From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 02:54:52 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 07:47:03 -0500
Subject: An Open Letter to the International UFO Congress


 >Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 16:45:35 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: An Open Letter to the International UFO Congress
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 00:16:44 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: An Open Letter to the International UFO Congress
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 15:58:21 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: Tim Haley <TimHaley@aol.com>
 >>>Subject: An Open Letter to the International UFO Congress
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>An Open Letter to the International UFO Congress

<snip>

 >>Naturally when you present the evidence that the guy is full of
 >>absolute crap, the people who invited him will then make some
 >>remark like "well, its not proven to our satisfaction" and or
 >>"well we must keep an open mind and hear from all points of
 >>view.."

 >This has _never_ been a problem with me. Just as an example, I
 >have been full of absolute crap often, and it never got me an
 >invite to speak at some conference. I've always had to have my
 >own conference to speak at. An' nobody came. (sniffles)

Ah, but you weren't telling the right story, say about being
part of some secret gov agency, or helped build underground
bases for space aliens, or better yet, have alleged sources
whose information is considered to be "top drawer", "never wrong
yet," "never told a like in their life," etc etc.

 >><snip>

 >>>Additionally, there is no evidence to support the claims made by
 >>>Jonathan Reed. Unless Mr. Reed can provide any reasonable
 >>>corroborating evidence to support his biography and that of his

 >Why do so many people on this list worry so damned much about
 >supporting biographies and Curriculum Vitae? Huh? Doesn't what
 >the dude have to say matter much more than his CV?

If the supporting biographies that the speaker provides do not
even check out, why should anybody believe anything the guy has
to say? Then the speaker has as much credibility as the local
fiction story telling club, who amuse each other with tales of
fiction.

Of course, who knows. Perhaps people in the UFO community want
to be amused with interesting tales of fiction.

<snip>

 >Dear Robert, Errol and all you ex spurts out there in the ether:

 >Who are we to determine who is righteous enough to speak our
 >minds and who are not? Seems that is the purview of those who
 >put on the show.

Thats seems to sum it all up. A "show." As to who speaks its not
a determination of who is righteous, but more of a credibility
determination. If the guys own supplied resume is a total fake,
it would suggest that his entire tale is phoney. Remember the so
called NASA consultant who was unloading tale after tale, even
made it on the Art Bell show? People started investigating his
background related claims and discovered they were all phony.
When confronted, he admitted that everything he said was phony
from the get go.

I guess the people really enjoyed that show until the final act
when they found out they were hearing and watching fiction.

If people in the UFO community enjoy being entertained by
fiction, I am sure we could line up a number of speakers with
admittedly fictional storys to tell.


Cheers,

Robert