HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: 9051467f@levels.unisa.edu.au
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: physical evidence
Date: 20 Aug 92 00:39:26 GMT
Organization: University of South Australia

In article <1992Aug18.140338.11327@rhrk.uni-kl.de>, kring@efes.physik.uni-kl.de (Thomas Kettenring) writes:
> In article <8z9m_aj.jeffp@netcom.com>, jeffp@netcom.com (Jeff Papineau) writes:
>>In article <Bt52oJ.6vy@apollo.hp.com>nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>>>These excuses about why nobody gets physical evidence of "abductions"
>>>are just a little too convenient -- sort of like the Christian Fundy's
>>>excuses for fossils, carbon dating and other evidence which appears
>>>to make the world seem older than 6000 years: being God, He made the 
>>>fossils and other evidence too.  
>>>
>>>Excuses, excuses.
>>
>>What do you want? Photo's? You claim they're faked. Metal from the ship?
>>It's turned up before, but seems to be lost now if the government gets
>>wind of it. The only reason we don't have lots of evedence is because your
>>and my taxes go to suppressing it.
>>
>>IF the Corona crash went to court, you could prove it happened. [..]
> 
> Excuses, as he said.  It's simple:  You give us proof, you get our belief.
> Look at it as a business transaction.  You can't go into a supermarket and say,
> "My credit card has turned up before, but seems to be lost now" or "The only
> reason I don't have money is because of my taxes" or "IF I went to court, I had
> money" and expect they give you anything for it.

good grief.... trillions of lifeforms on one small steel ball and some
people have the gall to say there is no concrete proof for the existance
of aliens in this universe.

John McVey
From: rogue@ccs.northeastern.edu (Free Radical)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Ley Lines
Date: 13 Aug 92 19:29:14 GMT
Organization: Comp. Sci. @ NU

In article <63914@cup.portal.com> John_-_Winston@cup.portal.com writes:
[...]
>The dust fact did come from a conventional Astronomer. 

John, I am shocked at your behavior.  Actually using a fact that came from 
a reputable source!  I am stunned.

	RA
From: rogue@ccs.northeastern.edu (Free Radical)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Crop Circles?
Date: 18 Aug 92 02:36:46 GMT
Organization: Comp. Sci. @ NU

In article <3341@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com 
(Rick Pavek) writes:
>In article <mw7mh3.payner@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>What would you consider as proof?
[Unresponsive answer deleted]
>And it was a rhetorical question, anyway.
[...]
>And I still haven't seen the "proof", nor has anyone offered to show it to me.

Rick - which is it?  Do you want an answer, or don't you?  It seems to me
you want it both ways.  You demand proof.  We ask what proof is acceptable.
You respond by saying 1) it was a rhetorical question and 2) we lose because
we haven't offered proof.

Either you honestly want proof, and define what constitutes proof, or you
admit your demand was unfair, and withdraw the challenge.  But you can't
have it both ways.

	RA
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: harti@mikro.ee.tu-berlin.de (Stefan Hartmann)
Subject: Re: UFO Sighting in switzerland 1990
Organization: ZRZ/TU-Berlin
Distribution: tub
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:24:55 GMT

In <1992Aug16.151601.50@pegasus.ch> dr_who@pegasus.ch (Sysop of PEGASUS) writes:

>Hi friends,

>At our bbs-party, my friend showed me some pictures (photos) from
>a local UFO sighthing. 
>The photos were very good ... 
>They were not the usual stuff  (GRAYS or such stuff).

>They were took, from a friend of him, in the area of ARBON (Switzerland) at 
>the lake of constanz, about in the year 1990.
>(BTW: my friend works is a specalist in makeing special effects photos and
> he told me that it nearly impossible to create such photos in a studio)

>On one of the picture there was the 'UFO' sourounded by different 
>coloured light.
>After the thing has landed. some blue rotating lights were outside the 
>thing... Some of thoses blue 'lights' were flying arround his body.
>(scanning him ???)

>He was able to talk with that lights and he was also able to touch 
>those 'things'. They were cold objects.

>Afterwards he some some other light-objects :
>They looked like paintings from a child... 
>He thougth that they 'the aliens' were imitating him with light... 

>What do u think about that stuff ?

