From: A. J. Gevaerd - Revista UFO <aj.nul> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 10:55:29 -0300 Archived: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 10:33:43 -0400 Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:57:40 -0500 >Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >>From: John Rimmer <johnrimmer.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 18:44:22 +0100 (BST) >>Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>>To: <post.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:51:39 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >>>>From: John Rimmer <johnrimmer.nul> >>>>To: post.nul >>>>Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:34:55 +0100 (BST) >>>>Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >>>>>From: Kentaro Mori <kentaro.mori.nul> >>>>>To: post.nul >>>>>Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 10:30:51 -0300 >>>>>Subject: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found ><snip" >>Oh, Alffed, and we were getting on so well with the Budd Hoplins >>business! My comment was actually aimed at Jerry Clark, who's >>been asking for a 'negative witness' - just one! - for what >>seems like years. >While, of course, you have been deriding the very concept. >Whether this is the long-awaited "negative witness" remains to >be seen. After reading the original post three times, I see >holes big enough to drive a Mack truck through. On the other >hand, perhaps the post was written hastily, and more substantive >information awaits. >Unlike you, I am interested in potential negative witnesses, and >I look forward, as always, to further developments. > >Meanwhile, back to my book in progress... Dear Jerry and Listers: All this new stuff was long-waited and adds nearly nothing concrete to this debate. I was expecting something much stronger than this, as repeatedly promised that we would have. A 'negative witness'? Skeptics always claim that witness' reports aren't good enough as evidence, and now they take into consideration a 'negative witness' report. Well, all the holes that you mention, Jerry, also clearly noticed by several colleagues here in Brazil, are being addressed this right minute by the _only_ UFO researcher in my country that really investigated the Trindade Case in full, not superficially, not over the internet, not several decades after it happened. I am referring to veteran researcher Marco Antonio Petit, co- editor of the Brazilian UFO Magazine, an investigator who spent some 30 years devoting to the Trindade Case, and many others. He interviewed Barauna personally a few times, spoke with many other witnesses, went deep into the documentation and have been examining all info available about the episode since the 80s. Petit has easily broken all info published against Trindade Case's validity, including the most recent one, by Barauna's own nephew, published in the magazine's website. It will be interesting to see again that the new 'evidences' and 'testimonies' in this new attempt to discredit one of the most serious Brazilian UFO cases feel down as easily as they are so eagerly brought up. In a couple of week. A. J. ------------------------ A. J. Gevaerd Editor, Brazilian UFO Magazine E-mail 1: aj.nul E-mail 2: ajgevaerd.nul E-mail 3: ajgevaerd.nul Site: www.ufo.com.br Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp