Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fwd = [SO] Corso's claims

Expand Messages
  • Frits Westra
    Forwarded by: fwestra@hetnet.nl (Frits Westra) Originally from: Skyopen@yahoogroups.com Original Subject: [SO] Digest Number 816 Original Date: 1 Nov
    Message 1 of 9 , Nov 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Forwarded by: fwestra@... (Frits Westra)
      Originally from: Skyopen@yahoogroups.com
      Original Subject: [SO] Digest Number 816
      Original Date: 1 Nov 2001 00:56:55 -0000

      ========================== Forwarded message begins ======================

      SKYWATCH INTERNATIONAL, INC. (A Non-Profit Organization)

      Visit the Skywatch International Inc. website! http://www.skywatch-
      international.org
      -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:39:11
      From: "Bill Hamilton" <skywatcher22@...>
      Subject: Corso's claims

      The fact is I do not have solid, convincing evidence that
      the Roswell craft or any other flying saucer has been reverse-engineered. I
      do have many statements along that line from ex-
      military and some engineers.

      Col. Corso was someone I met personally and had the opportunity
      to talk with for many hours over the dinner table. I do not think
      he fabricated the story so much as distorted it to a large degree
      as engineers and techs see no supporting evidence that the transistor,
      under development in 1946, owes its practical existence to reverse
      engineering of a craft that crashed in 1947. It is doubtful that
      anyone rushed in and said: "forget what you have under development,
      we just figured this out in zip time and came up with the answer so
      we could have a finished product". Right!

      Just today a new document analyzing Corso's reverse-engineering claims has
      been posted and the conclusion is reproduced here:

      from: http://www.nidsci.org/whatsnew.html

      "Corso claims that starting in 1961 he worked in the Army�s Foreign
      Technology division and was responsible for disseminating the wreckage of an
      alien craft to various laboratories with government contracts such as Bell
      Labs in order to accelerate their research through a process known as
      reverse engineering.

      Based on the 1961 date Corso provides, it seems unlikely that he could have
      had any direct impact on the development of the integrated circuit. Whether
      alien technology had been provided to companies such as Bell Labs at an
      earlier date remains open to speculation.
      However, the alleged Roswell crash in July 1947 probably could not have had
      any direct impact on the development of the transistor, which had a long
      history and was completed less than six months later. In addition, several
      other researchers (the Horovitz group at Prudue, Salisbury at
      the Naval Research Laboratory) were close to inventing the transistor at the
      time it was invented at Bell Labs, Julius E. Lilienfeld had patents on
      devices similar to those leading to the invention
      of the transistor going back 20 years, and a close match between alien
      technology and current Earth technology is highly unlikely.
      It is also unlikely that the integrated circuit was based on alien
      technology recovered at Roswell because Corso�s position in Foreign
      Technology began two years after its invention.

      More importantly, the integrated circuit was based on combining other ideas
      that had recently been discovered. It was the next logical step.
      Furthermore, two different groups invented the integrated circuit nearly
      simultaneously: Kilby at Texas Instruments and Noyce and Moore at
      Fairchild Semiconductor. Researchers at several other labs such as RCA and
      Westinghouse were working on the same idea. As in the case of the
      transistor, a close match between alien technology and current Earth
      technology is highly unlikely.

      Based on the available evidence, it appears that either alien technology did
      not play a role in the development of the transistor or the integrated
      circuit, or if it did, it was to a very minor
      degree that would be virtually impossible to verify. In either case, unless
      the information and dates provided in his book are incorrect, Corso most
      likely was in no way directly involved.


      References
      Alexander, J. (1998). A Review of Corso�s The Day After Roswell. Unpublished
      manuscript.
      Bernstein, J. (1984). Three Degrees Above Zero: Bell Labs In The Information
      Age. New York:
      Charles Scribner�s Sons.
      Campbell, G. (1998). Phone call from Jack Shulman.
      www.ufomind.com/misc/1998/mar/d13-
      001.shtml
      Corso, P. J. & Birnes, W. J. (1997). The Day After Roswell. Pocket Books.
      Berliner, D. & Friedman, S. (1992). Crash at Corona: The U.S. Military
      Retrieval and Cover-Up
      of a UFO. Marlowe & Co.
      Bryant, L. (2000). �The Love-Hate Relationship Between Whistleblower Philip
      J. Corso and the
      FBI.� www.ufocity.com.
      Dolan, R. (2000). UFOs and the National Security State. Keyhole Publishing
      Company.
      Friedman, S. (1997). �A Review of Col. Corso�s Book The Day After Roswell.�
      Stanton
      Friedman�s Website. www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfcorso.html.
      Friedman, S. (1997). Top Secret/MAJIC. Marlowe & Co
      Good, T. (1989). Above Top Secret: The Worldwide UFO Cover-Up. Acacia Press..
      Ingle, K. (1994). Reverse Engineering. McGraw Hill.
      Kaku, M. (1997). Visions: How Science Will Revolutionize the 21 st Century.
      Bantam Books.
      Kilby, J. S. (1976). �Invention of the Integrated Circuit.� IEEE
      Transactions and Electronic
      Devices. 23: 648.
      Kiver, M. S. (1972). Transistor and Integrated Electronics. New York:
      McGraw-Hill, Inc.
      Lilienfeld, J. E. (1926). �Method and Apparatus for Controlling Electric
      Currents,� U.S. Patent
      No. 1,745,175, filed 8 October 1926, patented 28 January 1930. Washington:
      U.S. Patent Office.

      I pretty much now agree with those conclusions. As to Corso's
      testimony of involvement, that will have to wait further disclosure
      of documents.

      Bill Hamilton

      Bill Hamilton
      Executive Director
      Skywatch International, Inc.
      websites:
      http://home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher22
      http://home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher12
      http://home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx
      http://home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx2

      ========================== Forwarded message ends ========================
    • Roger Anderton
      UFO Cover Up started long before 1947. ... technology did not play a role in the development of the transistor or the integrated circuit, or if it did, it was
      Message 2 of 9 , Nov 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        UFO Cover Up started long before 1947.

        >>>>>Based on the available evidence, it appears that either alien
        technology did
        not play a role in the development of the transistor or the integrated
        circuit, or if it did, it was to a very minor
        degree that would be virtually impossible to verify. In either case, unless
        the information and dates provided in his book are incorrect, Corso most
        likely was in no way directly involved.

        The 'available evidence' probably means ignoring Tesla - who claimed to be
        using radio to contact ET s before the official date that radio was
        invented, and had plans for an unconventional air craft. Nazis were
        developing unconventional craft. The object that crashed in 1947 could have
        been an unconventional craft from some unknown group of peoples' development
        of alien ideas, with the US already aware of this and trying to develop
        along those lines.

        >>>>............several
        other researchers (the Horovitz group at Prudue, Salisbury at
        the Naval Research Laboratory) were close to inventing the transistor at the
        time it was invented at Bell Labs,

        Several groups means: 'They' knew what the sort of thing 'they' were looking
        for.

        Roots of that 'idea' would probably go back to Tesla. And Tesla's roots :
        Boscovich.

        >>>>>>>>"Corso claims that starting in 1961 he worked in the Army's Foreign
        Technology division and was responsible for disseminating the wreckage of an
        alien craft to various laboratories with government contracts such as Bell
        Labs in order to accelerate their research through a process known as
        reverse engineering.

        Key word is 'accelerate' NOT 'initialise' . The idea was being worked on
        already, and did someone think that information from the 1947 crash would
        aid that research?

        This report seems to be based on the assumption that the '1947 crash
        initiated the transistor research' and then sets out to debunk that clearly
        false premise. While ignoring the deeper roots.

        >>>>>>In either case, unless the information and dates provided in his book
        are incorrect, Corso most likely was in no way directly involved.

        Or the other information and dates that it is being compared against are
        false?

        Cover Up is easy.

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Frits Westra" <fwestra@...>
        To: <UFOnet@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:32 PM
        Subject: [UFOnet] Fwd = [SO] Corso's claims


