Government Alien Announcement

33 views
Skip to first unread message

Dave Alexander

unread,
Dec 1, 1993, 2:33:29 PM12/1/93
to

THE COMING "OFFICIAL" ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE ALIEN PRESENCE ON EARTH

Polls reveal that over 90 percent of the American people believe
in UFOs and 95 percent of these people believe the government is
keeping this knowledge from the public. But why? Are they afraid
the people will panic if an "official" announcement were made?
Hardly. Such an announcement would create interest, excitement and
many questions, but not panic. Why then the continued cover-up?

Overwhelming evidence has surfaced in the past several years from
"whistle-blowers" and retired military officers who have finally
said, "Enough is enough! It's time the government told the people
the truth!"

These officers, such as former Navy intelligence officer William
Cooper, Major John Lear (whose father founded the Lear Jet Corp.)
and Air Force officer William English, to name but a few, have all
discovered the truth, and at the risk of their lives, are trying
to alert everyone to the secrets behind the UFOs and the Alien
Presence on earth. These people worked on secret projects, had
access to classified documents, have seen with their own eyes
"captured" aliens and UFOs and the incredible technology they
brought with them.

Sightings of UFOs have been reported throughout history, and
Biblical and historic references to "flaming chariots," huge
flying "birds" and odd looking beings predate our history by
thousands of years. In the 1940's several alien spacecraft were
recovered by the U.S. and other countries, along with a few dead
aliens and one live one they named EBE (a name suggested by Dr.
Vannover Bush, short for Extraterrestrial Biological Entity).

In 1953, astronomers discovered large objects in space which were
moving toward Earth. At first they believed these were asteroids,
but later evidence proved the objects could only be spaceships.
Project Sigma and Project Plato intercepted alien radio
communication and was able to arrange a landing that resulted in
face-to-face contact with alien beings from another planet.
Meanwhile, a race of human-looking aliens contacted the U.S.
Government, warning us that the aliens orbiting the equator were
hostile beings from Orion. These human-type aliens demanded that
we dismantle and destroy our nuclear weapons, that we were on a
path of self-destruction and we must stop killing each other, stop
polluting the earth, stop raping the earth's natural resources and
learn to live in harmony.

In 1954, the race of aliens known as the Greys, from Zeta
Reticuli, who had been orbiting the equator, landed at Holloman
Air Force Base. They stated that their planet was dying and they
needed quarters on earth to conduct genetic experiments that might
allow their race to survive. For this, they pledged to give us
certain alien technologies. President Eisenhower met with the
aliens and a formal treaty was signed. The treaty stated the
aliens would not interfere in our affairs and we would not
interfere in theirs. We would keep their presence on earth secret
and they would furnish us with advanced technology. They could
abduct humans on a limited basis for the purpose of medical
examinations aboard their craft and monitoring, with the
stipulation that the humans would not be harmed, would be returned
to their point of abduction, that they would have no memory of the
event. It was also agreed that alien bases would be constructed
underground, beneath Indian reservations in the Four Corners area
of Utah, New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado. Another was to be
constructed in Nevada in the area known as S-4, about 7 miles
south of Area 51, known as Dreamland. A multi-billion dollar
secret fund was organized and kept by the Military Office of the
White House, supposedly to build secret underground sites for the
President and staff in case of military attacks.

By secret Executive Memorandum, NSC 5410, Eisenhower established a
permanent committee known as "Majority Twelve" (MJ-12) to oversee
and conduct all covert actions with the aliens. This included FBI
director J. Edgar Hoover and six leaders of the Council on Foreign
Relations, known as the Wise Men, and later others from the
Trilateral Commission.

A major finding of the commission was the aliens were using humans
and animals for a source of glandular secretions, enzymes, hormone
secretions, blood and in horrible genetic experiments. The aliens
explained these actions as necessary for their survival, that if
their genetic structure were not improved, their race would cease
to exist.

The ruling powers decided that one means of funding the alien
project was to corner the illegal drug market. A young ambitious
member of the Council on Foreign Relations was approached. His
name is George Bush. At the time, he was president and CEO of
Zapata Oil Co. based in Texas. Zapata Oil was experimenting with
offshore oil drilling and it was arranged that the drugs could be
shipped from South America to the offshore platforms by fishing
boats, then transferred to the U.S. shore by normal
transportation, thus avoiding searches by customs agents. The plan
worked better than anyone expected, and today the CIA controls all
the world's illegal drug markets. The drug money was used to
finance the deep underground alien bases.

The Bilderbergers, the Council on Foreign Relations and the
Trilateral Commission are the Secret Government and rule this
nation through MJ-12 and the study group known as the Jason
Society.

Throughout history, the aliens have manipulated and/or ruled the
human race through various secret societies, religion and the
occult. The CFR and the Trilateral Commission are in complete
control of the alien technology ant the nation's economy.

Eisenhower was the last president to know the entire overview of
the alien problem. Succeeding presidents were told only what MJ-12
wanted them to know, and it was not the truth. MJ-12 presented
each new president with a picture of a lost alien culture seeking
to renew itself, build a home on this planet and shower us with
gifts of technology. Each president has bought the story hook,
line and sinker.

Meanwhile, innocent people continue to suffer unspeakable horrors
at the hands of alien and human scientists who are engaged in
barbarous research that would make the Nazis pale in comparison.
As if that is not enough, many people end up as food for the
insatiable alien appetite for biological enzymes, hormonal
secretions and blood. At least one in every 40 Americans have been
implanted with alien devices that are used to control them if
necessity calls.

By 1989, over three million Greys were occupying these deep multi-
level underground complexes. They have welched on their agreement
on abducting humans; today many millions of citizens have been
abducted and implanted, a literal army awaiting orders to march!
For this reason, other nations were informed. Within five months
the Communist monolith Russia was dismantled to unite with the
U.S. and its technology to fight the invasion. The Hubbell Space
Telescope was created to keep a watchful eye on the invasion
fleet; Star Wars technology has been developed to stop the aliens
in outer space before they can get to the earth.

Today, the government deals with an extreme dilemma. Too many
sources are releasing alien information. The public will get angry
at continued secrecy. MJ-12 plans soon to make an "official"
announcement, under controlled conditions. Network TV will be
called to meet the staged 'landing' of the aliens, these being the
Greys. They will come bearing gifts, technology that supposedly
will heal cancer and AIDS, retard aging, etc. They will tell us
they are the "saviors" of humanity who have come to defend the
earth against an invasion of man eating aliens called Reptoids.
This story is a lie. The Grays already work for the Reptoids.
Their plan is to unify the world into a One-World Government, a
'New World Order' with the argument that only this can defeat the
invasion by Reptoids. This is a trap to enslave the world's
population. Control will be accomplished through a universal
currency controlled by certain international bankers, who for
years have been lackeys of the aliens, who seized upon their greed
and lust for wealth and power as a means to bring about their evil
plan to control the earth. This also is the scenario predicted in
the Bible's Book of Revelation where only those who accept the
Mark of the Beast (the aliens being the 'Beast' and the 'Mark'
being a microchip implant they will use, which will allow people
to buy and sell goods). Those who do not accept this must live
outside the money system and survive somehow on their own.

So be aware. Only your knowledge of this fake invasion can prevent
it from happening. Demand the truth from your government. Tell
them you know about the alien situation, that you know there are
good aliens and bad aliens and that MJ-12 is promoting the bad
aliens and the One World Government they hope to control. Insist
on the truth.


--
al...@spiral.org
Dave Alexander
Society for the Protection of
Individual Rights and Liberties
Minneapolis Chapter

Mike Pritchard

unread,
Dec 2, 1993, 7:59:56 AM12/2/93
to
In article <alex-011...@dialip-53.mr.net> al...@spiral.org (Dave Alexander) writes:
>From: al...@spiral.org (Dave Alexander)
>Subject: Government Alien Announcement
>Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1993 13:33:29 -0600

>
>THE COMING "OFFICIAL" ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE ALIEN PRESENCE ON EARTH
>
>Polls reveal that over 90 percent of the American people believe
>in UFOs and 95 percent of these people believe the government is
>keeping this knowledge from the public. But why? Are they afraid
>the people will panic if an "official" announcement were made?
>Hardly. Such an announcement would create interest, excitement and
>many questions, but not panic. Why then the continued cover-up?
>

With big claims such as these, naturally you do have evidence to back them,
right? How about you post some of this evidence?

In any case, it makes good reading, although anyone can write stuff like
this. If you are so sure of these claims, I'd be interested in seeing some
sort of proof.

Mike Pritchard Phone: (217) 333-0850
Operations Supervisor FAX: (217) 333-7151
WILL AM/FM Radio Internet: m-pri...@uiuc.edu
University of Illinois

David Lillard

unread,
Dec 2, 1993, 1:49:51 PM12/2/93
to
I think someone's seen too many episodes of "V".

Dave Alexander

unread,
Dec 2, 1993, 9:33:23 PM12/2/93
to
In article <zardo...@sycom.mi.org>, zar...@sycom.mi.org (David Lillard)
wrote:

> I think someone's seen too many episodes of "V".

I think "V" was a leak.

al...@spiral.org

Jose L. Mancera

unread,
Dec 3, 1993, 1:01:26 AM12/3/93
to
In article <alex-011...@dialip-53.mr.net>, al...@spiral.org (Dave
Alexander) wrote:

reply: ============> Too often innocent people are lured into believing
unsubstantiated events with "it is believed that ..", "they said ...",
"government reports found out that ...".

It would be the biggest discovery of mankind to find other "life" in the
universe. Doesn't it seem unnatural that if astronomers found out
something important about "aliens" that they wouldn't document this so all
their colegues would scrutinize this? As stated below, "astronomers found
space aliens coming to Earth...". It is a fact of human nature to let
others know of great discoveries, not to hide them. Doesn't mankink want
to be immortalized when they make such discoveries?

Anyway, its effortless to give credence and to try to make individuals that
write this kink of stuff to understand that it is hearsay, no evidence.
I'm going to go have fun and scan the dance net and the soc.cul.mexican net
and .... !!!! Have fun ya'all

P.S. The space shuttle with the Hubble repairs activities are going great.
You should see the live ongoing pictures that's on NASA Select TV.
- Jose Luis <=============================end_reply 10pm.

--
Jose_L_...@ccmail.jpl.nasa.gov

JERRY PUCHYR

unread,
Dec 5, 1993, 1:39:03 AM12/5/93
to
In article <alex-021...@dialip-53.mr.net>,

Hahah. It was very interesting article. But somehow missed all the facts
and evidence to all claims. If this wasn't e alt.aliens I would think it
was a great science fiction.

I have a question. If the UFO sightings are going on since 1940's or earlier and as the article "government announcement" said that the Aliens were swapping
the Earth goodies with their technology. Where is a single prove of alien technology in 50 years?

I don't buy things like aliens helped us to develop jet technology. As far as I know, the US Air Force had an program which was suppose to simulate a flying suacer. Well, after couple test pilots were killed the project was cancelled.
So how come this project was not successful, if the American government made
contact with Aliens from other planets???? And by the way this program was
created during Eisenhower's years as president of USA.

If US. government had so called Alien technology, then we would be far more advanced. Don't you think???


Looking for all your replies.

