UFO UpDates Mailing List
For other Cohen/Devereux discussions
Click here From: Jerry Cohen <email@example.com> Web Site: CohenUFO.org Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 19:49:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 13:40:26 -0500 Subject: Re: EL/TST >From: DevereuxP@aol.com >Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 16:56:23 -0500 (EST) >To: firstname.lastname@example.org >>Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 19:48:59 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <email@example.com> >>From: "Jerry Cohen" <firstname.lastname@example.org> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Devereux - Rutkowski EL/TST >Jerry wrote: ....snip.... >>Oh, by the way, do you feel that "norm" is actually established >>[with regard to EL/BOL]? If so, could you possibly point me to >>this information? >The best thing would be for you to read *Earth Lights Revelation*, >if you can get hold of a copy nowadays. If you read that through, >you'll have a pretty good grasp of the range of the EL phenomenon. JC: Having the publisher and date of publishing would really help. Could you possibly make it a little easier for us to obtain this. I'd really like to read it. >There is no one, standard form of EL, of course. Typically it >is a roundish basketball-sized glowing object, but there are an >infinite number of varieties on this. They can be as small as >a few inches, or many metres across; they can be ovoid/discoid, >square,rectangular, rod-shaped and simply slow flares of light. >They can appear in daylight and artificial light as metallic - shiny >or dull. They can last from seconds to an hour or more. They >tend to haunt certain areas for days, weeks, months and - quite >often - for generations (we are on geological time). JC: Of course, as you have said, this happens primarily in areas with heavy tectonic strain. And each of these is documented for us to see with pictures, etc.? And you (or whomever) have conclusively proven that all the types you have mentioned are absolutely not metallic? How was this accomplished? Again, where can we see this? In good science, others need to verify how this was accomplished. ....snip.... >At the end of the day, we *know* that the attitude towards >Persinger is predicated on a desire for his approach to be *wrong*. >People want the fantasy of ETs.....snip.... JC: Since there are certain members of the scientific establishment who take exactly the opposite approach "It can't be, therefore it isn't," the two things basically cancel each other out. So why bother discussing either? A recent post I wrote concerning Hynek's reevaluation of Project Blue Book puts things in a more realistic perspective. Perhaps it would be better if we studied specific cases. >PS - as to your request to me to consider this and that specific >case - I really cannot get into that: I am not paid to spend my >life on this list, alas, any more than you are. JC: This is true yet, I and a number of others are here since research exchange is one of the basic functions of the NET. It is unfortunate that the work necessary to pursue one's theory makes it difficult for you to be familiar with the really difficult cases that do not fit your theory. Respectfully, Jerry Cohen For other Cohen/Devereux discussions
Click here Page from the website of: CohenUFO.org
UFO UpDates - Toronto - email@example.com
Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp - ++ 416-696-0304
A Hand-Operated E-Mail Subscription Service for the Study of UFO Related
To subscribe please send your first and last name to firstname.lastname@example.org
Message submissions should be sent to the same address.
Link it to the appropriate Ufologist or UFO Topic page.
Archived as a public service by Area 51 Research Center which is
not responsible for content. Financial support for this web server is provided by the Research Center Catalog.
Software by Glenn Campbell. Technical contact: email@example.com
Financial support for this web server is provided by the Research Center Catalog.