>greets 
>Roger
>-- 
> 
>      Mail    : Roger Sieber, Hauptstr. 102, CH-9434 Au/SG 
>      Internet: Dr_who@pegasus.ch         __
>      Phone   : ++41-71-71 70 42         ///
>                                    __  ///    There can be only one ... 
>        Sysop of PEGASUS BBS        \\\///       
>     BBS Phone: ++41-71-71 55 77     \XX/      X.25 : +228 4752 1 2574

Hi,
what about scanning these pics ???

can you do this and put it up to the UFO-pic-FTP server at:
phoenix.oulu.fi (130.231.240.17)  into  pub/incoming  

Best regards Stefan Hartmann.
email to: leo@zelator.in-berlin.de


Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: stanley@verga.enet.dec.com (My name is...)
Subject: Re: crop circles
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 17:26:58 GMT


In article <1992Aug12.043007.16792@news.unomaha.edu>, jcitro3@cwis.unomaha.edu (Joe Citro III) writes...
>I am particularly enjoying the "crop circle" on the famous LITE beer 
>commercial :)
> 
>                                        Joseph A. Citro III
>                                        

Me too :-)... that's my favorite advertisement.
From: rogue@ccs.northeastern.edu (Free Radical)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Crop Circles?
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:55:38 GMT
Organization: Comp. Sci. @ NU

In article <3357@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com 
(Rick Pavek) writes:
[...]
>
>The second has different characteristics such as the stalks are bent,
>not broken, and the cellular structure exhibits some kind of abberation.

First things first.  Now that it's been established that crop circles can
be hoaxed, circle-chasers have come up with these new criteria.  What 
reputable research/investigation has established either of these phenomena?
And what reputable r/i has demonstrated the impossibility, or at least
extreme difficulty, of hoaxers producing these effects?

I'm not asking this of you, Rick - I'm throwing this open to the floor.
Anyone?

	RA
From: jdr@starflight.Corp.Sun.COM (Jon Roland)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Crop Circles?
Date: 15 Aug 1992 03:23:11 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: jdr@starflight.Corp.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: starflight.corp.sun.com

There seems to be a tendency to explain crop circles as landing sites of UFOs,
but there is another explanation that needs to be added to the set of 
contenders, which is that they are the sites where alien vessels have passed
into or out of the ground using a method of transportation which allows them
to interpenetrate or bypass ordinary matter with a minimum of interaction,
although enough interaction to cause things like crop circles.

There has been at least one report from a witness that he was standing in a
field when a crop circle was formed around him. He also experienced paralysis.
He reports that he received a telepathic message: "Don't be alarmed. You are
standing in the middle of our spaceship." After a couple of seconds, the
paralysis ended and the crop circle was there.

We tend to assume that solid objects cannot interpenetrate each other, but
an alien technology may allow this, in which case they could have underground
bases without entrances.

If this is what the markings are, then the explanation of their shapes would
not be that they are some kind of symbol, but that they are the shapes of the
vessels that passed through at that point. If these are the shapes of objects,
then what kinds of objects could have such shapes? One obvious explanation is
that the more unusual, nonsymmetric ones are either special-purpose machines
or large modules of a construction project. Perhaps aliens are expanding or
removing one or more bases under Southern Britain and other places.
---

jdr@starflight.corp.sun.com, starflt@uunet.uu.net
Jon Roland
Starflight Corporation, 1755 E Bayshore Rd #9A,
Redwood City, CA 94063-4142, 415/361-8141

Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: rutkows@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Chris Rutkowski)
Subject: Re: Book: The Bible and UFOs (can you help?)
Keywords: bible, UFO
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 17:02:40 GMT

In <1992Aug21.233525.22499@random.ccs.northeastern.edu> rogue@ccs.northeastern.edu (Free Radical) writes:
>>
>>I am trying to find what appears to be an obviously out of print book. I found
>>this book in the Merridian, Mississippi library, of all places, while selling
>>Bibles in Mississippi the summer I graduated from high school. The book was
>>entitled something like "The Bible and UFOs" or "UFOs and the Bible" or 
>>whatever.

I think the book you're looking for is "The Bible and Flying Saucers"
by Barry Downing.  I have it in paperback, but there is another with a
similar title which I have in my collection (I can't remember the
author's name offhand).  There are, of course, a number of books which
deal in the Von Daankien stuff, but Downing's book is a theological
discussion of ET's, the Bible and the implications of contact, and
predated Von Daaniken's fluff by several years.