Ciau,

Jerry Puchyr York University Toronto Ontario Canada
cs92...@ariel.cs.yorku.ca

Email: feel free,,, :)


Dave Alexander

unread,
Dec 5, 1993, 3:43:41 PM12/5/93
to
In article <CHJuH...@ariel.cs.yorku.ca>, cs92...@ariel.cs.yorku.ca
(JERRY PUCHYR) wrote:

>
> I have a question. If the UFO sightings are going on since 1940's or earlier
> and as the article "government announcement" said that the Aliens were
> swapping the Earth goodies with their technology. Where is a single prove of
> alien technology in 50 years?
>

What makes you think they would tell *us* anything about what they had
learned? It is the military/industrial complex that got the technology.
They do not routinely broadcast their knowledge to the masses.

laura.k.watson

unread,
Dec 6, 1993, 10:22:08 AM12/6/93
to
In article <alex-051...@dialip-54.mr.net> al...@spiral.org (Dave Alexander) writes:
>>
>> I have a question. If the UFO sightings are going on since 1940's or earlier
>> and as the article "government announcement" said that the Aliens were
>> swapping the Earth goodies with their technology. Where is a single prove of
>> alien technology in 50 years?

C'mon. Use your old bean. What about calculators. We supposedly got
them as an outgrowth of chips which supposedly had to be invented
(necessity is the mother of invention, right) for the Appollo mission
or some such. And what about microwave ovens. And sattelite dishes,
computers, and even televsion. Most of this stuff of aliens landing
on earth and forming the alleged MJ-12 and all of that happened before
I was even BORN, and even *I* can figure out that we didn't have all
our modern technology back BEFORE this alleged alien landing. Sheesh.

--
Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com

Trying to free myself from anxiety-causing positive ion buildup.

JERRY PUCHYR

unread,
Dec 5, 1993, 8:44:56 PM12/5/93
to
In article <alex-051...@dialip-54.mr.net>,

Aha, so if it is military/industrial complex that has the technology, where
is the actual alien technology used? With 50 years of so called Alien Swapping
we should at least see it in use somewhere. Or at least within the 5 decades any decent information would leak out. Just like the secrets about Stealth fighters leaked out.

I still don't buy these technological swaps. If there was any military use of this alien technology it would be in use for a long time, don't you think?
And if it was, then it would be a bit known.
And don't forget there are hundreds of Magazines which are based on military inventions and new equipment. Do you think they are government controlled? I don't think so.

Just like the stealth techology
which is pretty old. Or do you think a martian handed it to Americans???
Nah.

And that information about Sw-12 or whatever it's called terminating masses of people because they knew too much, I heard that somewhere too, and I think there were 2 such famous people. Hitler and Stalin.

Until I see a solid prove of this document, or a strong evidence that such things exist I won't buy it.

Looking forward to your replies!

|
--------- __
|_____________> ==(oo)==
/ || \


Wow!!!! Look UP!!!!!

Jerry
email:cs92...@ariel.cs.yorku.ca

JERRY PUCHYR

unread,
Dec 6, 1993, 1:24:59 PM12/6/93
to
In article <CHMDD...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>,

laura.k.watson <wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> wrote:
>In article <alex-051...@dialip-54.mr.net> al...@spiral.org (Dave Alexander) writes:
>>>
>>> I have a question. If the UFO sightings are going on since 1940's or earlier
>>> and as the article "government announcement" said that the Aliens were
>>> swapping the Earth goodies with their technology. Where is a single prove of
>>> alien technology in 50 years?
>
>C'mon. Use your old bean. What about calculators. We supposedly got
>them as an outgrowth of chips which supposedly had to be invented

And how about the first transistor, do u think it was passed to us by the
alien nation, and the Nobel prize was just a cover up? And how about Intel?
Is that an Alien Corporation. Did you know that Cyrix's president is Dr. ET?


>(necessity is the mother of invention, right) for the Appollo mission
>or some such. And what about microwave ovens. And sattelite dishes,

Microwave ovens too? Wow, and where did u hear that? I still haven't seen
any facts. It's like saying that ET gave us the old PINTO technology.

>computers, and even televsion. Most of this stuff of aliens landing

And how about Telephone? Are you telling me that Bell was a moron, who wasted
his life, which was already known???

And how about a light bulb by Edison? If there was Alien technology why
were people using gasoline lightings?

Lastly, how about Modern Compact Disc Players? By you assumption it came
from another galaxy too?


>on earth and forming the alleged MJ-12 and all of that happened before
>I was even BORN, and even *I* can figure out that we didn't have all
>our modern technology back BEFORE this alleged alien landing. Sheesh.
>

*I* can figure out why we didn;t have the technology. That;s because it wasnt
invented yet.


Later!!!!!


Jerry

Doreen E Bower-1

unread,
Dec 6, 1993, 12:07:49 AM12/6/93
to
In article <CHJuH...@ariel.cs.yorku.ca>,

JERRY PUCHYR <cs92...@ariel.cs.yorku.ca> wrote:
>In article <alex-021...@dialip-53.mr.net>,
>Dave Alexander <al...@spiral.org> wrote:
>
>If US. government had so called Alien technology, then we would be far more advanced. Don't you think???
>

Heheheheheheh, this is neat. First off, any alien technology they had
would be classified 'Secret' or above. The public would not hear _any_
of it.

Well, actually I should retract that... sometimes the public does hear
wierd things in the sky. For example the 'skyquakes' in the Nevada
desert, of sonic booms so strong they made strong marks on those earthquake
measuring devices (forget the name, sorry). Myself, a few months ago
I heard some VERY strange, very loud sonic rumblings above the sky
that I could not identify in any way. Didn't seem to be a rocket test,
a jet sonic boom, or anything (I live in San Diego) I could readily
identify.

Now, I said the public as a whole wouldn't hear about any of it, but
perhaps individuals might unearth something here and tehre. Information
is highly compartmentalized, so you really have to ask around and come
in contact with a lot of people (especially in military sectors) to
find out stuff. I know the government has particle beam weaponry,
'cold tubes' (underground vacuum tunnels meant to move nuclear weaponry
and war material from point A to point B at supersonic speeds),
a fusion generator, lots of neat toys. I read Timothy Good's latest
book which covered Robert Lazar very well, and I highly suggest it to
those who want a bit of insight as to what the gov't is doing with these
alien toys. Lazar mentioned that some things he couldn't say, and rightly
should remain classified, but even that stuff you can uncover if you look
in the right circles. Research esoteric Tesla, John Keely, Thomsend
Brown, and you got yourself a solid start into the real nuts and bolts
of unfied theory, gravity manipulation and energy-from-vacuum devices.
I will make a quick plug for KeelyNET, a nonprofit (hell, they ask you
to spread their files everywhere) BBS that has tons of very keen files.
GRAVITY3.ASC (a gravity field manipulator) and COILBAK.ZIP (a simple
free energy device), at 1-214-324-3501. Beyond that, it is up to everyone
on their own to do the research and make the effort to ASK THE QUESTIONS.

I wish you luck :)

- Richard Temps


Ken Jensen

unread,
Dec 6, 1993, 3:33:01 PM12/6/93
to
Jeeez, Get an education.

Rich Payne

unread,
Dec 7, 1993, 9:46:51 AM12/7/93
to
In article <CHMDD...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (laura.k.watson) writes:
>In article <alex-051...@dialip-54.mr.net> al...@spiral.org (Dave Alexander) writes:
>>>
>>> I have a question. If the UFO sightings are going on since 1940's or earlier
>>> and as the article "government announcement" said that the Aliens were
>>> swapping the Earth goodies with their technology. Where is a single prove of
>>> alien technology in 50 years?
>
>C'mon. Use your old bean.

Please do, you need to read up on some recent history...

> What about calculators. We supposedly got
>them as an outgrowth of chips which supposedly had to be invented
>(necessity is the mother of invention, right) for the Appollo mission
>or some such.

Naaa, IC's were a normal outgrowth of transistors, and MOS technology
is not something impossible for humans to invent/understand. As for
Apollo, man-rating is so difficult to get that the Challenger still
had magnetic core memory (long extinct everywhere else).

> And what about microwave ovens. And sattelite dishes,

Microwave ovens were invented when someone (forget his name) noticed
that birds flying in front of high-power radar dishes fell to the
ground, cooked. They are built with the same microwave technology.

>computers, and even televsion.

Unbelievable, you ascribe all these things to aliens?

> Most of this stuff of aliens landing
>on earth and forming the alleged MJ-12 and all of that happened before
>I was even BORN, and even *I* can figure out that we didn't have all
>our modern technology back BEFORE this alleged alien landing. Sheesh.

And cave men did not have electricity, what does this prove? Things
change over time Laura, and the rate of change has accelerated. You
might try reading _Future_Shock_ by Alvin Toffler. He has a new book
out but the name escapes me.



>--
>Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com
>
>Trying to free myself from anxiety-causing positive ion buildup.

How are you going about that?


Rich

pay...@netcom.com


--

Dirk John Fischer

unread,
Dec 8, 1993, 9:00:58 PM12/8/93
to

> = laura.k.watson [hi laura]

>>> = Dave Alexander


>>>
>>> I have a question. If the UFO sightings are going on since 1940's or earlier
>>> and as the article "government announcement" said that the Aliens were
>>> swapping the Earth goodies with their technology. Where is a single prove
>>>of alien technology in 50 years?

>C'mon. Use your old bean. What about calculators. We supposedly got


>them as an outgrowth of chips which supposedly had to be invented
>(necessity is the mother of invention, right) for the Appollo mission
>or some such.

Back in the stone age (1972) I used a piece of equipment called an
Integral Calculator - about the size of an Apple II. It did integrals
(surprise!). I watched as over the years the size of this type of
equipment slowly & steadily (no 'great leap forward') shrank in size
& became the scientific calculator I now use today.

>And what about microwave ovens.

An outgrowth of radar; which itself was part of the continual scientific
exploration of the electro-magnetic spectrum.

>And sattelite dishes,

The parabola is a well known figure/surface. No magic here.

>computers, and even televsion. Most of this stuff of aliens landing

>on earth and forming the alleged MJ-12 and all of that happened before
>I was even BORN,

>and even *I* can figure out that we didn't have all
>our modern technology back BEFORE this alleged alien landing. Sheesh.

laura, laura, laura . . . cause & effect. We didn't have 'all our modern
technology' before WWII either. Cause? Effect? All that you have mentioned
as 'modern' technologies have LONG & well document evolutions from basic
scientific principles. C'mon.

DJF

PS If there are any 'alien' technologies - how could any technology be 'alien'
if it's all part of this universe? - & the 'gov' or whomever is not
using it (ie it has no measurable impact on reality) then, for all practical
purposes, it doesn't exist.
--
"Here's what I know," said the physicist. "If we lived in a microscopic
world, trucks would crash into walls, fly apart & then reassemble perfectly
on the other side of the wall. This has been proven."
DJF is Dirk John Fischer am...@yfn.ysu.edu

Dean Adams

unread,
Dec 9, 1993, 8:32:51 AM12/9/93
to
>>> Where is a single prove of alien technology in 50 years?

Obvioulsy there isn't any...

>>C'mon. Use your old bean. What about calculators.

Geez, how about GETTING a "bean"!! :->

>>And what about microwave ovens.

>>And sattelite dishes,
>>computers, and even televsion.

Well, all of those devices may be beyond YOUR comprehension,
but thankfully for the human face they were *not* beyond the
intellect of many scientists and engineers.

Have you ever seen the series "Connections"? Watch it sometime
and James Burke will show you the very technological leaps and
bounds that led to some of those very devices.

