UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > May > May 29

Re: UFOs Or Simply Oil Well Flames? - Friedman

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 14:39:56 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 14:59:37 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs Or Simply Oil Well Flames? - Friedman


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 20:54:42 +0000
>Subject: Re: UFOs Or Simply Oil Well Flames?

>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 11:45:29 -0700
>>Subject: Re: UFOs Or Simply Oil Well Flames?

><snip>

>>Time to summarize. Sharpen your pencils. This is a multiple-
>>choice exam. The correct prosaic explanation offered by the
>>debunkers for the recent Mexican UFO sighting is:

>>A. A flotilla of U.S. supersecret stealth aircraft rendered
>>invisible by isoluminant technology, flying far from home in the
>>Gulf/Yucatan on some hard-to-fathom mission, and playing games
>>with the Mexican Air Force for God-knows-what reason.

>>B. Never-heard-of-before ball lightning or "atmospheric sparks"
>>created in non-stormy conditions, lasting tens of minutes,
>>flying 200+ mph through clouds, invisible to the eye, and
>>displaying intelligent behavior such as evasive maneuvers,
>>flying in formation, pacing and encircling the aircraft.

>>C. Meteors lasting tens of minutes, flying through clouds,
>>invisible to the eye, intelligent behavior, etc., etc.
> >
>>D. Re-entering space debris lasting tens of minutes, flying
>>through clouds, invisible to the eye, intelligent behavior,
>>etc., etc.

>>E. A flotilla of hot air garbage bags, flying in a low-altitude,
>>200+ mph jetstream, passing through clouds unaffected by the
>>same jetstream, made of garbage bag material and using flames
>>also unaffected by 200+ mph winds, whose meager wire frames
>>create solid radar blips at 20+ miles, invisible to the eye,
>>displaying intelligent behavior, etc., etc.

>>F. Invisible, flying oil wells, etc., etc., etc.

>>G. A, C, and E, or B, D, and F, but only if on weekends and
>>during leap years.

>>H. All of the above.

>>I think that about covers it. Have I missed anything?

>David,

>That about covers it. Unless you want to include the ultimate
>fallback position that, since it was released to Jamie Maussan
>rather than to scientists whose minds are made up in advance,
>it must be false.

>I have some problems with Maussan's activities and reputation,
>but in this case the objective evidence trumps all those pre-
>emptive debunking comments.

>At an absolute minimum, we have a very interesting, well-
>documented event that any scientist worth his/her salt should be
>intensely curious about and willing to investigate objectively,
>not reflexively debunk it.

I am in full agreement with Dick, but would like to add one more
stupid explanation to David's list, namely that it was all a
Mexican government hoax to draw media attention away from an
ongoing big corruption scandal down there!. Which idea was
actually put forth.


Stan Friedman
www.stantonfriedman.com




[ 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