >originals ou of his (Ed's) control where all sorts of tests
 >could be done to test for fakery. With all due respect to Mr.
 >Hyzer and experience, the fact is that photo analysis experience
 >is not all it takes in UFO investigation.

I think this is a very important point that tends to be
overlooked in the rest of the hubris - that Ed allowed the
originals to be tested.

If Ed was such a hoaxer he wouldn't have gained anything by
doing that. Did Billy Meier do that? Uh, I don't think so.

I tend to believe that Ed Walters had real experiences and that
his photos, although extremely controversial, were not faked.

I don't know if this is directly pertinent but when I was in GB
in 1992 and witnessed the red light UFO along with Bob Oechsler,
Steven Greer and about 100 others, Ann Morrison told me that she
and her husband had lots of videotapes of the GB UFO. I don't
recall if they included the Ed Walters variety. I also don't
recall the names, but it seems to me that someone else also
witnessed the Ed Walters type UFO, from years ago.

The biggest problem I see with videotape and photographic
evidence is that it will always be challenged as to it's
authenticity and analysis methodology. That's why it's my
opinion that UFO photographs make poor evidence. I personally
would put more credence in the testimony of multiple witnesss
corroboration of a sighting than a crystal clear photograph,
which will always be under suspicion, even if proven with a
gazillion dollars worth of high-tech photo analysis to be
completely legitimate.

I think it's unfair, but you will probably have to put up with
this kind of demeaning crap from your mealy-mouth detractors
mainly because you have been so high profile on the Walters
photo analysis.

Of course, Jerry Black, Hyzer, et al., can always put up or shut
up.

Whoops! I guess that makes *me* one of the " UFO good ole boys"
club for shooting my mouth off. I'm just tired of reading the
same damned re-hash over and over and over.


Regards,

Don


http://www.fwpd.net/dona/tesla/teslacoil.htm