Sorry, guys... no "aliens" involved. :->

Its also VERY sad that anyone could be so hooked on aliens that
they can't even imagine a televison or microwave oven being
invented without them! What causes people to have such a
profound detatchment from reality and common sense??? Sheesh.

dmv

unread,
Dec 9, 1993, 11:06:26 AM12/9/93
to
In article <alex-011...@dialip-53.mr.net> al...@spiral.org (Dave
Alexander) writes:
>
> How do you know about this? Just curious not an insult, seems
intresting.

laura.k.watson

unread,
Dec 10, 1993, 2:45:45 PM12/10/93
to
In article <2e60sq$a...@news.ysu.edu> am...@yfn.ysu.edu (Dirk John Fischer) writes:

>laura, laura, laura . . . cause & effect. We didn't have 'all our modern
>technology' before WWII either. Cause? Effect? All that you have mentioned
>as 'modern' technologies have LONG & well document evolutions from basic
>scientific principles. C'mon.

Well, what you say is true enough generally, however, it seems to me
that the rapidity which things have developed in this century, after
science was just crawling along at a snail's pace for several thousand
years, it might seem to indicate that knowledgeable aliens in various
scientific disciplines might have come along and helped things along a
bit. How do you explain the sudden accleration of science and
technology otherwise?

--
Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com

laura.k.watson

unread,
Dec 10, 1993, 4:51:18 PM12/10/93
to
In article <dadamsCH...@netcom.com> dad...@netcom.com (Dean Adams) writes:
>
>>>C'mon. Use your old bean. What about calculators.
>
>Geez, how about GETTING a "bean"!! :->
>
>>>And what about microwave ovens.
>>>And sattelite dishes,
>>>computers, and even televsion.
>
>Well, all of those devices may be beyond YOUR comprehension,
>but thankfully for the human face they were *not* beyond the
>intellect of many scientists and engineers.

I didn't say they were beyond MY COMPREHENSION, I just happen to
know that it's a lot easier to understand a simplistic theory of
something like that than it is to develop it into a working
functional device that can be reproduced reliably. Especially when
new materials to make them out of have to be invented first. An
awful lot of the right things have to happen in the right sequence
for these ideas even to come to fruition. It's very complex. One
little failure of one little link in the chain of this progress
would blow the whole thing out of the water.

>Its also VERY sad that anyone could be so hooked on aliens that
>they can't even imagine a televison or microwave oven being
>invented without them! What causes people to have such a
>profound detatchment from reality and common sense??? Sheesh.

Okay, then you just explain to me, just explain why they didn't
invent electricity and microwave ovens in the 1600's. After all
they had some other great scientists back then. Huh? Why didn't
they do it? And don't tell me it's because Saturn happened to
line up with Venus in such and such a year.
--
Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com

Dean Adams

unread,
Dec 11, 1993, 1:22:52 AM12/11/93
to

Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Government Alien Announcement
Summary:
Expires:
References: <dadamsCH...@netcom.com> <CHuA1...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: Netcom Online Communications
Keywords:

Oh, please! Did you start this thread just as a bullshitting
excercise or something? Now you are being even more silly.

>And don't tell me it's because Saturn happened to
>line up with Venus in such and such a year.

Hmmm... I would expect that to be one of YOUR reasons! :->

You really should try and see the "Connections" series sometime!
It goes into *great* detail about this very subject of what it
takes to precipitate many of the most important inventions in
human (no aliens, sorry!) history.

One BIG problem we had back in those "dark ages" was the overpowering
control of theocracy. Organized religion existed to keep the people
ignorant and subserviant to the ruling priests, etc. Science and
new ideas were often repressed or obliterated entirely, because they
were seen as a threat to the "status quo". Organized religion is
perhaps guilty of the greatest crimes against humanity imaginable.
Besides all the wars and "inquisitions", perpetuating and *enforcing*
IGNORNACE is an inexcusable crime. If these types of religions had
not been invented and evolved into powerful institutions, then
perhaps we *would* have had "microwave ovens" in the 1600s.

Hmm... I wasn't planning to get into all that stuff, but whatever! :>

Sourcerer

unread,
Dec 11, 1993, 5:30:06 AM12/11/93
to
laura.k.watson (wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com) wrote:

: Okay, then you just explain to me, just explain why they didn't


: invent electricity and microwave ovens in the 1600's. After all
: they had some other great scientists back then. Huh? Why didn't
: they do it? And don't tell me it's because Saturn happened to
: line up with Venus in such and such a year.
: --
: Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com

This comment displays such a totality of ignorance of history and of what
science is that no answer that could penetrate and dispel it is possible --
unless someone were willing to dedicate years to the project of
educating you. And even then it may not be possible.

I understand why you have no choice but to believe what you do.

--
(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}})__
({{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ At the back of the blue bus{{} /(**)\
({dje...@telerama.LM.com{{{{{{{Sourcerer{{{{{{{{{{) \../
(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}) ||

Jeremy Konopka

unread,
Dec 11, 1993, 4:29:30 PM12/11/93
to

Hmm, there was little or no 'science' in the modern sense until the 16th
century. Before that people would believe any old crap on blind faith
(kind of like UFOlogists) without ever conducting controlled experiments
to prove or disprove things. After this point small incremental advances
started which over time snowballed into the rapid changes evidenced in
this century. As far as the helpful alien is concerned, how did the alien
get its knowledge? Did it learn on its own or was it taught? If it was
taught then who taught it? If it learned on its own, then what makes you
think humans are incapable of the same process?
I would recommend the book, "The Day the Universe Changed" by James Burke
as a good introduction to the history of science and technology. The TV
programme of the same name is also quite good.

>--
>Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com
--
Jeremy Konopka | opinions mine |

Jeremy Konopka

unread,
Dec 11, 1993, 4:41:05 PM12/11/93
to
In article <CHuA1...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (laura.k.watson) writes:
>In article <dadamsCH...@netcom.com> dad...@netcom.com (Dean Adams) writes:
>>
>>Well, all of those devices may be beyond YOUR comprehension,
>>but thankfully for the human face they were *not* beyond the
>>intellect of many scientists and engineers.
>
>I didn't say they were beyond MY COMPREHENSION, I just happen to
>know that it's a lot easier to understand a simplistic theory of
>something like that than it is to develop it into a working
>functional device that can be reproduced reliably. Especially when
>new materials to make them out of have to be invented first. An
>awful lot of the right things have to happen in the right sequence
>for these ideas even to come to fruition. It's very complex. One
>little failure of one little link in the chain of this progress
>would blow the whole thing out of the water.

And that is exactly what happens all the time. Have you seen early VTRs?
Or early microwaves? Or early Rocket experiments? The history of science
and technology is littered with failed ideas, explosions and unexpected
results. Fortunately most of these people would go back to work and try
another tack until they got it right or found out why it couldn't be done
that way.

>>Its also VERY sad that anyone could be so hooked on aliens that
>>they can't even imagine a televison or microwave oven being
>>invented without them! What causes people to have such a
>>profound detatchment from reality and common sense??? Sheesh.

>Okay, then you just explain to me, just explain why they didn't
>invent electricity and microwave ovens in the 1600's. After all
>they had some other great scientists back then. Huh? Why didn't
>they do it? And don't tell me it's because Saturn happened to
>line up with Venus in such and such a year.

Electricity was not invented, it had existed as a natural force before
people learned to use it. As far as microwaves existing, they couldn't,
the necessary knowledge base did not yet exist. The whole argument is
very silly, you may then argue that the internet is a product of alien
technology since it did not exist in 1960 and there were plenty of smart
people living at that time. The Intel Pentium only became available now,
but Intel existed in 1980, therefore, the Pentium is an alien product.
The Boeing 767 is obviously an alien design since it did not exist in
1955, etc etc etc
As far as Saturn and Venus lining up, talk to the astrology loons about that.

JERRY PUCHYR

unread,
Dec 11, 1993, 7:17:26 PM12/11/93
to
In article <CHu48...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>,

No offense Laura, bud do you really believe that all the modern science is based on some Aliens teaching at leading research centres and universities?
COME OON!!! How do YOU explain the sudden acceleration of science?

Do you actually believe that for example some ET came to IBM during 80''s and
said.. Hey guys why don't you build a PC and sell it to the public?

Or do you think that some ET came over to the French inventor of Steam Automobile, telling him he should put the steam engine on the wheels and make a car?

And how about Wright Brothers? First plane??? Hmm do you think it's based on
Alien Technology? I don't think so.

With your views you are putting down the entire scientific population this planet had for the "century" You are right, lot's of new things were invented.
But definetly not by some ET's. Why don't you show us a single prove or evidence of your ET-RULEZ Science-Sucks accusations.

If you stand behind all of your amusing sci-fi story, then it seems to me that
you are not really well educated about the history, and the scientists who invented things we are still using. Then I would probably think, that you yourself
are a Looney from another planet.

See ya around.

HEY SNATTIE!!!! BEAM ME UP!!!!

Dr. C. Scott Littleton

unread,
Dec 11, 1993, 7:55:39 PM12/11/93
to

I think you and the others who've jumped on Laura's question are being a
bit hard on the poor woman. To be sure, it is possible to trace out the
intricate web of connections that led from the mechanical clock (13th
century) to Copernicus (16th century) to Newton (end of the 17th century),
and then, through Savery (1698), Newcommon (1712), and others who applied
the new scientific discoveries (e.g., "Boyle's Law") to James Watt and the
onset of the Industrial Revolution, etc., etc. But Laura has asked a fair
question: Why didn't electricity, etc., appear in the 16th century; after
all, the human brain hasn't evolved much, if at all, in the last four
hundred years, so our ancestors were as bright (and as dumb) as we are
today, with all of our microchips, computers, and whatnot.

The answer lies, I think, in both the cumulative effect of a series of
discoveries about the way the world actually works, devoid of the "God
factor," plus the growing pressure for new sources of power to turn wheels
and run mills. The traditional sources--air (windmills), water
(water wheels), as well as animal and human muscle power--simply weren't
sufficient as the British and then other Europeans began to extend their
economic hegemony to the planet as whole in the 18th and early 19th
centuries.

But the most basic of these inventions, the steam engine, was far from
new. The first to invent it was an Alexandrian Greek named Hero, circa
130 B.C. Of course, at that time there was a vast and seemingly
endless supply of human muscle power in the persons of the slaves that
did most of the work, and so there was no pressure for a new source of
power (i.e., steam). Hero's device was viewed as a clever toy.

Had Ptolomaic Egypt been under threat at the time (as it would be about a
century later from the Romans), and had there been an epidemic that was
wiping out the slave population, it's possible that this "toy" might have
been developed into a real engine. say, to grind grain. If that had
happened, the "Industrial Revolution" would have started two millennia
before it actually did. Of course, if the same basic timetable had been
followed, that is, approximately two hundred years from steam power to
nuclear energy, the Emperor Caligula might have had an atomic bomb at his
disposal...and today the cockroaches might be at the top of the food
chain.... If our species had survived, though, it's entirely possible
that at this point in absolute time we might be about to launch the first
expedition to the Andromeda Galaxy!

How much input have our ET colonial masters had in all this? Very little,
I suspect, although from time to time--as Laura implies--they MAY have
injected some ideas into the intellectual marketplace. Indeed, they may
still be doing this; giving us an occasional nudge, if only to see how we
react.

So continue to ask questions, Laura, and don't let the know-it-alls

inhibit you! (Though I suspect that there's a fat chance of THAT
happening...) In any case, hang in there--and keep on challenging
conventional wisdom!