        >
        > Forwarded by: fwestra@... (Frits Westra)
        > Originally from: Skyopen@yahoogroups.com
        > Original Subject: [SO] Digest Number 816
        > Original Date: 1 Nov 2001 00:56:55 -0000
        >
        > ========================== Forwarded message begins ======================
        >
        > SKYWATCH INTERNATIONAL, INC. (A Non-Profit Organization)
        >
        > Visit the Skywatch International Inc. website! http://www.skywatch-
        > international.org
        > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
        -----
        >
        > Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:39:11
        > From: "Bill Hamilton" <skywatcher22@...>
        > Subject: Corso's claims
        >
        > The fact is I do not have solid, convincing evidence that
        > the Roswell craft or any other flying saucer has been reverse-engineered.
        I
        > do have many statements along that line from ex-
        > military and some engineers.
        >
        > Col. Corso was someone I met personally and had the opportunity
        > to talk with for many hours over the dinner table. I do not think
        > he fabricated the story so much as distorted it to a large degree
        > as engineers and techs see no supporting evidence that the transistor,
        > under development in 1946, owes its practical existence to reverse
        > engineering of a craft that crashed in 1947. It is doubtful that
        > anyone rushed in and said: "forget what you have under development,
        > we just figured this out in zip time and came up with the answer so
        > we could have a finished product". Right!
        >
        > Just today a new document analyzing Corso's reverse-engineering claims has
        > been posted and the conclusion is reproduced here:
        >
        > from: http://www.nidsci.org/whatsnew.html
        >
        > "Corso claims that starting in 1961 he worked in the Army's Foreign
        > Technology division and was responsible for disseminating the wreckage of
        an
        > alien craft to various laboratories with government contracts such as Bell
        > Labs in order to accelerate their research through a process known as
        > reverse engineering.
        >
        > Based on the 1961 date Corso provides, it seems unlikely that he could
        have
        > had any direct impact on the development of the integrated circuit.
        Whether
        > alien technology had been provided to companies such as Bell Labs at an
        > earlier date remains open to speculation.
        > However, the alleged Roswell crash in July 1947 probably could not have
        had
        > any direct impact on the development of the transistor, which had a long
        > history and was completed less than six months later. In addition, several
        > other researchers (the Horovitz group at Prudue, Salisbury at
        > the Naval Research Laboratory) were close to inventing the transistor at
        the
        > time it was invented at Bell Labs, Julius E. Lilienfeld had patents on
        > devices similar to those leading to the invention
        > of the transistor going back 20 years, and a close match between alien
        > technology and current Earth technology is highly unlikely.
        > It is also unlikely that the integrated circuit was based on alien
        > technology recovered at Roswell because Corso's position in Foreign
        > Technology began two years after its invention.
        >
        > More importantly, the integrated circuit was based on combining other
        ideas
        > that had recently been discovered. It was the next logical step.
        > Furthermore, two different groups invented the integrated circuit nearly
        > simultaneously: Kilby at Texas Instruments and Noyce and Moore at
        > Fairchild Semiconductor. Researchers at several other labs such as RCA and
        > Westinghouse were working on the same idea. As in the case of the
        > transistor, a close match between alien technology and current Earth
        > technology is highly unlikely.
        >
        > Based on the available evidence, it appears that either alien technology
        did
        > not play a role in the development of the transistor or the integrated
        > circuit, or if it did, it was to a very minor
        > degree that would be virtually impossible to verify. In either case,
        unless
        > the information and dates provided in his book are incorrect, Corso most
        > likely was in no way directly involved.
        >
        >
        > References
        > Alexander, J. (1998). A Review of Corso's The Day After Roswell.
        Unpublished
        > manuscript.
        > Bernstein, J. (1984). Three Degrees Above Zero: Bell Labs In The
        Information
        > Age. New York:
        > Charles Scribner's Sons.
        > Campbell, G. (1998). Phone call from Jack Shulman.
        > www.ufomind.com/misc/1998/mar/d13-
        > 001.shtml
        > Corso, P. J. & Birnes, W. J. (1997). The Day After Roswell. Pocket Books.
        > Berliner, D. & Friedman, S. (1992). Crash at Corona: The U.S. Military
        > Retrieval and Cover-Up
        > of a UFO. Marlowe & Co.
        > Bryant, L. (2000). "The Love-Hate Relationship Between Whistleblower
        Philip
        > J. Corso and the
        > FBI." www.ufocity.com.
        > Dolan, R. (2000). UFOs and the National Security State. Keyhole Publishing
        > Company.
        > Friedman, S. (1997). "A Review of Col. Corso's Book The Day After
        Roswell."
        > Stanton
        > Friedman's Website. www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfcorso.html.
        > Friedman, S. (1997). Top Secret/MAJIC. Marlowe & Co
        > Good, T. (1989). Above Top Secret: The Worldwide UFO Cover-Up. Acacia
        Press..
        > Ingle, K. (1994). Reverse Engineering. McGraw Hill.
        > Kaku, M. (1997). Visions: How Science Will Revolutionize the 21 st
        Century.
        > Bantam Books.
        > Kilby, J. S. (1976). "Invention of the Integrated Circuit." IEEE
        > Transactions and Electronic
        > Devices. 23: 648.
        > Kiver, M. S. (1972). Transistor and Integrated Electronics. New York:
        > McGraw-Hill, Inc.
        > Lilienfeld, J. E. (1926). "Method and Apparatus for Controlling Electric
        > Currents," U.S. Patent
        > No. 1,745,175, filed 8 October 1926, patented 28 January 1930. Washington:
        > U.S. Patent Office.
        >
        > I pretty much now agree with those conclusions. As to Corso's
        > testimony of involvement, that will have to wait further disclosure
        > of documents.
        >
        > Bill Hamilton
        >
        > Bill Hamilton
        > Executive Director
        > Skywatch International, Inc.
        > websites:
        > http://home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher22
        > http://home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher12
        > http://home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx
        > http://home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx2
        >
        > ========================== Forwarded message ends ========================
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > UFOnet is an open, international, free news and discussion list dedicated
        to:
        > UFOs, Anomalous Phenomena, Astronomy, Skywatching, SETI, the Latest on
        > Aerospace Research and Space Flight, Free & New Energy, Exoscience, etc.
        > To subscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
        > ufonet-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
        > ufonet-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Website (Dutch only): http://www.ufonet.nl/
        > Messages to the list-owner: jkumeling@...
        >
        > Word voor fl 20,- lid van de UFOnieuwsbrief. Zes maal per jaar in de echte
        brievenbus het laatste nieuws uit de ufologie, astronomie, ruimtevaart en
        aanverwante onderwerpen. Kijk op www.ufonet.nl!
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      • Joe McGonagle
        ... [snip ... Accusations of cover-ups are easier still! Deny it, and you are covering that fact up! ;-) Joe
        Message 3 of 9 , Nov 3, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In ufonet@y..., "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@b...> wrote:
          > UFO Cover Up started long before 1947.
          >
          [snip
          > Cover Up is easy.
          >

