UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Nov > Nov 26

Re: Cosmic Top Secret

From: John W. Auchettl <Praufo.nul>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 08:28:48 EST
Archived: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 09:39:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret


>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:28:24 -0500
>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:13:16 -0500
>Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret

>>From: John W. Auchettl <Praufo.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 11:07:43 EST
>>Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret

>>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 13:12:58 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret


Hi Jan,

>>A few in my 20 years of service as a Gunner Officer.

>Well is it Flight Lt. or Lt. Col.? Your mates can't seem to
>get it right.

Then they are not my mates. My mates know me very well.

This old web page may help you.

http://hometown.aol.com/praoz/zerror/ErrorMag.htm

                               ***
>>>And John, you have, of course, done similar work, correct?

>>Got it in one.

>Several people I respect here say you have a good knowledge of
>US military history and equipment in addition to extensive
>knowledge of military aircraft.

>Sorry, I can't say the same for your knowledge of the security
>system.

Oh.... it's sound Jan, very sound. Still serves me well, even
today.

                               ***

>So, looking at SOM 1-01 what is your opinion of the document. Is
>it tactically sound? How about the discussing it from the
>operations, intelligence and logistical points of view?

>And from the historical point of view, I would like you comments
>the document at the Woods' site, "The First Annual Report."

>I do sincerely look forward to your comments and opinions.

With regard to your SOM 1-01 questions, my short replys are on
the RHS:

* Tactically sound?            = Non TAC.
* Operations points of view?   = Weak, lacks military rigor.
* Intelligence points of view? = Not sound.
* Logistical points of view?   = Very poor.


The copy we received is a digital copy (RE: Dr Wood), we don't
have any original material.

From PRA's point of view, (and this is also my view) after some
analysis by our research group back in 2000, our examination of
the SOM 1-01 document produced 12 questions (errors).

The general concessus was that if this document is a 'DRAFT',
and we believe it to be that, then our questions (errors) could
not be ruled in or out and thus became neutral.

The key to this is the word 'DRAFT'.

Thus, using Dr Robert M. Wood, data & research, at present PRA
(and I) are happy to state that:

[1]. SOM 1-01 is authentic.

Then, if authentic who are the SOM 1-01 author(s)/producer(s)
for the want of a better word?

This was not easy to answer, and remains open to discussion.

From PRA's point of view, (and this is also my view) the
author(s) are NOT a normal or standard Armed Services unit - Re:
Army, Navy or Air Force. It is most likely (on review) a Federal
Government Agency drawing staff, ideas, and data from the Armed
Services. It looks like a group effort, but SOM 1-01 does not
have the rigor or quality of a Armed Service (standard) manual.

So...

[2]. SOM 1-01 manual aim, purpose or character, is not like any known
Armed Service manuals aim, purpose or character.

And...

[3]. "Special" - yes, nothing normal about this product.

It looks wrong to me, but I have no evidence to defend this
position, so it's still a live & valid doc. Would I use the
document in my defence case? No I would not! But I can not rule
it in or out = neutral.

                               ***
I can only praise Bob and Ryan Wood efforts and analysis,
although some don't carry that view, I believe that their
analysis has rigor, and their hypothesis the best of the lot. If
future evidence arises then, I would be happy to review my
position & decision.


Regards,

John W. Auchettl

Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
Australian & Asia UFO
1961-2002 - 41 YEARS OF RESEARCH SERVICE


[ 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