--
Cheers, "I think we're property...."
Scott Littleton --Charles Fort
yok...@oxy.edu

JERRY PUCHYR

unread,
Dec 11, 1993, 7:36:40 PM12/11/93
to
In article <CHuA1...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>,

laura.k.watson <wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> wrote:
>In article <dadamsCH...@netcom.com> dad...@netcom.com (Dean Adams) writes:
>>
>>>>C'mon. Use your old bean. What about calculators.
>>
>>Geez, how about GETTING a "bean"!! :->
>>
>>>>And what about microwave ovens.
>>>>And sattelite dishes,
>>>>computers, and even televsion.
>>
>>Well, all of those devices may be beyond YOUR comprehension,
>>but thankfully for the human face they were *not* beyond the
>>intellect of many scientists and engineers.
>
>I didn't say they were beyond MY COMPREHENSION, I just happen to
>know that it's a lot easier to understand a simplistic theory of
>something like that than it is to develop it into a working
>functional device that can be reproduced reliably. Especially when
>new materials to make them out of have to be invented first. An
>awful lot of the right things have to happen in the right sequence
>for these ideas even to come to fruition. It's very complex. One
>little failure of one little link in the chain of this progress
>would blow the whole thing out of the water.

I am sorry to intrude again. But your approach to this topic is totally
unscientific. And it seems to me that we are discussing this topic with
some kid from a 3rd grade who has no idea about history, geography and gener
al science. The above text says nothing technical, nothing scientific.

I would like to what functional device you had in your mind. What particular things have to have in the right sequence??? And what's very complex???

I am sorry but you didn't tell us anything. No offense but it's exactly same
if you wrote 20 lines of Blah Blah Blah Blah and so on. Where are your facts?
Any proves? You have no idea what you are or would like to talk about.

>
>>Its also VERY sad that anyone could be so hooked on aliens that
>>they can't even imagine a televison or microwave oven being
>>invented without them! What causes people to have such a
>>profound detatchment from reality and common sense??? Sheesh.
>
>Okay, then you just explain to me, just explain why they didn't
>invent electricity and microwave ovens in the 1600's. After all
>they had some other great scientists back then. Huh? Why didn't
>they do it? And don't tell me it's because Saturn happened to
>line up with Venus in such and such a year.

This is really pathetic. Now again please specify which country you are in
right now? It doesn't take a 6 year old kid to think what was in America /
Canada in 1600? I ask you the same question.

Wasn't 1600's the Rennesaince time (correct me if I am wrong). I suggest you
take a science or physics book and read on scietists of those times. And again you mentioned they had great scientists back then? Do you know who were they?
Why don't you tell us some examples (that will give you an opportunity to look it up!)

And guess what perhaps they didn't need electricity? They obviously didn't have the resources as later.

Laura, reading your posts I kinda tend to think that you never went to school,
or possibly never travelled to Europe. Or if you did than you were
blindfolded.

HEY SNATTIE!!!!! BEEEEEEAM UP!!!!!

Ciau!!!

ET
ma...@galaxy.spc

>--
>Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com
>


JERRY PUCHYR

unread,
Dec 11, 1993, 7:44:57 PM12/11/93
to

Excellent point, Dean. The religion was very suppresive at those times.
But hey it's almost pointless to point it out to someone who has no idea
about the history or about anything.

Laterz

ET busters!!!

Sourcerer

unread,
Dec 12, 1993, 5:17:59 PM12/12/93
to
Dr. C. Scott Littleton (yok...@cheshire.oxy.edu) wrote:

: In article <2ec7fe$q...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
: >laura.k.watson (wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com) wrote:
: >
: >: Okay, then you just explain to me, just explain why they didn't
: >: invent electricity and microwave ovens in the 1600's. After all
: >: they had some other great scientists back then. Huh? Why didn't
: >: they do it? And don't tell me it's because Saturn happened to
: >: line up with Venus in such and such a year.
: >: --
: >: Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com
: >
: >This comment displays such a totality of ignorance of history and of what
: >science is that no answer that could penetrate and dispel it is possible --
: >unless someone were willing to dedicate years to the project of
: >educating you. And even then it may not be possible.
: >
: >I understand why you have no choice but to believe what you do.
: >
: >--
: >(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}})__
: >({{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ At the back of the blue bus{{} /(**)\
: >({dje...@telerama.LM.com{{{{{{{Sourcerer{{{{{{{{{{) \../
: >(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}) ||

(edit)

: onset of the Industrial Revolution, etc., etc. But Laura has asked a fair


: question: Why didn't electricity, etc., appear in the 16th century; after
: all, the human brain hasn't evolved much, if at all, in the last four
: hundred years, so our ancestors were as bright (and as dumb) as we are
: today, with all of our microchips, computers, and whatnot.

The ancient Chinese invented rockets. Why didn't they explore the solar
system?

Some of us confronted with such questions study history, psychology and
science. And some of us watch Star Trek.

Your answer (here deleted) was very good. That the developmental process,
the accumulation of knowledge, the growing complexity of connections
apparently does not occur to Laura indicates the level of her ideation.
I would add that some cultures just aren't interested in technological
change (which may explain the ancient Chinese attitude to rocketry). They
prefer other models for their society. Technological development as a
cultural norm is only about two centuries old and has been limited to the
West until only recently.

I don't want to stop Laura from asking questions, I think though she ought
to look for answers elsewhere than the first thought that pops into her mind.
No pain, no gain.

Dr. C. Scott Littleton

unread,
Dec 12, 1993, 8:27:22 PM12/12/93
to
In article <2eg5an$q...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
>Dr. C. Scott Littleton (yok...@cheshire.oxy.edu) wrote:
>: In article <2ec7fe$q...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
>: >laura.k.watson (wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com) wrote:
>: >
>: >: Okay, then you just explain to me, just explain why they didn't
>: >: invent electricity and microwave ovens in the 1600's. After all
>: >: they had some other great scientists back then. Huh? Why didn't
>: >: they do it? And don't tell me it's because Saturn happened to
>: >: line up with Venus in such and such a year.
>: >: --
>: >: Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com
>: >
>: >This comment displays such a totality of ignorance of history and of what
>: >science is that no answer that could penetrate and dispel it is possible --
>: >unless someone were willing to dedicate years to the project of
>: >educating you. And even then it may not be possible.
>: >
>: >I understand why you have no choice but to believe what you do.
>: >
>: >--
>: >(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}})__
>: >({{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ At the back of the blue bus{{} /(**)\
>: >({dje...@telerama.LM.com{{{{{{{Sourcerer{{{{{{{{{{) \../
>: >(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}) ||
>
>(edit)
>
>The ancient Chinese invented rockets. Why didn't they explore the solar
>system?
>

This is a fascinating question. During the early years of the Sung
Dynasty (the 11th & 12th centuries), Chinese scholars and inventors had a
field day. Rockets, gunpowder, the magnetic compass, and a great many
other sophisticated things were developed; indeed, at that time China was
FAR ahead of the West in this area. But several things conspired to put
an end to this creative surge. One, of course, was the Mongol invasion,
under Ghengis Khan, which obliterated the Northern Sung at the end of the
12th century. But a more important factor was Confucianism, especially
the Neo-Confucianism of Chu Shi, et al. The idea that rockets, gunpowder,
etc., could have practical uses, or that technological development was an
important end in itself, was simply unacceptable. This was NOT the path
toward virtue, and the embryonic presence of a class of educated
tinkerers, such as would make the West's industrial revolution
six-hundred years later, scared the hell out of the Manderin "sages,"
whose chief claim to intellectual authority was that they'd mastered the
Confucian classics (i.e., the Analects, etc.). So the Establishment
discouraged both invention and empirical scientific research, ostensibly
on the ground that the Middle Kingdom was superior to all others and had
reached what amounted to perfection in this area--which must have amused
the ETs who were assigned to monitor East Asia no end. In any case, by
the time the West came into sustained contact with China in the late 18th
century, it was far more advanced technologically--despite the fact that
many of the basic inventions that had helped it get that way had been
borrowed from China several centuries earlier (e.g., gunpowder. movable
type, etc.).

>Some of us confronted with such questions study history, psychology and
>science. And some of us watch Star Trek.

I do both.

>Your answer (here deleted) was very good.

Thanks!

>That the developmental process,
>the accumulation of knowledge, the growing complexity of connections
>apparently does not occur to Laura indicates the level of her ideation.
>I would add that some cultures just aren't interested in technological
>change (which may explain the ancient Chinese attitude to rocketry). They
>prefer other models for their society.

See above comments re Chinese technology. I don't expect Laura to be an
expert on Chinese history, or or the history of technology per se, for
that matter, but at least she's willing to explore uncharted
territory--which is more than I can say for most of my more conevntional
professional colleagues.

>Technological development as a
>cultural norm is only about two centuries old and has been limited to the
>West until only recently.

That's essentially correct, although there have been other eras when
technological progress has been surprisingly rapid. In addition to the
previously mentioned thrust toward technological sophistication in early
Sung China, let's not forget that many regions of the planet, from
Mesopotamia to Mesoamerica, underwent rapid change in response to the
challenge posed by the retreat of the ice caps and the subsequent profound
climatic changes that affected the entire planet. We generally call this
rapid explosion of knowledge, which saw the invention of the wheel, the
plow, animal transport, and a host of other fundamental things, the
"agricultural revolution." Indeed, communities of less than 150
semi-nomadic hunters and gatherers often evolved into settled farming
village of upwards of 1,000 in less than two centuries (in southern
Anatolia, Palestine, the Zargos, the Tehuacan Valley of Mexico, etc.).

>I don't want to stop Laura from asking questions, I think though she ought
>to look for answers elsewhere than the first thought that pops into her mind.
>No pain, no gain.
>
>--
>(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}})__
>({{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ At the back of the blue bus{{} /(**)\
>({dje...@telerama.LM.com{{{{{{{Sourcerer{{{{{{{{{{) \../
>(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}) ||

I'm sure you don't. But at least she's searching for answers--and willing
to consider new and seemingly impossible ones (at least from the
standpoint of conventional scholarship/science), such as the possibility
that some of our current technological triumphs MAY stem from alien input.
While I don't think that's the case generally, it's not something that
should be ruled out altogether. And so l still encourage Laura to keep on
asking questions, no matter how off-the-wall they may seem at first
glance. I, for one, find her contributions to this dialogue consistently
refreshing and, on occasion, rather enlightening.

In sum, speaking as a teacher with over thirty-one years' experience in
a college classroom, I'd love to have her as a student! That's more than I
can say about most of the people whose prose I read on this echo.

Murray Bott

unread,
Dec 11, 1993, 6:17:09 PM12/11/93
to
Greetings Everyone

Ever since the movie "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" came out I have been
hearing Claims that the Government (American and possibly others) are softening
us up and preparing us for their announcement that UFO,s are coming here and
that they know all about the Extraterrestrial Visits to our Planet

My personal view is that all of this is Just Plain "Wishfull Thinking" on
the part of many "Believers" World Wide"
I think that all of this continued Paranoid thinking about Governments
Coverup etc etc is just plain foolish thinking

Of course there are people who are helping to fuel this all with their own
brand of Disinformation and Fraudlant Claims
But they are doing so knowing there are many "wishful thinkers" and "belivers"
who will readily accept this all without any form of "critical thinking"
And along the way some of these people (who are making the False Claims) or
simply passing them on are also making money from the sale of material/books
as well as Lecture Fees and so on

It is time that the UFO research community (every one in fact) started afresh
and looked at What the UFO phenomenon is all about


--
Domain : mur...@kiwi.gen.nz
Voice : 64-9-6315825
Snail : PO Box 27117, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1030, New Zealand

Sourcerer

unread,
Dec 12, 1993, 11:13:20 PM12/12/93
to
Dr. C. Scott Littleton (yok...@cheshire.oxy.edu) wrote:
: In article <2eg5an$q...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
: >
: >The ancient Chinese invented rockets. Why didn't they explore the solar
: >system?
: >

: This is a fascinating question.

