UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > Mar > Mar 17

Re: Tracing the Flow of the Gulf Breeze Money -

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:38:51 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:03:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Tracing the Flow of the Gulf Breeze Money -

>From: Jerry Black <gulfbreezeinfo.nul>
>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 20:09:27 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: Re: Tracing the Flow of the Gulf Breeze Money

>March 14, 2004

>Mr. Stanton Friedman,

>I've noticed recently in your reply to Kenny Young, you stated
>that Mr. Bruce Maccabee, in your opinion was a very objective
>investigator. Certainly nothing could be further from the truth
>in the case of the Gulf Breeze sightings. The word objective was
>not in Mr. Maccabee's vocabulary during his investigation into
>the Gulf Breeze sightings.

I don't know how you could presume to know which words were and
which weren't "in my vocabulary" during the Gulf Breeze
investigation. As I have pointed out numerous times in the past
and have published, my initial opinion was that this was another
Meier-type case (note: perhaps you should give Meier a polygraph

It took months of analysis and investigation .. and _no_,_no_
money from _anyone_... before I concluded that the sightings by
Ed were real. (Of course, there were also all the other
sightings. Hmmmm... want to polygraph test the county coronor,
Fenner McConnell, and his wife? They claimed they saw the same
object near their house in July 1988. "And it was no small
model!" exclaimed Mrs. McConnell during a TV interview.)

>Some may consider you standing by your good friend Mr. Bruce
>Maccabee to be very noble, but considering you know nothing
>about the Gulf Breeze sightings it was not a very smart move.

>Please explain this to me, Mr. Friedman, how is it that three of
>Mr. Bruce Maccabee's friends, Mr. Richard Hall, Mr. Jerome Clark
>and Mr. Ray Fowler, do not support Mr. Bruce Maccabee's work in
t>he Gulf Breeze sightings. In another words, none of these
>gentlemen believes Mr. Maccabees conclusions in the Gulf Breeze

>Would you please explain this for me, I eagerly await your

I wouldn't presume to respond for Stan, but let me respond for
myself. Why don't Hall,Clark, Fowler, et al "believe?" Probably
because they haven't done what I did.

I, too, would probably doubt the conclusion if I hadn't done all
the calculations, analyses, interviews, etc. myself. Sorry, but
it takes a lot of analytical "horsepower" (knowledge of optics
and photography) to understand the significance of some of Ed's
photos. If these gentlemen, and you, can't understand all the
details of photography, parallax calculations for stereo
cameras, experiments to verify photographic parameters, etc.,
then you have to rely on someone who can.

One person who does understand is not in your list above - Jeff

He approached the GB sighting photos from a skeptical point of
view and ultimately concluded they were real. His method of
operation was to examine the photos independently of any
interviews. He was would have called them fake if he found any
conclusive evidence. He did indicate to me that he was surprised
that Ed was willing to let him (Sainio) borrow the originals for
analysis. Jeff presented his results at the 1992 MUFON
Symposium. Sainio did no interviews and never met Ed. He worked
solely with the photos themselves.

As for Messr's Hall, Clark, Fowler, et. al. They may have their
own opinions, but I note that not one of them has called me a
liar. Not one has called for a lie detector test. Perhaps this
is because they believe I would pass such a test.

[ 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