          Accusations of cover-ups are easier still! Deny it, and you are
          covering that fact up!

          ;-)
          Joe
        • Roger Anderton
          And even before that. The debunking of Corso assumes that the Cover Up started from 1947, hence manages to maintain the Cover Up. Cheers Roger ... From: CUN
          Message 4 of 9 , Nov 5, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            And even before that. The debunking of Corso assumes that the Cover Up
            started from 1947, hence manages to maintain the Cover Up.

            Cheers Roger

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "CUN" <retecun@...>
            To: <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 10:19 PM
            Subject: R: [UFOnet] Fwd = [SO] Corso's claims


            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: Roger Anderton <R.J.Anderton@...>
            > To: <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>
            > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 9:00 PM
            > Subject: Re: [UFOnet] Fwd = [SO] Corso's claims
            >
            >
            > > UFO Cover Up started long before 1947.
            > >
            >
            > Oh, yes, f.e. in Italy in 1933, during Fascism, with secret commission
            > Cabinet RS/33.
            > Best wishes
            > Alfredo Lissoni
            >
            >
            > UFOnet is an open, international, free news and discussion list dedicated
            to:
            > UFOs, Anomalous Phenomena, Astronomy, Skywatching, SETI, the Latest on
            > Aerospace Research and Space Flight, Free & New Energy, Exoscience, etc.
            > To subscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
            > ufonet-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
            > ufonet-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Website (Dutch only): http://www.ufonet.nl/
            > Messages to the list-owner: jkumeling@...
            >
            > Word voor fl 20,- lid van de UFOnieuwsbrief. Zes maal per jaar in de echte
            brievenbus het laatste nieuws uit de ufologie, astronomie, ruimtevaart en
            aanverwante onderwerpen. Kijk op www.ufonet.nl!
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
          • Roger Anderton
            Hi Joe ... covering that fact up! An interesting statement, presumably you believe that it cannot be proved false, so I have a question: do you believe that a
            Message 5 of 9 , Nov 5, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Joe

              >>>>>>Accusations of cover-ups are easier still! Deny it, and you are
              covering that fact up!