Really? The answer seems obvious.

: >Some of us confronted with such questions study history, psychology and


: >science. And some of us watch Star Trek.

: I do both.

Oh, I do both as well. I just don't give equal weight to the scriptwriters of
Star Trek. Neither do they.

:I don't expect Laura to be an expert on Chinese history, or or the


:history of technology per se,

Neither do I. I *do* expect her to familiarize herself with the subject
she is writing about. The encyclopedia is not an obscure resource.

:for that matter, but at least she's willing to explore uncharted


:territory--which is more than I can say for most of my
:more conevntional professional colleagues.

Does she? I see no evidence of this. Explore? Like the encyclopedia?
Stitching together random thoughts may be exploration of *something*, I guess.

: >I don't want to stop Laura from asking questions, I think though she ought


: >to look for answers elsewhere than the first thought that pops into her mind.
: >No pain, no gain.

: I'm sure you don't. But at least she's searching for answers--and willing


: to consider new and seemingly impossible ones (at least from the
: standpoint of conventional scholarship/science), such as the possibility
: that some of our current technological triumphs MAY stem from alien input.

She doesn't say "MAY" at all. She's convinced. She's not "searching";
she's found the answers. Her mind is closed on this.

Can either you or she name one (1) "of our current technological triumphs"
the development of which is *not* traceable to previous technological
triumphs? If not, then what reason could there be to consider the
"possibility" of "alien input" in their existence?

You will note that the above paragraph does not deny (or affirm, let me
add) the existence of "alien visitors" and the phenomena conceptualized in
that phrase.

: While I don't think that's the case generally, it's not something that


: should be ruled out altogether. And so l still encourage Laura to keep on
: asking questions, no matter how off-the-wall they may seem at first
: glance. I, for one, find her contributions to this dialogue consistently
: refreshing and, on occasion, rather enlightening.

Well, okay -- but only if Laura is 11 years old.

: In sum, speaking as a teacher with over thirty-one years' experience in


: a college classroom, I'd love to have her as a student! That's more than I
: can say about most of the people whose prose I read on this echo.


: --
: Cheers, "I think we're property...."
: Scott Littleton --Charles Fort
: yok...@oxy.edu

Dr. C. Scott Littleton

unread,
Dec 13, 1993, 11:57:35 AM12/13/93
to
In article <2egq50$2...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
>Dr. C. Scott Littleton (yok...@cheshire.oxy.edu) wrote:
>: In article <2eg5an$q...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
>: >
>: >The ancient Chinese invented rockets. Why didn't they explore the solar
>: >system?
>: >
>
>: This is a fascinating question.
>
>Really? The answer seems obvious.

How does your answer differ from the one I included in my previous post--
that is, that the impact of the Mongol invasion and the spread of
Neo-Confucianism combined to inhibit what had been an incipient
scientific/technological revolution?

>
>: >Some of us confronted with such questions study history, psychology and
>: >science. And some of us watch Star Trek.
>
>: I do both.
>
>Oh, I do both as well. I just don't give equal weight to the scriptwriters of
>Star Trek. Neither do they.

Who are "they"?

>:I don't expect Laura to be an expert on Chinese history, or on the


>:history of technology per se,
>
>Neither do I. I *do* expect her to familiarize herself with the subject
>she is writing about. The encyclopedia is not an obscure resource.

I agree that Laura sometimes(!) tends to go off half-cocked. But then so
do most bright people when confronted with something that fascinates them,
but about which they have little objective knowledge. Believe me, I've
seen this happen many times (well, not really "many," but often enough) in my
years of teaching anthropology. It's exciting to watch such students
come to grips with the knowledge they need to really make sense the new
worlds that has opened up for them. I think Laura's in this position at
the moment, and the LAST I want to do is discourage her.


>:for that matter, but at least she's willing to explore uncharted
>:territory--which is more than I can say for most of my
>:more conevntional professional colleagues.
>
>Does she? I see no evidence of this. Explore? Like the encyclopedia?
>Stitching together random thoughts may be exploration of *something*, I guess.

That's how it starts...indeed, we ALL begin by "stitching together random
thoughts"; that's how Einstein and Freud began. The exploration comes
later. She'll do it sooner or later.

>: >I don't want to stop Laura from asking questions, I think though she ought
>: >to look for answers elsewhere than the first thought that pops into her mind.
>: >No pain, no gain.

True enough, but don't be so hard on her for stretching her neurons before
diving head first into the complexities of human history & scientific
achievement.

>: I'm sure you don't. But at least she's searching for answers--and willing
>: to consider new and seemingly impossible ones (at least from the
>: standpoint of conventional scholarship/science), such as the possibility
>: that some of our current technological triumphs MAY stem from alien input.
>
>She doesn't say "MAY" at all. She's convinced. She's not "searching";
>she's found the answers. Her mind is closed on this.
>
>Can either you or she name one (1) "of our current technological triumphs"
>the development of which is *not* traceable to previous technological
>triumphs? If not, then what reason could there be to consider the
>"possibility" of "alien input" in their existence?
>
>You will note that the above paragraph does not deny (or affirm, let me
>add) the existence of "alien visitors" and the phenomena conceptualized in
>that phrase.

See the following quote from my post. No, I can't put my finger on
anything specific that may have derived from alien input--though there
have been rumors about certain advances in radar in the late
'40s and early '50s. The assumption here is that our early radar
beams were adversely affecting their operations, causing crashes, etc.
I really don't put much stock in this; it implies a whole scenario of
secret contacts that has yet to be substantiated, and runs
contrary to the more likely (IMHO) possibility that "they" have
been following what amounts to a "prime directive" (maybe Roddenberry
was right!) and have had very little direct impact on either our
biological or cultural evolution. But as I say below, you can't rule it
out altogether.

>
>: While I don't think that's the case generally, it's not something that
>: should be ruled out altogether. And so l still encourage Laura to keep on
>: asking questions, no matter how off-the-wall they may seem at first
>: glance. I, for one, find her contributions to this dialogue consistently
>: refreshing and, on occasion, rather enlightening.
>
>Well, okay -- but only if Laura is 11 years old.

That's unfair! She may be naive, but she's doing her best and is not afraid
to ask what might at first glance seem to be dumb questions.
That's the mark of an eager student, the kind that keeps a class hopping,
and the basis for the comment made below.

>
>: In sum, speaking as a teacher with over thirty-one years' experience in
>: a college classroom, I'd love to have her as a student! That's more than I
>: can say about most of the people whose prose I read on this echo.
>

Present company excluded, of course.

>--
>(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}})__
>({{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ At the back of the blue bus{{} /(**)\
>({dje...@telerama.LM.com{{{{{{{Sourcerer{{{{{{{{{{) \../
>(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}) ||

In sum, I don't think we're in disagreement over Laura's lack of
sophistication. What I'm saying is that that'll come with time--and a
little friendly guidance from the rest of us. She has a lively mind, and
I would hate to see it smothered by "conventional wisdom."

Happy Holidays!

Nick Paizis~

unread,
Dec 13, 1993, 6:23:24 PM12/13/93
to
In article <1993Dec11.21...@sue.cc.uregina.ca> kono...@aristotle.cs.uregina.ca (Jeremy Konopka) writes:
>
>>Okay, then you just explain to me, just explain why they didn't
>>invent electricity and microwave ovens in the 1600's. After all
>>they had some other great scientists back then. Huh? Why didn't
>>they do it? And don't tell me it's because Saturn happened to
>>line up with Venus in such and such a year.
>
>Electricity was not invented, it had existed as a natural force before
>people learned to use it. As far as microwaves existing, they couldn't,
>the necessary knowledge base did not yet exist. The whole argument is
>very silly, you may then argue that the internet is a product of alien
>technology since it did not exist in 1960 and there were plenty of smart
>people living at that time. The Intel Pentium only became available now,
>but Intel existed in 1980, therefore, the Pentium is an alien product.
>The Boeing 767 is obviously an alien design since it did not exist in
>1955, etc etc etc
>As far as Saturn and Venus lining up, talk to the astrology loons about that.
>
>>--
>>Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com
>--
>Jeremy Konopka | opinions mine |

Sorry Jeremy, but Laura is right, I can confirm that the Intel Pentium is of
alien design. None of this technology existed until it was brought here by
aliens. In fact most of us here are aliens, no really!

Nick P.


--
Not speaking for Intel

JERRY PUCHYR

unread,
Dec 14, 1993, 12:49:34 AM12/14/93
to
In article <2eithc$e...@chnews.intel.com>,

Hahahha another good one!!! This is a great conference. So, when did ET go to Intel and told em about Pentium? For how much did he sell it to them?
People I still haven't seen any proves. By the way, did you know that Eagle Talon was invented by aliens? We didn't have those cars before!

;-)
J.

Sourcerer

unread,
Dec 14, 1993, 6:49:07 AM12/14/93
to
Dr. C. Scott Littleton (yok...@cheshire.oxy.edu) wrote:
: In article <2egq50$2...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
: >Dr. C. Scott Littleton (yok...@cheshire.oxy.edu) wrote:
: >: In article <2eg5an$q...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
: >: >
: >: >The ancient Chinese invented rockets. Why didn't they explore the solar
: >: >system?
: >: >
: >
: >: This is a fascinating question.
: >
: >Really? The answer seems obvious.

: How does your answer differ from the one I included in my previous post--
: that is, that the impact of the Mongol invasion and the spread of
: Neo-Confucianism combined to inhibit what had been an incipient
: scientific/technological revolution?

I think the concept of planets as *places*, i.e. planetary bodies with the
same material properties as earth, in space, was not known in Chinese
philosophy. Therefore it could not occur to them to travel to them.

: >
: >: >Some of us confronted with such questions study history, psychology and


: >: >science. And some of us watch Star Trek.
: >
: >: I do both.
: >
: >Oh, I do both as well. I just don't give equal weight to the scriptwriters of
: >Star Trek. Neither do they.

: Who are "they"?

The scriptwriters. The scriptwriters do not believe they are doing basic
research in science etc, and do not give equal weight to their storytelling
and basic scientific research.

: >Does she? I see no evidence of this. Explore? Like the encyclopedia?


: >Stitching together random thoughts may be exploration of *something*, I guess.

: That's how it starts...indeed, we ALL begin by "stitching together random
: thoughts"; that's how Einstein and Freud began. The exploration comes
: later. She'll do it sooner or later.

Check out the def of 'random' in a dictionary. Einstein's and Freud's
methodology was hardly random

: >: >I don't want to stop Laura from asking questions, I think though she ought


: >: >to look for answers elsewhere than the first thought that pops into her mind.
: >: >No pain, no gain.

: >
: >Can either you or she name one (1) "of our current technological triumphs"


: >the development of which is *not* traceable to previous technological
: >triumphs? If not, then what reason could there be to consider the
: >"possibility" of "alien input" in their existence?
: >
: >You will note that the above paragraph does not deny (or affirm, let me
: >add) the existence of "alien visitors" and the phenomena conceptualized in
: >that phrase.

