[net.space] I still think we"re alone

aka779 (10/23/82)

As much fun as it has been reading this interesting series of
discussions, I find it hard to believe
that the subject of UFO close encounters has
been ignored.  Before you all jump onto me,
read my series of UFO classifications in
THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF UFOS, edited by Ron Story

doubleday, 1980.  I interpret the evidence
of these reports as evidence
of extraterrestrial visits.

As to the theories of
whether we are alone, or whether we could be
visited by physical vehicles (as opposed to
radio signals only)-- there are hundreds ofreports of alien credatures
of all types, sizes, and apparent evolutionary tracks.

None of these reports contradicts any known
"science"; and in factthe reports from the
1950s indicate types of
technologies that we only now can recognize--
hardly the frauds and hoaxes most would have
us believe.  So I say--there may be some Netnews
terminals in use right now by some who know the answers
to the raft of questions proposed.  And undoubtedly
laughing at some of the arrogant geocentric
prejudices
being expressed.

Not afraid to sign my name, but aware of the
flak/flames to come.--Arlan Andrews, Bell Labs, Indy...inuxd!aka779

charliep@sri-unix (10/23/82)

I cannot let the references to UFO's go unanswered.  As a fan of
the Skeptical Enquirer, it is my duty to point out that even Dr.
Hynek, head honcho UFOlogist-believer, admits that NOT ONE reported
case of UFO sightings is best explained by proposing some alien
interference.  Even the kindest (non-alien) observer must truly admit that the
entire subject is rife with frauds and cases of blatant tampering with
the "evidence". It's really too bad when the movie makers mislead
and misrepresent the facts, as in several recent "big hits",
just to make more money.  A lot of people REALLY BELIEVE that stuff now.
Maybe if we all pray hard enough, ET will come back and give us
an outlet for our love....