              An interesting statement, presumably you believe that it cannot be proved
              false, so I have a question: do you believe that a statement which cannot be
              proved false must then be true?

              Roger

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Joe McGonagle" <joe@...>
              To: <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 8:15 PM
              Subject: [UFOnet] Re: Fwd = [SO] Corso's claims


              > --- In ufonet@y..., "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@b...> wrote:
              > > UFO Cover Up started long before 1947.
              > >
              > [snip
              > > Cover Up is easy.
              > >
              >
              > Accusations of cover-ups are easier still! Deny it, and you are
              > covering that fact up!
              >
              > ;-)
              > Joe
              >
              >
            • Joe McGonagle
              ... Hi, Roger, ... are ... proved ... cannot be ... No, that is exactly my point: that is the whole premise of the cover- up protagonists, that they can t
              Message 6 of 9 , Nov 5, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In ufonet@y..., "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@b...> wrote:
                > Hi Joe

                Hi, Roger,

                >
                > >>>>>>Accusations of cover-ups are easier still! Deny it, and you
                are
                > covering that fact up!
                >
                > An interesting statement, presumably you believe that it cannot be
                proved
                > false, so I have a question: do you believe that a statement which
                cannot be
                > proved false must then be true?
                >

                No, that is exactly my point: that is the whole premise of the cover-
                up protagonists, that they can't prove the cover-up because the
                evidence is covered up.....this is used to support their case of a
                cover-up, and cannot be disproved.

                My personal opinion is that some things do get covered up, but
                eventually, they are exposed. Of the cover-ups that have been
                exposed, they are generally covered up in order to hide embarrassing
                personal and official details, eg the ineffectiveness of the UK radar
                coverage post WWII, the sexual excesses of members of the royal
                family, etc.

                Secrets that have a personal bearing on politicians and other public
                figures seem to be more closely protected than military secrets.

                I would expect that irrefutable evidence of any Government covering
                up evidence of alien contact or captured alien technology more than
                50 years ago would have been exposed by now.

                Likewise, I would expect any conspiracy to suppress "real" science to
                have been exposed (in verifiable terms) by now.

                Cheers, Joe
              • Roger Anderton
                Hi Joe ... up evidence of alien contact or captured alien technology more than 50 years ago would have been exposed by now. ... to have been exposed (in
                Message 7 of 9 , Nov 6, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Joe

                  Most of that seems reasonable (but I wouldn't put it that way), except:


                  >>>>>>>>I would expect that irrefutable evidence of any Government covering
                  up evidence of alien contact or captured alien technology more than
                  50 years ago would have been exposed by now.

                  >>>>>>>>Likewise, I would expect any conspiracy to suppress "real" science
                  to
                  have been exposed (in verifiable terms) by now.

                  But what about a Cover Up that has gone on for far long than 50 years?

                  And a Cover Up that nearly everyone unconsciously engages in?

                  If all people were unconsciously engaging in cover up, then no one would
                  know that it was consciously happening and thus be unable to expose it.

                  The type of Cover Up you assume when you say what you have said, is that
                  Cover Ups are solely conscious activities. However, not all our activities
                  are controlled by our conscious minds. Have you considered a way to debunk
                  that possibility?

                  Roger

                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "Joe McGonagle" <joe@...>
                  To: <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 7:55 PM
                  Subject: [UFOnet] Re: Fwd = [SO] Corso's claims