: See the following quote from my post. No, I can't put my finger on
: anything specific that may have derived from alien input--though there
: have been rumors about certain advances in radar in the late
: '40s and early '50s. The assumption here is that our early radar
: beams were adversely affecting their operations, causing crashes, etc.
: I really don't put much stock in this; it implies a whole scenario of
: secret contacts that has yet to be substantiated, and runs
: contrary to the more likely (IMHO) possibility that "they" have
: been following what amounts to a "prime directive" (maybe Roddenberry
: was right!) and have had very little direct impact on either our
: biological or cultural evolution. But as I say below, you can't rule it
: out altogether.

There is not enough here to encourage speculation about alien
intervention. "Not ruling it out" does not open the floodgates of
speculation for me. That it does for some people indicates a
rationalization, which puts it on the level of a wish seeking fullfilment.

: >
: >: While I don't think that's the case generally, it's not something that


: >: should be ruled out altogether. And so l still encourage Laura to keep on
: >: asking questions, no matter how off-the-wall they may seem at first
: >: glance. I, for one, find her contributions to this dialogue consistently
: >: refreshing and, on occasion, rather enlightening.
: >
: >Well, okay -- but only if Laura is 11 years old.

: That's unfair! She may be naive, but she's doing her best and is not afraid
: to ask what might at first glance seem to be dumb questions.
: That's the mark of an eager student, the kind that keeps a class hopping,
: and the basis for the comment made below.

For all I know Laura is 11 years old. Or 15. Or 9.


: In sum, I don't think we're in disagreement over Laura's lack of


: sophistication. What I'm saying is that that'll come with time--and a
: little friendly guidance from the rest of us. She has a lively mind, and
: I would hate to see it smothered by "conventional wisdom."

The problem she is having has nothing really to do with knowledge of
things and ideas and everything to do with assessing and weighing them.
Some things and ideas simply have more credibility than other things and
ideas. The playing field is not that level.

Dr. C. Scott Littleton

unread,
Dec 14, 1993, 12:41:50 PM12/14/93
to
In article <2ek97j$6...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
>Dr. C. Scott Littleton (yok...@cheshire.oxy.edu) wrote:
>: In article <2egq50$2...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
>: >Dr. C. Scott Littleton (yok...@cheshire.oxy.edu) wrote:
>: >: In article <2eg5an$q...@telerama.lm.com> dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
>: >: >
>: >: >The ancient Chinese invented rockets. Why didn't they explore the solar
>: >: >system?
>: >: >
>: >
>: >: This is a fascinating question.
>: >
>: >Really? The answer seems obvious.
>
>: How does your answer differ from the one I included in my previous post--
>: that is, that the impact of the Mongol invasion and the spread of
>: Neo-Confucianism combined to inhibit what had been an incipient
>: scientific/technological revolution?
>
>I think the concept of planets as *places*, i.e. planetary bodies with the
>same material properties as earth, in space, was not known in Chinese
>philosophy. Therefore it could not occur to them to travel to them.
>

That's correct. But the ideological constraints I mentioned precluded
them from getting to the point where that idea might have occurred to
them. Had they reached that point--another century or so?--they might
well have accelerated their experiments in rocketry, and who knows how far
ahead the whole human race might be at this point?

>: >
>: >: >Some of us confronted with such questions study history, psychology and
>: >: >science. And some of us watch Star Trek.
>: >
>: >: I do both.
>: >
>: >Oh, I do both as well. I just don't give equal weight to the scriptwriters of
>: >Star Trek. Neither do they.
>
>: Who are "they"?

>
>The scriptwriters. The scriptwriters do not believe they are doing basic
>research in science etc, and do not give equal weight to their storytelling
>and basic scientific research.

OK, that clears up the "they" business. No, I'm sure they don't consider
themselves to be scientists, but I know some people who've sold scripts to
both the old and new Star Trek shows, as well as "Deep Space Nine," and
they tell me that the there are some heavy guidelines re what they can and
cannot include as gimmicks. From the outset, the Gene Roddenberry
established the precedent of staying as close to where scientists think we
MIGHT be in three hundred-odd years as possible. (Incidently, Roddenberry
himself was something of a "believer" when it came over the years.)


>: >Does she? I see no evidence of this. Explore? Like the encyclopedia?
>: >Stitching together random thoughts may be exploration of *something*, I guess.
>
>: That's how it starts...indeed, we ALL begin by "stitching together random
>: thoughts"; that's how Einstein and Freud began. The exploration comes
>: later. She'll do it sooner or later.
>
>Check out the def of 'random' in a dictionary. Einstein's and Freud's
>methodology was hardly random
>

Not in retrospect. But I'm convinced that most major scientific (and
scholarly) breakthroughs have come about serendipitously. I can verify
this personally. My discovery that the core of the Arthurian/Grail
legends is rooted not in the ancient Celtic tradition but was brought into
Europe by Sarmatians, Alans, and other migrants from ancient Scythia (what
is now southern Russia and the Ukraine) toward the end of the Roman period
resulted from the chance observation, apropos of nothing in particular, by
a former student that a troop of Sarmatian auxiliary cavalry was posted to
Britain in 175 A.D. The point is that once the discovery (or whatever) is
made, it often looks as if it was inevitable, the result of a systematic
research project. But in fact most such discoveries are the result of
random events. No one could have predicted that I would stop to chat with
my former student while he was reading Sulimirski's THE SARMATIANS, any
more than Watson's timely dream, in which he "saw" a double spiral
staircase and thereby found the key to the structure of the DNA molecule,
could have been predicted. I don't mean to imply that Laura is on the
threshold of a major discovery; that's extremely improbable. But stranger
things have happened....

Again, if somebody had told me twenty years ago that I would make what
some of my colleagues consider to be a major contribution to Arthurian
studies I would have said they were crazy. I was not a medievalist, let
alone an Arthurian scholar. But then I happened to be in the right place
at the right time, and bingo! The random factor cannot be discounted!


>
>: >
>: >: While I don't think that's the case generally, it's not something that
>: >: should be ruled out altogether. And so l still encourage Laura to keep on
>: >: asking questions, no matter how off-the-wall they may seem at first
>: >: glance. I, for one, find her contributions to this dialogue consistently
>: >: refreshing and, on occasion, rather enlightening.
>: >
>: >Well, okay -- but only if Laura is 11 years old.
>
>: That's unfair! She may be naive, but she's doing her best and is not afraid
>: to ask what might at first glance seem to be dumb questions.
>: That's the mark of an eager student, the kind that keeps a class hopping,
>: and the basis for the comment made below.
>
>For all I know Laura is 11 years old. Or 15. Or 9.

I think she's who she says she is: a grownup lady with some technical
training and a hyper-curious mind who's not afraid to ask off-the-wall
questions. And more power to her!


>
>: In sum, I don't think we're in disagreement over Laura's lack of
>: sophistication. What I'm saying is that that'll come with time--and a
>: little friendly guidance from the rest of us. She has a lively mind, and
>: I would hate to see it smothered by "conventional wisdom."
>
>The problem she is having has nothing really to do with knowledge of
>things and ideas and everything to do with assessing and weighing them.
>Some things and ideas simply have more credibility than other things and
>ideas. The playing field is not that level.

I agree--but who can say in advance what's more and what's less credible?
Yes, I have my own priorities in this regard: I think that most if not
all traditional religious explanations of how the world/universe works are
less credible than scientific ones. Yet embedded in some if not all
religious beliefs MAY be reflections of forces, entities, etc., that we're
only beginning to understand scientifically. Much of the so-called
"paranormal" falls in this category, along with, of course, the UFO/alien
phenomenon. My own Arthurian research is a case in point. Although my
collaborator Linda Malcor and I are convinced we've discovered an
important new set of historical relationships--an opinion shared by a
growing number of colleagues and Garland Publishing Inc. (New York), which
will publish our book FROM SCYTHIA TO CAMELOT next April--there are still
some diehard Celticists "out there" who are convinced that we're as crazy,
as off-the-wall as most a.a.v. subscribers think Laura and John _-_
Winston are. In any case, don't be so quick to condemn people like Laura
(and John, too, for that matter). You never really know precisely where
the quest for truth will take you...or who might be the one to show you
the way.

>
>--
>(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}})__
>({{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ At the back of the blue bus{{} /(**)\
>({dje...@telerama.LM.com{{{{{{{Sourcerer{{{{{{{{{{) \../
>(}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}) ||

Again, Happy Holidays! (I was about to say "Happy Mithra's Birthday!" but
that would open another can of peas, if not worms.)

A J P Ducker (UG3)

unread,
Dec 14, 1993, 1:47:43 PM12/14/93
to
In article <2eg5an$q...@telerama.lm.com>, dje...@telerama.lm.com (Sourcerer) writes:
|> I would add that some cultures just aren't interested in technological
|> change (which may explain the ancient Chinese attitude to rocketry). They
|> prefer other models for their society. Technological development as a
|> cultural norm is only about two centuries old and has been limited to the
|> West until only recently.

Precisely, the Romans had heros engine, which (if they had thought of
it) would have reduced the amont of work needed for all sorts of things.
But, they preferred to use slaves. If people don't wanto to innovate,
they wont.

Samael
--
********************************************************************************
The eyes * In the end * In the end? * Andrew Ducker :a...@uk.ac.stir.cs
are windows * all our * Nothing ever * Roleplayer, Juggler, Student.
on the soul * windows are* ends. * AKA: Samael
* mirrors * * Arguments a speciality
********************************************************************************

Jeremy Konopka

unread,
Dec 14, 1993, 2:42:17 PM12/14/93
to
In article <2eithc$e...@chnews.intel.com> npa...@sedona.intel.com (Nick Paizis~) writes:
>In article <1993Dec11.21...@sue.cc.uregina.ca> kono...@aristotle.cs.uregina.ca (Jeremy Konopka) writes:
>>Electricity was not invented, it had existed as a natural force before
>>people learned to use it. As far as microwaves existing, they couldn't,
>>the necessary knowledge base did not yet exist. The whole argument is
>>very silly, you may then argue that the internet is a product of alien
>>technology since it did not exist in 1960 and there were plenty of smart
>>people living at that time. The Intel Pentium only became available now,
>>but Intel existed in 1980, therefore, the Pentium is an alien product.
>>The Boeing 767 is obviously an alien design since it did not exist in
>>1955, etc etc etc
>>As far as Saturn and Venus lining up, talk to the astrology loons about that.
>>--
>>Jeremy Konopka | opinions mine |
>
>Sorry Jeremy, but Laura is right, I can confirm that the Intel Pentium is of
>alien design. None of this technology existed until it was brought here by
>aliens. In fact most of us here are aliens, no really!
>
>Nick P.
>--
>Not speaking for Intel

Aha! You have fallen into my logical trap. The Pentium is obviously not
a product of a higher intelligence, (being overheated and underpowered) so
at best it could be a product of some human intelligence. Now the MIPS
R4000....

JERRY PUCHYR

unread,
Dec 14, 1993, 9:36:20 PM12/14/93
to
In article <1993Dec14.19...@sue.cc.uregina.ca>,


Right on DUDE!!!! Hahahah. I just love to follow these ALIEN productions
of electronics. Most people believing in this, obviously don't have much
of a background in history of electronics and science.