-- 
Chris Rutkowski - rutkows@ccu.umanitoba.ca
Royal Astronomical Society of Canada
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: degroot@mksol.dseg.ti.com (doug degroot)
Subject: Book: The Bible and UFOs (can you help?)
Keywords: bible, UFO
Organization: Texas Instruments
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:48:52 GMT


I am trying to find what appears to be an obviously out of print book. I found
this book in the Merridian, Mississippi library, of all places, while selling
Bibles in Mississippi the summer I graduated from high school. The book was
entitled something like "The Bible and UFOs" or "UFOs and the Bible" or whatever.
I really cannot be sure anymore. It was red and notebook paper sized (I think).
It had been written as a Ph.D. or Doctor of Divinity or whatever dissertation by
a Catholic priest/seminary student/whatever. It was superb! He, of course, was
excommunicated because of it.

I have tried several times over the years through book search companies to find
this book, but to no avail. I even tried calling the Merridien Mississippi
library, but they could not help.

If you
1. know of this book
2. have any ideas how I might extend my search
3. or have any other clues,
would you please reply directly to me at
	degroot@dog.dseg.ti.com

I would be *most* appreciative.

Thank you,

Doug DeGroot
degroot@dog.dseg.ti.com
From: rogue@ccs.northeastern.edu (Free Radical)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Crop Circles?
Date: 18 Aug 92 02:46:10 GMT
Organization: Comp. Sci. @ NU

In article <3342@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com 
(Rick Pavek) writes:
[...]
>Yes, mine was a rhetorical question.  
>
>And my point, all along, is that while some of the circles have apparently
>been made by men, no one has yet to prove that men made all of them.
                              ^^^
Again, Rick wants to have his cake and eat it too.  He wants his challenge
to be declared 'rhetorical', requiring no response - but he continues to 
imply he has won the challenge.

Rick, if your point is simply that one cannot 'prove' the origin of all the
disputed circles, fine.  But you seem also to be saying that lack of such
a proof is our (the skeptics') fault.  Either the challenge is inherently
unanswerable (rhetorical), or it does in fact have a solution.  Which is it?

	RA
From: rl@ferris.cray.com (Randy Lambertus)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Landing on thw White House lawn
Date: 14 Aug 92 16:54:10 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.

In article <1992Aug14.105922.9839@aston.ac.uk> evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans) writes:
>keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:
>: 
> text deleted...
>>
>Maybe there exist alien pranksters?
>-- 
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Mark Evans                                   |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
>+(44) 21 565 1979 (Home)                     |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
>+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office)             |

In the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy, they are referred to as

  >>>>     Teasers !!!    <<<<  :')


Randy Lambertus            Cray Research, Region 4           rl@uk.cray.com
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: kring@efes.physik.uni-kl.de (Thomas Kettenring)
Subject: Re: Crop Circles?
Organization: FB Physik, Universitaet Kaiserslautern, Germany
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 20:30:29 GMT

In article <3306@bcstec.ca.boeing.com>, kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Rick Pavek) writes:
>I don't want you to get the wrong idea about my comments...  I'm not
>jumping on your citation because it doesn't agree with me...  rather
>that I haven't actually claimed the aliens are coming, rather I'v
>tried to leave the door open to explanations other than human.

But you *sound* as if you want to close the door on this one
explanation (humans).

>I have no evidence the aliens are coming.  What my opinion is has no
>bearing on this case.  I can't prove there are aliens and I don't
>intend to.  I'm simply stating that there is reason to doubt that
>humans with mechanical implements created the majority of the
>crop circles and that any explanation is only a theory.

Which reason?

>Even the
>two hoaxters (that were reported to have recanted their story) could
>be hoaxing their confession.

It was not only a confession, it was a demonstration.  They made a circle,
and the famous cerealogist Pat Delgado said it was "genuine".

>Until someone can stand in the middle
>of one forming, with a camera, tape recorder or other instruments
>there will always be doubt.

After that there will be doubt too, because that will only explain this
one circle.

>  Heck, until the Leyden Jar and the
>Galvanometer scientists doubted there was such a radical thing
>as electricity!!  