                  > --- In ufonet@y..., "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@b...> wrote:
                  > > Hi Joe
                  >
                  > Hi, Roger,
                  >
                  > >
                  > > >>>>>>Accusations of cover-ups are easier still! Deny it, and you
                  > are
                  > > covering that fact up!
                  > >
                  > > An interesting statement, presumably you believe that it cannot be
                  > proved
                  > > false, so I have a question: do you believe that a statement which
                  > cannot be
                  > > proved false must then be true?
                  > >
                  >
                  > No, that is exactly my point: that is the whole premise of the cover-
                  > up protagonists, that they can't prove the cover-up because the
                  > evidence is covered up.....this is used to support their case of a
                  > cover-up, and cannot be disproved.
                  >
                  > My personal opinion is that some things do get covered up, but
                  > eventually, they are exposed. Of the cover-ups that have been
                  > exposed, they are generally covered up in order to hide embarrassing
                  > personal and official details, eg the ineffectiveness of the UK radar
                  > coverage post WWII, the sexual excesses of members of the royal
                  > family, etc.
                  >
                  > Secrets that have a personal bearing on politicians and other public
                  > figures seem to be more closely protected than military secrets.
                  >
                  > I would expect that irrefutable evidence of any Government covering
                  > up evidence of alien contact or captured alien technology more than
                  > 50 years ago would have been exposed by now.
                  >
                  > Likewise, I would expect any conspiracy to suppress "real" science to
                  > have been exposed (in verifiable terms) by now.
                  >
                  > Cheers, Joe
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > UFOnet is an open, international, free news and discussion list dedicated
                  to:
                  > UFOs, Anomalous Phenomena, Astronomy, Skywatching, SETI, the Latest on
                  > Aerospace Research and Space Flight, Free & New Energy, Exoscience, etc.
                  > To subscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
                  > ufonet-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  > To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
                  > ufonet-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  >
                  > Website (Dutch only): http://www.ufonet.nl/
                  > Messages to the list-owner: jkumeling@...
                  >
                  > Word voor fl 20,- lid van de UFOnieuwsbrief. Zes maal per jaar in de echte
                  brievenbus het laatste nieuws uit de ufologie, astronomie, ruimtevaart en
                  aanverwante onderwerpen. Kijk op www.ufonet.nl!
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  >
                  >
                • Joe McGonagle
                  ... Hi, Roger, ... covering ... science ... years? ... History is riddled with acknowledged scientific theories that have been proved wrong, you have quoted
                  Message 8 of 9 , Nov 9, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In ufonet@y..., "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@b...> wrote:
                    > Hi Joe

                    Hi, Roger,

                    >
                    > Most of that seems reasonable (but I wouldn't put it that way),
                    except:
                    >
                    >
                    > >>>>>>>>I would expect that irrefutable evidence of any Government
                    covering
                    > up evidence of alien contact or captured alien technology more than
                    > 50 years ago would have been exposed by now.
                    >
                    > >>>>>>>>Likewise, I would expect any conspiracy to suppress "real"
                    science
                    > to
                    > have been exposed (in verifiable terms) by now.
                    >
                    > But what about a Cover Up that has gone on for far long than 50
                    years?
                    >
                    > And a Cover Up that nearly everyone unconsciously engages in?
                    >

                    History is riddled with acknowledged scientific theories that have
                    been proved wrong, you have quoted many of them yourself. A
                    particular example which I like is a science book from 1912 which I
                    have in my posession, which ascertains that the craters on the moon
                    are caused by extinct volcanic activity-that theory was accepted less
                    than a century ago, but as we are now aware, the craters are caused
                    by impacting meteors.

                    > If all people were unconsciously engaging in cover up, then no one
                    would
                    > know that it was consciously happening and thus be unable to
                    expose it.
                    >

                    They could only be unconscious if someone didn't discover that a
                    given scientific premise was wrong. If someone made such a discovery,
                    but continued to promote an incorrect version, then it would become
                    conscious.

                    Unconscious cover-ups are common, and are generally called ignorance,
                    (though some could be considered negligence, eg BSE and Thalidomide)
                    which is perfectly normal and acceptable, so long as efforts are made
                    to verify or dispel existing theories. If a theory appears to fit the
                    facts, there is no reason to deny it's validity unless a new theory
                    or experimentation shows it to be incorrect. Both of the latter are
                    probably a daily occurence in highly specialised fields.

                    > The type of Cover Up you assume when you say what you have said, is
                    that
                    > Cover Ups are solely conscious activities. However, not all our
                    activities
                    > are controlled by our conscious minds. Have you considered a way to
                    debunk
                    > that possibility?
                    >

                    It's not a case of debunking-there is always the possibility that
                    conscious cover-ups exist, and it is a certainty that unconscious
                    cover-ups exist (through ignorance/negligence), but I think the
                    statistical odds are that both types of cover-up will ultimately be
                    exposed. Particularly in respect of claims of alien contact dating
                    back 50 years or more, I think _that_ conspiracy is past it's sell-by
                    date.