>

Laterz

Jerry

laura.k.watson

unread,
Dec 15, 1993, 12:04:44 PM12/15/93
to
In article <CHwBH...@ariel.cs.yorku.ca> cs92...@ariel.cs.yorku.ca (JERRY PUCHYR) writes:
>>Well, what you say is true enough generally, however, it seems to me
>>that the rapidity which things have developed in this century, after
>>science was just crawling along at a snail's pace for several thousand
>>years, it might seem to indicate that knowledgeable aliens in various
>>scientific disciplines might have come along and helped things along a
>>bit. How do you explain the sudden accleration of science and
>>technology otherwise?
>
>No offense Laura, bud do you really believe that all the modern science
>is based on some Aliens teaching at leading research centres and
>universities? COME OON!!! How do YOU explain the sudden acceleration
>of science?

That is most assuredly not what I said. My thinking at the moment
is going more in the direction of wondering why is it that our society
at this time in history is able to support the organization and
sustainment of all these research centers and and universities such
that we are able to make all these modern scientific advancements.
They would have even gotten a research center off the drawing board
back in the days of the feudal system, for example. What is it that
is different now? Could it be that people are different? Is there
something different about people in our day and time? Could it be
something about people that has changed? People are somehow different?
Maybe there was some kind of alien involvement in changing people?

>Do you actually believe that for example some ET came to IBM during
>80''s and said.. Hey guys why don't you build a PC and sell it to the
>public?

Well, I won't rule that out as a possibility. I mean, I have read that
some aliens can make themselves invisible. And they can project
thoughts into people's minds. So, maybe something like that did happen.
Maybe it did not. IBM was started by a Baptist sunday school teacher
anyway, wasn't it? Poor guy (whoever he was) probably thought God was
leading him to develop the PC. Or maybe he had a dream and when he
woke up he thought it was a good idea.

>Or do you think that some ET came over to the French inventor of Steam
>Automobile, telling him he should put the steam engine on the wheels
>and make a car?

In my mind it is not impossible.

>And how about Wright Brothers? First plane??? Hmm do you think it's
>based on Alien Technology? I don't think so.

I didn't say it was based on alien technology. Not at all. But maybe
some invisible alien came along when they were having some difficulty
figuring out how to make it work. At some critical point in time,
maybe the right idea just sort of popped into Orville's head. I can
remember when I was in engineering school and was having difficulty
getting a computer program to run right. At that time I believed
in God and I was praying for God to help me figure it out. Then the
solution to my problem just sort of popped into my mind. Now at
this point in time, I can no longer discount the possibility that maybe
it was not God but maybe some sort of alien intervention in my life.
Of course, why they would want to help me solve my computer program,
I don't know, but maybe they might have a reason for it.

>With your views you are putting down the entire scientific population
>this planet had for the "century" You are right, lot's of new things
>were invented.
>But definetly not by some ET's. Why don't you show us a single prove
>or evidence of your ET-RULEZ Science-Sucks accusations.

Oh dear, well, it seems I have offended you. Now, I certainly didn't
mean to imply that modern science was a bad thing or that we are
a bunch of stupid helpless idiots. Quite the contrary. I'm impressed
with many of our achievements. I just think that maybe we had a little
help here and there, say maybe at a few critical points where we
otherwise might have failed all on our own, as we have done at other
times in history. I mean, I don't really know, I'm just kind of
thinking about this thing here and I want to hear other people's ideas
as to what could be going on.

--
Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com

Robert Houghton

unread,
Dec 15, 1993, 8:23:09 PM12/15/93
to

How about velcro? It was introduced to the world in general
about 4 years after the crash at Roswell New Mexico. The
occupants that were recovered were wearing suits with no buttons
or zippers. No one could, at first, figure out how the suits were
put on and off. Turns out the mystery fastener was in fact
velcro.....
Rob

Carla Beth Schumann

unread,
Dec 15, 1993, 11:09:38 PM12/15/93
to
In article <CHu48...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (laura.k.watson) writes:

>Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com
This is plausible.

Our mordern society began, when Nicola Tesla create triple phase AC electricity,We went from the 'dark ages', to our current state in a few decades.

Furthermore, Teasla said that his ideas came to him as 'voices in his head'.

I'm quoting a book I read on Tesla. I can't remember the title, but I remember the author was female.

I have been wanting to post to this group for a year, I am glad I have gotten the courage up to do it. I just hope the N $ a doesn't pick this up. You can
never be to paranoid. (What was that.... :-)


>


Thad P Floryan

unread,
Dec 16, 1993, 7:25:15 AM12/16/93
to
In article <CI3t6...@freenet.carleton.ca>
an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Robert Houghton) writes:

The above is all bushwa.

I recall hearing a radio interview decades ago with the inventor of Velcro(tm),
and his invention was the end-result of curiousity about a very natural and
common phenomenon.

He was an outdoorsman and wondered why burrs and other parts of certain
plants stuck to clothes so tenaciously. The plants, of course, evolved the
micro hooks &tc to help spread their seed.

Investigation of the burrs, pods and seeds under high magnification revealed
the methods used by the plant parts to fasten themselves to animal hair and
fur (and, of course, clothes!)

He "simply" (after much experimentation) reproduced the techniques used by
those plants to create what is now known as Velcro.

Natural, and no "alien" technology involved at all.


Thad Floryan [ th...@btr.com, th...@cup.portal.com, th...@netcom.com ]

laura.k.watson

unread,
Dec 16, 1993, 8:30:27 AM12/16/93
to
In article <CI3t6...@freenet.carleton.ca> an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Robert Houghton) writes:
>
>

Gee, that really is interesting. If I'd said that somebody would
have said it was some feminist rambling. I really like Velcro because
my 3-year old can put on her shoes by herself and I don't have to
tie her shoelaces. Velcro is definitely a triumph of modern
technology. Wonderful stuff.
--
Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com

Ken Jensen

unread,
Dec 16, 1993, 2:43:40 PM12/16/93
to
...(If I'd said that somebody would
have said it was some feminist rambling.)

Not feminist rambling, just rambling.

-- my views, not my employer's

Carla Beth Schumann

unread,
Dec 16, 1993, 11:31:33 PM12/16/93
to
You sir, are CORRECT!

Tom Randolph

unread,
Dec 13, 1993, 11:17:21 AM12/13/93
to

In article <dadamsCH...@netcom.com>, dad...@netcom.com (Dean Adams) writes...

>>>And what about microwave ovens.
>>>And sattelite dishes,
>>>computers, and even televsion.
>
>Its also VERY sad that anyone could be so hooked on aliens that
>they can't even imagine a televison or microwave oven being
>invented without them! What causes people to have such a
>profound detatchment from reality and common sense??? Sheesh.

Not to mention those who can't conceive of an ancient people who could level the
ground accurately, and then build a pyramid of worked stone on top of it, even
after it's been demonstrated that these things weren't at all difficult to do
with even the most primitive methods...

It's borderline religious, like many facets of the UFO jewel... aliens
invented it, and that's all there is to it. Any evidence to the contrary is a
coverup.

The infamous NASA video is a perfect example. Now entrenched UFO legend, it
shows nothing more than a couple of specs of light. But a well known alien
sensationalizer called it SDI lasers, and the rest is history.
-Tom R. rand...@est.enet.dec.com

Rich Payne

unread,
Dec 17, 1993, 9:32:22 AM12/17/93
to
In article <CHu48...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (laura.k.watson) writes:
>In article <2e60sq$a...@news.ysu.edu> am...@yfn.ysu.edu (Dirk John Fischer) writes:
>
>>laura, laura, laura . . . cause & effect. We didn't have 'all our modern
>>technology' before WWII either. Cause? Effect? All that you have mentioned
>>as 'modern' technologies have LONG & well document evolutions from basic
>>scientific principles. C'mon.
>
>Well, what you say is true enough generally, however, it seems to me
>that the rapidity which things have developed in this century, after
>science was just crawling along at a snail's pace for several thousand
>years, it might seem to indicate that knowledgeable aliens in various
>scientific disciplines might have come along and helped things along a
>bit. How do you explain the sudden accleration of science and
>technology otherwise?

There was no organized Science for most of human history. The scientific
invesigation which was done was done by wealthy dilitants mostly, and
there were few of these. As has been pointed out, most of the developments
have been by slow plodding, well-documented steps. Since you say that
you are an engineer, I find it odd that you did not cover these things
in the core classes. Your lack of knowledge in these areas is hard for
me to understand.

I am reminded of some posters (in another newsgroup) claiming that the
roads (in the US) were designed for 55MPH, displaying a complete ignorance
or recent history. Luckily I was in Okinawa at the time, I missed the
gas lines clean.

Basically, speculation based upon ignorance (which is different from
stupidity) is usually not worth much, but ignorance is curable.

>--
>Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com

(why do you have 150 spaces after your name? Its a pain to edit them out.)

Rich

pay...@netcom.com


--

laura.k.watson

unread,
Dec 17, 1993, 4:39:15 PM12/17/93
to
In article <paynerCI...@netcom.com> pay...@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:

>There was no organized Science for most of human history. The scientific
>invesigation which was done was done by wealthy dilitants mostly, and
>there were few of these. As has been pointed out, most of the developments
>have been by slow plodding, well-documented steps. Since you say that
>you are an engineer, I find it odd that you did not cover these things
>in the core classes. Your lack of knowledge in these areas is hard for
>me to understand.

Well, I will say that I did not take any course on history of science
or history of technology in school, nor have I particularly been
interested in learning about it up till now so didn't read any books
about it on my own. We were only required to take one history
course to graduate and the one I took was not about history
of science. I don't even remember what kind of history course
I did take at this point.

>Basically, speculation based upon ignorance (which is different from
>stupidity) is usually not worth much, but ignorance is curable.

Yeah, that's the ticket. Next time I'll read an entire encyclopedia
and 5 books on a given subject before I dare even mention it in a
posting. Golly gee. I'll buy an encyclopedia and put it on the
headboard of my bed and faithfully read a chapter a night. Yeah,
yeah, that's the ticket. I'm surely going to do it.

So many books, so little time.
--
Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com
We did not inherit the earth from our mothers and fathers, we are
borrowing it from our children and grandchildren.
(Saying I saw on a blanket in a store)

Rich Payne

unread,
Dec 18, 1993, 1:38:01 PM12/18/93
to
In article <CI363...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (laura.k.watson) writes:
>In article <CHwBH...@ariel.cs.yorku.ca> cs92...@ariel.cs.yorku.ca (JERRY PUCHYR) writes:
>>>Well, what you say is true enough generally, however, it seems to me
>>>that the rapidity which things have developed in this century, after
>>>science was just crawling along at a snail's pace for several thousand
>>>years, it might seem to indicate that knowledgeable aliens in various
>>>scientific disciplines might have come along and helped things along a
>>>bit. How do you explain the sudden accleration of science and
>>>technology otherwise?
>>
>>No offense Laura, bud do you really believe that all the modern science
>>is based on some Aliens teaching at leading research centres and
>>universities? COME OON!!! How do YOU explain the sudden acceleration
>>of science?
>
>That is most assuredly not what I said. My thinking at the moment
>is going more in the direction of wondering why is it that our society
>at this time in history is able to support the organization and
>sustainment of all these research centers and and universities such
>that we are able to make all these modern scientific advancements.
>They would have even gotten a research center off the drawing board
>back in the days of the feudal system, for example. What is it that
>is different now? Could it be that people are different?

Could it be that there was no mechanism for investigation in pre-
industrial agrarian societies? In the extremely stable social enviornment
of the time, any change was looked upon with suspicion if not rejected
outright. (if it was good enough for my father, and grandfather, and
great grandfather, it's good enough for me).

Lack of stability is one of todays big problems BTW. Read _Future_Shock_
by Alvin Toffler. He has a new book out which I have not yet read.