Aha, a new incarnation of Ye Olde Galileo Pseudo Argument.  "They didn't
believe Galileo, they don't believe me, Galileo was right, I am too."

>I can't prove a negative any more than someone can prove the positive.
>I can't prove the aliens made any of the crop circles and no one can
>prove to the same level of certainty that humans created all of them.

There is a vast difference between these two hypotheses.
To prove humans made every crop circle ever observed, one has to clear up
*every* case, which is impossible.  To prove aliens made one of them, one
has to clear up one case.
Therefore the "there are other things that cause circles beside humans"
hypothesis is not falsifiable, and you shouldn't demand of others to falsify
it.  In an older article you write:

RP>Prove they were all made by humans.  Don't just assume.

You demand proof for a non-provable hypothesis before believing in it.
That is indeed closing the door on it.

>Sure, you can jump on the simple explanation and try to make it apply
>to all of the circles...  any fool can do that...
Fools can do other things too...

-- 
--------------thomas kettenring, 2 dan, kaiserslautern, germany---------------
Definition:  Idiot-proof  -  you are idiot-proof when you NEVER flame anybody.
From: rogue@ccs.northeastern.edu (Free Radical)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Ley Lines
Date: 21 Aug 92 00:32:05 GMT
Organization: Comp. Sci. @ NU

In article <64318@cup.portal.com> John_-_Winston@cup.portal.com writes:
>Dear RA: Did you know that your name RA is the name of a god? 

Yes, I know about Ra, the mythological Egyptian god of the Sun.  Not where
I got it though - it's a short form of my nickname.

>In answer to your question it may seem silly but there are a lot of 
>people from Venus living here just ask anybody. 

Which part of 'anybody' would this be?  I'm not sure if you're joking or not.
I know _you_ believe this - but yours is a far from common belief.  BTW,
what reason do you have to believe this guy?

>The skull is not one million years old but it's pretty old.

Source?

	RA
From: kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Rick Pavek)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: physical evidence
Date: 12 Aug 92 23:36:00 GMT
Followup-To: alt.alien.visitors
Organization: Boeing

In article <BsvL27.1AJ@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>   events in it.  Turn on a videotape loop every night before going
>   to bed.  Maybe prepare the ground outside to mark footprints.
>   Set up automatic video or camera equipment around the house 
>   to record people (beings, whatever) going in and out.  Et cetera.


It's been done.  There are recordings of a subject sleepwalking while
she turns the camera off.  Supposedly the beings remained off-camera until
this happened.

Now part of the claims of the abductees is that there seems to be a form
of telepathy involved.  If that's the case (What? Now I have to prove
Telepathy, Too??) then you'll not only have to put a camera on the 
victim and their residence, but you'll also have to do it without
the victim's knowledge.  And also, you'll have to avoid having
someone watching from nearby, with the knowledge the events are taped.
You might put someone nearby, and put them on camera, too, without
their knowledge.  If they know about it, they can think about it, and
if Telepathy is associated with this, then the abductors will know 
about it.

Of course, they might have some means to scan for electrical activity
nearby... 

Rick

-- 
Rick Pavek                       | Never ask a droid to outdo its program.
kuryakin@bcstec.boeing.com       |           
AppleLink:  kuryakin             | It wastes your time           
r.pavek1@GENIE                   |          and annoys the droid.
From: kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Rick Pavek)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Crop Circles?
Date: 19 Aug 92 17:59:00 GMT
Organization: Boeing

In article <1992Aug19.141332.23094@acd4.acd.com> gvb@TEFS1.acd.com (Gregg Brown) writes:
>
>Did you see the CBS special on crop circles? Not much conclusive evidence but 
>there is a lot of good arial photography. Makes you realize real fast that
>these were not made with 2X4s and ropes.

No, I missed it.  (Was picking up the Father-in-Law from the airport for
his annual visit.  8-]

I did speak last night with a friend who had seen it, and while the
evidence isn't conclusive enough to prove what DID make them, it was
in my opinion enough to prove that they weren't created by 2x4's and
feet.  Whoever owns the patent for what caused the effects could be
rich...  

Sure hope they figure it out someday...