                    > Roger
                    >

                    Cheers, Joe
                  • Roger Anderton
                    Hi Joe ... been proved wrong, you have quoted many of them yourself. Not always. Some theories are thought wrong, and then later reinstated again. For example
                    Message 9 of 9 , Nov 12, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi Joe

                      >>>History is riddled with acknowledged scientific theories that have
                      been proved wrong, you have quoted many of them yourself.

                      Not always. Some theories are thought wrong, and then later reinstated
                      again. For example Newton's corpuscle (particle) theory was thought wrong
                      and replaced by Huygen's wave theory. Then Planck and Einstein brought back
                      the particle idea renamed as quanta.

                      It is not always clear cut to disprove a theory, and often a theory is
                      assumed wrong without proof, and makes a come back later. The theories I am
                      backing, have been unfairly treated in this way.

                      >>>>>>... we are now aware, the craters are caused
                      by impacting meteors.

                      Some craters are caused by meteors, it is too much to assume that all
                      craters are formed by meteors. Though in the case of the moon, without
                      anything extra to go on, it seems reasonable to assume for now that all
                      craters on the moon are caused by meteors.

                      >>>>They could only be unconscious if someone didn't discover that a
                      given scientific premise was wrong. If someone made such a discovery,
                      but continued to promote an incorrect version, then it would become
                      conscious.

                      Yes
                      >>>>>Unconscious cover-ups are common, and are generally called ignorance,

                      Yes

                      >>>>>(though some could be considered negligence, e.g. BSE and Thalidomide)
                      which is perfectly normal and acceptable, so long as efforts are made
                      to verify or dispel existing theories.

                      Some people think such accidents are deliberate for some hidden agenda.

                      >>>>>>>If a theory appears to fit the
                      facts, there is no reason to deny it's validity unless a new theory
                      or experimentation shows it to be incorrect.

                      Yes, ideally. But I have found that this has not been adhered to. For
                      instance: A theory that was not disproved was replaced by Quantum
                      Mechanics. It is either then unconscious cover up or conscious cover up. The
                      theory was 18th century Boscovich's.

                      I have recently found another interesting item in connection with said
                      theory.
                      Brian Greene in The Elegant Universe p 380 while talking about Superstring
                      theory says:

                      "The mathematical formalism describing string theory begins with equations
                      that describe the motion of a tiny, infinitely thin piece of classical
                      thread - equations that, to a large extent, Newton could have written down
                      some three hundred years ago. These equations are then quantised."

                      String theory could have been discovered if someone had foresight, three
                      hundred years ago. Boscovich was that man.

                      So, a theory more than two hundred years old and being like Modern
                      Superstring theory is not too unreasonable. But it is not quite the same as
                      the modern version, because as Greene says what happens for the modern
                      version is that 'these equations are then quantised.'

                      I say the quantisation is wrong, as per Einstein's claim. And Einstein was
                      never disproved in this, merely "debunked." If the answer is 'yes' to the
                      question of Cover Up, then it means that UFO Physics has been covered up
                      for a very long time, and a lot of things that Conventional wisdom teaches
                      us is wrong, has been unfairly debunked instead of disproved. The perception
                      of the world then turns upside -down.

                      >>>>Both of the latter are
                      probably a daily occurence in highly specialised fields.

                      One would hope so, but they are not.

                      >>>>It's not a case of debunking-there is always the possibility that
                      conscious cover-ups exist, and it is a certainty that unconscious
                      cover-ups exist (through ignorance/negligence), but I think the
                      statistical odds are that both types of cover-up will ultimately be
                      exposed.

                      Statistical odds can only be formulated if factors are known. How can a
                      calculation be made on 'unknowns'. How many conscious and unconscious
                      conspiracies are there, and what is the mean time to their exposure?

                      I have many examples of historical cover ups. Who was behind the Piltdown
                      man? For a long time it was believed genuine. The Roman Catholic Church got
                      its authority from a hoaxed document, when it was discovered to be hoaxed it
                      was too late to change the authority hierarchy. Scientists have hoaxed their
                      experiments, even the great Newton and Galileo.

                      How often are these coverups? And when they are revealed, no one seems to
                      care too much and instead pass on to the next mystery. And these are only
                      the cover ups that are known about. There are cases which are in dispute
                      such as : JFK which a lot of people think cover up. How do you count these?
                      Then what number of cover ups manage to get by undetected?

