UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Jun > Jun 24

Re: Filer's Files #25 - 2002 - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 11:55:24 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 18:41:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Filer's Files #25 - 2002 - Mortellaro

 >Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 00:46:06 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Filer's Files #25 - 2002

 >>From: Marty Murray <mmurray31@cogeco.ca>
 >>To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Filer's Files #25 - 2002
 >>Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 11:21:06 -0400

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 20:59:57 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Filer's Files #25 - 2002

 >>>From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 09:45:25 EDT
 >>>Subject: Filer's Files #25 - 2002



 >>>GETTYSBURG -- Also on Saturday, June 1, 2002, a third year
 >>>medical student and her boyfriend were lying on a blanket on the
 >>>Gettysburg Battlefield just up the hill from her former college.
 >>>At 10:00 PM, the witnesses noticed that lights or stars were
 >>>moving around the sky past a tall lookout tower.

 >>>George, List:

 >>>This is obviously a garden veriety example of >autokinetic motion
 >>>of the eye muscles. For an example, go >outside tonight as soon
 >>>as it's dark and if the sky is clear look to the >West for
 >>>brilliant Venus. Stare at it for a minute or so >and you will see
 >>>the famous "falling leaf effect" of the last Allen >Hynek.


 >>Howdy Mr. Young & All,

 >>I've been looking up into the sky since my childhood, and not
 >>once have I ever seen or experienced this "autokinetic motion"
 >>which you keep bringing up. Maybe your eyes work differently
 >>than mine.

 >>The only thing that I've noticed is that now I'm in my 40's I
 >>need to either wear my glasses or look through binoculars in
 >>order to check anything out in detail. Otherwise the stars
 >>remain stationary and fixed, as they should. The only things I
 >>see moving around up there are usually airplanes or satellites,
 >>or the occasional shooting star.

 >>My one UFO sighting involved an object which vanished in front
 >>of my eyes after collapsing into a tiny dot first, like an old
 >>TV set shutting off. That was no aircraft from this world, and
 >>it wasn't "autokinetic motion" either.

 >As an experiment, I stood outside on a dark nite at work
 >(sneaking a cigarette) and pretended I was some dolt who just
 >finished his first UFO book, article, or television spectacle.

 >Some bright planet was visible, probably Venus or Jupiter. I
 >stared at it, and it was stationary with respect to the dimmer

 >Then I shifted over a few feet so a tall tree nearly got in the
 >way. _Then_ I noted a slight back and forth motion, not really
 >"falling leaf", but noticeable .. and it was in perfect rhythm
 >to my weight shifting back and forth from one foot to the other.
 >I suppose that helps the circulation in tired feet.

 >Furthermore, my middle-aged eyes made this planet look rather
 >oval in shape, more so in one eye than the other. ( I should
 >really pop for prescription lenses.)
 >This 'ovoid' was stretched out from left to right as if squished
 >from above and below. I let myself 'see' a glowing flying saucer
 >in effect, for a little while.
 >Then I blinked and resumed by usual self, the one that knows
 >damn well this was a planet. Not everybody does that of course,
 >and that is why I am very, very suspicious of "nite-lite"
 >reports via the internet etc.
 >Sightings reports must be filtered if we are ever going to
 >discern the signal in all that noise. The trick for me at least,
 >is to carefully scan the observer's description; reading between
 >the lines so to speak.

 >This gets very tedious. Makes me thirsty. [ burp!]

Dear All,

Mr. Young Bob and some others on this freekwency love to use
'autokinetic' motion with which to describe moving lights. Not
that the phenomena does not exist. It does, most likely.

However autokinetic motion does not explain a dim star (to a dim
bulb like me) moving around in a zig-zag pattern covering an
area half the size of the moon.

In night time competitive shooting, in daylight, in the dark
room at NASA Goddard, in the sky, I've never had autokinetic
motion as an experience. But I have seen objects move in a most
_irregular_ and _wide area_ pattern on some occasions.

This is a calibrated eyeball I got me. Like my ears, which can
still send 40 WPM of international Morse Code to my brain and
understand it. This ain't no autokinetic motion. Which by the
by, is the standard skeptibunkies' standard for anything which

Not so.

Key words here are thalf the width of a full moon whilst all about
are stationary and which all about are being passed and gassed
by that single, most extraordinary pelican at high altitude.



[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com