Rick

-- 
Rick Pavek                       | Never ask a droid to outdo its program.
                                 |           
Seattle, WA                      |   It wastes your time
                                 |          and annoys the droid.  
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: stanley@verga.enet.dec.com (My name is...)
Subject: Re: Disinformation Agents at Work?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 17:19:17 GMT


In article <b83mqpm.sheaffer@netcom.com>, sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) writes...
>>In article <1992Aug10.171429.16729@engage.pko.dec.com> 
>>stanley@verga.enet.dec.com writes:
>>>
>>>In article <rb1mwy=.sheaffer@netcom.com>, sheaffer@netcom.com 
>>>(Robert Sheaffer) writes...
>>>>
>>>>No, if anybody is CIA here, it *must* be me.
>>>
>>>I agree, Robert... I've thought it was you for quite awhile now.
>>>
>>>Can you give us solid proof that you are not working for the CIA?
> 
>>                                          ^^^
>   Why, yes. I was just given a document by the Agency this morning
>   proving that I do *not* work for them.

Aha... I suspected as much... it's a CIA code encryption. :-)

You're with the service... admit it or risk losing your pension.. :-)
From: kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Rick Pavek)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Mysterious Happening
Keywords: military helicopters lights
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:25:17 GMT
Organization: Boeing

In article <1992Aug19.165303.1844@HQ.Ileaf.COM> hal@HQ.Ileaf.COM (Hal Wadleigh) writes:
>And DON'T let anybody hypnotize you unless you have a reason.  If you want to

What about the abduction victims that remembered being abducted WITHOUT
ever being hypnotized?  

Why is the assumption made that if the subject was hypnotized for the
purposes of recollecting incidents, and the incidents happen to include
abduction, that the hypnotist HAD to have lead the subject?

I mean, we're not talking about lounge act Hypnotists here... this is
a clinical setting.

Rick

-- 
Rick Pavek                       | Never ask a droid to outdo its program.
                                 |           
Seattle, WA                      |   It wastes your time
                                 |          and annoys the droid.
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Moon Activities?y
From: Robert_Sutton@kcbbs.gen.nz (Robert Sutton)
Date: 14 Aug 92 09:44:23 GMT
Organization: Kappa Crucis Unix BBS, Auckland, New Zealand

randolph@est.enet.dec.com(Tom Randolph) 10 AUG 92 10:31:28GMT  types...
>It's widely believed that the monks did in fact witness a large meteor 
>impacting the moon.Is that so unbelievable?.I'll post references if 
>you like.

Well it pretty much doesexpand the horizon of my boggle threshold
as I wonder if the Apollo LEVAs wore those suits because the air was 
toxic to humans.Maybe it was a kind of Total Recall in reverse.

Actually I wonder if it's only a meteorite if it hits Earth or will 
any solid thing do?
Maybe an Asterite.

***********************                                             
ARE ETOI SPACESHIPS SHY
OR ARE THEY JUST WAITING
TO SEAL THE ROYALTY DEAL?
********************************
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: physical evidence
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 14:46:55 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Aug11.195522.110@m.cs.uiuc.edu> mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.092619.1@cubldr.colorado.edu>, crago_l@cubldr.colorado.edu writes in part:
>|> One ofthe main differences between ordinary rape and *abduction/rape* is
>|> that when the victem reports what's happened to her, nobody says, Oh,
>|> there are no such things as rapists! You must be a nut!
>No, they say "You're making it up!" or "You led him on!" or "You
>said yes at the time!" or lots of other things that imply that
>she must be a nut.  You imply that rape victims have a simple
>and easy time, which just ain't the way it is.
>
>Anyway, any case built on one witnesses testimony is pretty much
>untenable.  You need to use the ordinary tools of investigation be 
>applied:  look for corroborating evidence and witnesses.
>(If I walk into the police station and tell them that I was
>kidnapped by Columbian-Iraqui-narco-terrorists, who tortured and 
>raped me but left no traces, they'll tell me I'm nuts, even though 
>beings MIGHT exist, and MIGHT even have kidnapped me.  No evidence,
>no case, thats just the way it is.)

   Also remember that some "abduction victims" claim that it is a
   repeated or regular occurence or that it's still happening to
   them.  It would not be that hard to rig up their house to record
   events in it.  Turn on a videotape loop every night before going
   to bed.  Maybe prepare the ground outside to mark footprints.
   Set up automatic video or camera equipment around the house 
   to record people (beings, whatever) going in and out.  Et cetera.
   Use a little imagination.


---peter