From: Bill Stockstill <size14d@bigfoot.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 08:14:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:43:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Chile: Researchers Battle Over Vet's Conclusions


 >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:52:07 -0500
 >Subject: Chile: Researchers Battle Over Vet's Conclusions

 >The following is a communique recieved from the CHILE C.I.O.
 >research group in regard to the conclusions reached by
 >veterinarian Arturo Mann on the alleged "monito de monte"
 >corpse. The communique was issued by Eric Martinez on October
 >26, 2002 and quotes  from a zoology broadcast on Chile's
 >Megavision TV station. Sebastian Jimenez, a veterinarian and
 >director of the Santiago de Chile Zoo, was the interviewee. It
 >turns out that the creature has been given the name TOY (no
 >reason given).

 >===================================

 >COMMUNIQUE FROM C.I.O CHILE

 >Sebastian Jimenez: "No conclusions in this regard could be made
 >beyond a reasonable doubt."

 >What is more, he added: "Some are going around saying its a
 >little mouse, a marsupial, monito, etc. "but that he could not
 >identify it beyond being a mammal, and that it needs further
 >research."

 >In regard to the statements made by veterinarian Arturo Mann, it
 >is 10% (sic) that he does not know what he is saying. Therfore,
 >it cannot be final.

 >Furhtermore, oither veterinarians do not agree on what the
 >[creature] might be.

 >The "EL MERCURIO" Newspaper dated October 25, 2002 says the
 >following in an article on the subject: veterinarian Pedro
 >Katan, of the University of Chile, could not determine the
 >species it belonged to."

 >In an interview for TVN (Television Nacional de Chile) on
 >October 25, 2002 with Eric Martinez (Research Director for CIO
 >CHILE) and Arturo Mann, Eric Martinez asked the following
 >question off camera:

 >"Arturo, if it was a marsupial, would it have to have a tail?"

 >Arturo's reply: "Yes."

 >Eric Martinez asked: "So what happened to TOY's tail?" [bold in
 >the original--SC]

 >Arturo's reply: "Well...um...maybe it fell off."

 >It is worth noting that it isn't Arturo Mann who says "it's
 >final", but the OVNIVISION news section.

 >The question is: why such a heading? Isn't it better to wait for
 >analyses, as OVNIVISION's own director said on the Megavision
 >news broadcast, that "it was necessary to wait for the DNA exams
 >before reaching a conclusion."

 >The only analysis performed by Mr. Arturo Mann was a visual one,
 >without a magnifying glass or any instrument that might have
 >aided him [in reaching a] better diagnosis.

 >How could he identify a given animal, if other veterinarians are
 >unable to?

 >[...]

 >No consideration appears to have been given to the diverging
 >opinions of other specialists, who also examined TOY...

 >[...]

 >Why was the opinion of the other specialists not published in
 >this article, which is contrary to that of Arturo Mann?

 >There are three specialists who examined TOY!!! [bold in the
 >original--SC]

 >Two of them have said they cannot identify it.

 >One has identified it 90% and doesn't know what the remaining
 >10% might be.

 >But the reply given by Mr. Arturo Mann is precisely employed to
 >define a case such as this one..... Why?

 >Eric Martinez
 >Director of Research
 >C.I.O. Chile
 >Ph: (cell) 09-857-72110


For those interested in what a monito de monte looks like:

http://www.cape1.net/chile/monito_del_monte.htm

How anyone could describe this little guy as humanoid is beyond
me. Is there a picture of this thing anywhere yet Scott? BTW, I
always enjoy your work, Scott.

Bill Stockstill