                      On a recent TV programme there was about the Tutanakhamun Conspiracy. An
                      archaeologist is making the claim that Howard Crater found the tomb many
                      years before the official date he gave for finding it. His arguments on the
                      surface seem convincing. And if true, then Carter got away with a robbery
                      and con job. How many cases are there like this of possible successful cover
                      ups? The exposed cover ups could be the mere tip of an iceberg.

                      Cover up, confidence tricks, hoaxing and the like have been a part of human
                      behaviour for a very long time.

                      >>>>>>>>......... I think _that_ conspiracy is past it's sell-by
                      date.

                      How so? Admittedly talking about conspiracies, a lot of people find
                      boring. (But is this because they are responding to the advertising that
                      tells them its boring? - then it would be another part of the cover up, by
                      those doing the cover up. ) Being bored with conspiracies does not change
                      the fact that there is a lot of it about, and it does not seem like it going
                      to abate. Humans like the activity too much, to want to stop. As Barnum says
                      "there's a sucker born every minute." And so long as there are, there will
                      be predators to take advantage of the 'suckers'.

                      Conspiracies are everywhere. The world is not as I would wish it to be. May
                      be you have the same wish, that things were not as bad as they really are.
                      Anyway it is has been mathematically proven that Conspiracies are a
                      consequence of Democracy. The two go together. Being 'past it's sell by
                      date' does not stop the commodity being sold.

                      Cheers
                      Roger

                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Joe McGonagle" <joe@...>
                      To: <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 1:08 AM
                      Subject: [UFOnet] Re: Fwd = [SO] Corso's claims


                      > --- In ufonet@y..., "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@b...> wrote:
                      > > Hi Joe
                      >
                      > Hi, Roger,
                      >
                      > >
                      > > Most of that seems reasonable (but I wouldn't put it that way),
                      > except:
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > >>>>>>>>I would expect that irrefutable evidence of any Government
                      > covering
                      > > up evidence of alien contact or captured alien technology more than
                      > > 50 years ago would have been exposed by now.
                      > >
                      > > >>>>>>>>Likewise, I would expect any conspiracy to suppress "real"
                      > science
                      > > to
                      > > have been exposed (in verifiable terms) by now.
                      > >
                      > > But what about a Cover Up that has gone on for far long than 50
                      > years?
                      > >
                      > > And a Cover Up that nearly everyone unconsciously engages in?
                      > >
                      >
                      > History is riddled with acknowledged scientific theories that have
                      > been proved wrong, you have quoted many of them yourself. A
                      > particular example which I like is a science book from 1912 which I
                      > have in my posession, which ascertains that the craters on the moon
                      > are caused by extinct volcanic activity-that theory was accepted less
                      > than a century ago, but as we are now aware, the craters are caused
                      > by impacting meteors.
                      >
                      > > If all people were unconsciously engaging in cover up, then no one
                      > would
                      > > know that it was consciously happening and thus be unable to
                      > expose it.
                      > >
                      >
                      > They could only be unconscious if someone didn't discover that a
                      > given scientific premise was wrong. If someone made such a discovery,
                      > but continued to promote an incorrect version, then it would become
                      > conscious.
                      >
                      > Unconscious cover-ups are common, and are generally called ignorance,
                      > (though some could be considered negligence, eg BSE and Thalidomide)
                      > which is perfectly normal and acceptable, so long as efforts are made
                      > to verify or dispel existing theories. If a theory appears to fit the
                      > facts, there is no reason to deny it's validity unless a new theory
                      > or experimentation shows it to be incorrect. Both of the latter are
                      > probably a daily occurence in highly specialised fields.
                      >
                      > > The type of Cover Up you assume when you say what you have said, is
                      > that
                      > > Cover Ups are solely conscious activities. However, not all our
                      > activities
                      > > are controlled by our conscious minds. Have you considered a way to
                      > debunk
                      > > that possibility?
                      > >
                      >
                      > It's not a case of debunking-there is always the possibility that
                      > conscious cover-ups exist, and it is a certainty that unconscious
                      > cover-ups exist (through ignorance/negligence), but I think the
                      > statistical odds are that both types of cover-up will ultimately be
                      > exposed. Particularly in respect of claims of alien contact dating
                      > back 50 years or more, I think _that_ conspiracy is past it's sell-by
                      > date.
                      >
                      > > Roger
                      > >
                      >
                      > Cheers, Joe
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.