> Is there
>something different about people in our day and time? Could it be
>something about people that has changed? People are somehow different?
>Maybe there was some kind of alien involvement in changing people?

Could it be that our idea sets and base knowledge have changed rapidly,
and continue to change at an even greater rate?


>>Do you actually believe that for example some ET came to IBM during
>>80''s and said.. Hey guys why don't you build a PC and sell it to the
>>public?
>
>Well, I won't rule that out as a possibility.

A little bit of research would however. Personally I recall when the
Z80 came out, and many (including myself) doubted that Zilog could
deliver. BTW, it's curious what happened with IBM and why they got
involved with PCs. Formerly they built only mainframes. My observation
is that Apple developed the home computer market (which was begun by
Altair and in the 8080 days), and IBM noticed one day that there was
a market for home computers and decided to take over the market. They
did not, and then they forgot the open architechure that allowed the
PC market to explode, and now they are in big trouble. Texas Instruments
built a crappy 16-bit system, and demanded a fortune to allow anybody
to develop for it. Noone did, TI lost a bundle, and their ground floor
position in the PC market. Now they build PC clones.

It's a fascinating storyu with many (human) players, and much (human)
invention and innovation, and lots of big (human) successes and failures.

> I mean, I have read that
>some aliens can make themselves invisible. And they can project
>thoughts into people's minds. So, maybe something like that did happen.
>Maybe it did not. IBM was started by a Baptist sunday school teacher
>anyway, wasn't it? Poor guy (whoever he was) probably thought God was
>leading him to develop the PC. Or maybe he had a dream and when he
>woke up he thought it was a good idea.

An more likely maybe is -maybe people did it-. Random speculation in the
face of an abundance of information seem more like an avenue towards
wish fulfillment than any sort of quest for "truth." And "It could have
happened" is the starting point for must urban legends. I might post
the urban legend FAQ to illustrate.

>>Or do you think that some ET came over to the French inventor of Steam
>>Automobile, telling him he should put the steam engine on the wheels
>>and make a car?
>
>In my mind it is not impossible.

So then you have no selection criteria at all, and uncritically accept
everything as "not impossible"?


>>And how about Wright Brothers? First plane??? Hmm do you think it's
>>based on Alien Technology? I don't think so.
>
>I didn't say it was based on alien technology. Not at all. But maybe
>some invisible alien came along when they were having some difficulty
>figuring out how to make it work. At some critical point in time,
>maybe the right idea just sort of popped into Orville's head. I can
>remember when I was in engineering school and was having difficulty
>getting a computer program to run right. At that time I believed
>in God and I was praying for God to help me figure it out. Then the
>solution to my problem just sort of popped into my mind. Now at
>this point in time, I can no longer discount the possibility that maybe
>it was not God but maybe some sort of alien intervention in my life.
>Of course, why they would want to help me solve my computer program,
>I don't know, but maybe they might have a reason for it.

No Laura, it was the greys, and they abducted Orville's wife, had sex
with her, dropped her off, and she invented the airplane. Later they
came back and stold the baby.

You have stumbled onto a valuable learning technique. Study a subject
till you are sick of it, or at minimum till you know all the equations
and are falimiar with the mechanics of the subject, then forget it and
let the subconsious chew on it. Anywhere from several days to a week
later when you start working on the problems, usually you will understand
them, and wonder what the problem was. Praying is an optional and unecessary
step (by all means, do it if you wish).



>>With your views you are putting down the entire scientific population
>>this planet had for the "century" You are right, lot's of new things
>>were invented.
>>But definetly not by some ET's. Why don't you show us a single prove
>>or evidence of your ET-RULEZ Science-Sucks accusations.
>
>Oh dear, well, it seems I have offended you. Now, I certainly didn't
>mean to imply that modern science was a bad thing or that we are
>a bunch of stupid helpless idiots. Quite the contrary. I'm impressed
>with many of our achievements.

But you seem to be attributing them to aliens enmasse. It sounds like
you are impressed with the aliens achievments to me.

> I just think that maybe we had a little
>help here and there, say maybe at a few critical points where we
>otherwise might have failed all on our own, as we have done at other
>times in history.

What do you mean by "critical points?" Critical by which criteria?
Did the aliens help at White Sands during the A-bomb development?

> I mean, I don't really know, I'm just kind of
>thinking about this thing here and I want to hear other people's ideas
>as to what could be going on.

Now you know. Excuse me, my alien is late and I need some help on this
diagnostic korn shell script. Do you know how to access registers directly
in Sparc processors?

>--
>Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com >>EOL, why the 150 spaces after your sig?


Rich

pay...@netcom.com


--

Rich Payne

unread,
Dec 18, 1993, 1:50:00 PM12/18/93
to
In article <2eon22$6...@ucunix.san.uc.edu> schu...@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Carla Beth Schumann) writes:
>In article <CHu48...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (laura.k.watson) writes:
>>In article <2e60sq$a...@news.ysu.edu> am...@yfn.ysu.edu (Dirk John Fischer) writes:
>>
>>>laura, laura, laura . . . cause & effect. We didn't have 'all our modern
>>>technology' before WWII either. Cause? Effect? All that you have mentioned
>>>as 'modern' technologies have LONG & well document evolutions from basic
>>>scientific principles. C'mon.
>>
>>Well, what you say is true enough generally, however, it seems to me
>>that the rapidity which things have developed in this century, after
>>science was just crawling along at a snail's pace for several thousand
>>years, it might seem to indicate that knowledgeable aliens in various
>>scientific disciplines might have come along and helped things along a
>>bit. How do you explain the sudden accleration of science and
>>technology otherwise?
>>
>>--
>
>>Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com

<long lines broken, please try to hit return at the end of every line>

>This is plausible.

Do you understand how exponential growth works?


>Our mordern society began, when Nicola Tesla create triple phase AC electricity
>,We went from the 'dark ages', to our current state in a few decades.

When you say "the 'dark ages'", what period of time are you referring to?
I suggest that your use of the term is different form general usage.



>Furthermore, Teasla said that his ideas came to him as 'voices in his head'.

Tesla was a genius, and a loon. Most loonies (99.9999999%) are not genius'
however.



>I'm quoting a book I read on Tesla. I can't remember the title, but I
>remember the author was female.

The sex of the author is significant?


>I have been wanting to post to this group for a year, I am glad I have
>gotten the courage up to do it. I just hope the N $ a doesn't pick this
>up. You can never be to paranoid. (What was that.... :-)

Congratulations, and do not be discouraged if others fail to agree
with you or support you. On the other hand, do not ignore good, well
thought out posts which suggest either that you are wrong, or that
their might be a better way to look at something.


Rich

pay...@netcom.com


--

Rich Payne

unread,
Dec 18, 1993, 2:50:21 PM12/18/93
to
In article <CI785...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (laura.k.watson) writes:
>In article <paynerCI...@netcom.com> pay...@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>
>>There was no organized Science for most of human history. The scientific
>>invesigation which was done was done by wealthy dilitants mostly, and
>>there were few of these. As has been pointed out, most of the developments
>>have been by slow plodding, well-documented steps. Since you say that
>>you are an engineer, I find it odd that you did not cover these things
>>in the core classes. Your lack of knowledge in these areas is hard for
>>me to understand.
>
>Well, I will say that I did not take any course on history of science
>or history of technology in school, nor have I particularly been
>interested in learning about it up till now so didn't read any books
>about it on my own. We were only required to take one history
>course to graduate and the one I took was not about history
>of science. I don't even remember what kind of history course
>I did take at this point.

I think it was Leibnitz (sp?) (remember calculus?) who came up with the
historical approach to teaching, and it has been used by schools and
universities ever since in most areas.

Physics might start with Archimedes Screw, and modern physics
starts with the greek theory of indivisible particles and builds
from there. Even if you do not remember the historical events
(what did Gauss and Maxwell do?) it gives you a good historical
perspective and a good feeling for the timescale of the development
odf science and technology. Your ingorance in these areas is
somthing I have a hard time understanding.



>>Basically, speculation based upon ignorance (which is different from
>>stupidity) is usually not worth much, but ignorance is curable.
>
>Yeah, that's the ticket. Next time I'll read an entire encyclopedia
>and 5 books on a given subject before I dare even mention it in a
>posting. Golly gee. I'll buy an encyclopedia and put it on the
>headboard of my bed and faithfully read a chapter a night. Yeah,
>yeah, that's the ticket. I'm surely going to do it.

And this... Laura, what did you do in college?

I'm reminded of reading an article in Dr. Dobbs Journal of someone
spending an inordinate amout of time and effort trying to fing out
how to calculate the tangent function (he needed to do it in assy).
Series expansions are covered in the first calculus course, and he
never did identify the taylor expansion he ended up using. But he
did not bill himself as an engineer, so his ignorance in this area
was to be expected.


>So many books, so little time

Close... ;^}

>--
>Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com
>We did not inherit the earth from our mothers and fathers, we are
>borrowing it from our children and grandchildren.
> (Saying I saw on a blanket in a store)


Rich

pay...@netcom.com

--

Rich Payne

unread,
Dec 18, 1993, 3:07:38 PM12/18/93
to
In article <1993Dec14....@cheshire.oxy.edu> yok...@cheshire.oxy.edu (Dr. C. Scott Littleton) writes:

<3,751 characters carefully stored in the bit bucket>



>Not in retrospect. But I'm convinced that most major scientific (and
>scholarly) breakthroughs have come about serendipitously.

Just out of curiosity, do you include the transistor and cosmic background
radiation in your serendipitous umbrulla?

<more additions the /dev/null archive site>

>>: >: >No pain, no gain.

Opps, deleted the attribute, sorry. I would like to point out that it is
often the case that too much pain will lead to an avoidance response,
expecially of there is a corresponding lack of pleasure.

>Again, Happy Holidays! (I was about to say "Happy Mithra's Birthday!" but
>that would open another can of peas, if not worms.)

Happy Holidaze...

>--
>Cheers, "I think we're property...."
>Scott Littleton --Charles Fort
>yok...@oxy.edu


Rich

pay...@netcom.com


--

Rich Payne

unread,
Dec 18, 1993, 3:12:07 PM12/18/93
to
In article <CI4qu...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> wat...@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (laura.k.watson) writes:
>In article <CI3t6...@freenet.carleton.ca> an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Robert Houghton) writes:
>>
>>
>>How about velcro? It was introduced to the world in general
>>about 4 years after the crash at Roswell New Mexico. The
>>occupants that were recovered were wearing suits with no buttons
>>or zippers. No one could, at first, figure out how the suits were
>>put on and off. Turns out the mystery fastener was in fact
>>velcro.....
>> Rob
>
>Gee, that really is interesting. If I'd said that somebody would
>have said it was some feminist rambling.

Did you not attribute such inventions to alien intervention? And noone
has alluded to "feminist rambling" in any form yet, you have been asked
to defend your -ideas-, not your person.

The fact that you mention this in the absense of any cause makes me think
that you are a tad bit oversensitive. If so, you will eventually see
what you expect, even if it is not there.

> I really like Velcro because
>my 3-year old can put on her shoes by herself and I don't have to
>tie her shoelaces. Velcro is definitely a triumph of modern
>technology. Wonderful stuff.

But did not some ET give the inventor telepathic assistance at some
critical point?

>--
>Laura Watson l...@falcon3.att.com
>


Rich

pay...@netcom.com


--

Dirk John Fischer

unread,
Dec 19, 1993, 1:53:26 AM12/19/93