ParaNet BBS/gbupd
From KB42
ParaNet BBS/gbupd
| File Name: | gbupd.txt |
|---|---|
| Author: | Unknown |
| Date: | Unknown |
| Posting BBS: | Unknown |
| BBS Main Page: | ParaNet Main Page |
| Key Words: | ParaNet, UFO, Ufology |
(2875) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gulfbreeze Files - Introduction
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 19:34:50 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.193450.10590@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
=====================================================================
===
** Gulfbreeze Introduction **
=====================================================================
===
The following articles are part of a series on the Gulfbreeze
UFO's . I know of no other case in UFOlogy that has been
debated/contested as much as this one has. Much of the debate
centers around "Mr Ed", Ed Walters and the swirls of controversy
over his photos. There have been cries of "HOAX!" ever since
this case made the headlines a few years ago, and this was only
exacerbated even further when Ed wrote his book. Much of the
debate centers over the infamous "road shot" that appears in
this book and the tug of war between the various UFO groups
still continues to this day. To date, there has not been any
established or absolute conclusive PROOF as to the hoax claims,
though there has been quite a few theories advanced. What makes
Ed's claims the more difficult to accept by many is that he has
been the ONLY one who has photographed the UFO(s) in great detail,
where others have only managed to get "red blobs" in their pics.
Having followed this for a few years now..it is still NO closer
to being resolved. I think I could safely say that the ParaNet
UFO organization and CUFOS have rated Ed Walters as probable
hoax. MUFON on the other hand, has stood behind the Walters
case all the way.
Here's a partial list of characters so you will understand who the
principles are:
Ed Walters - The _center_ of the controversy.He took the photos
and wrote the book, "The Gulf Breeze Sightings".
Bob Oechsler - Investigator/reporter.
Donald Ware - Florida state MUFON director. Investigator.
Carol and Rex Salisberry - (former) State Section Directors for
Pensacola MUFON. Investigators.
Dr. Bruce Maccabee - Optical physicist for the US Navy and MUFON
State Director for Maryland. Principle photo analyst for MUFON.
Duane Cook - Editor of the Gulf Breeze Sentinel.
Willy Smith - Claims that Ed made the models and hoaxed the photos.
Got nailed in a "sting" by Antonio Huneeus and Manuel Fernandez and
was later dis-credited.
- Others mentioned in articles on the BBS side -
John Hicks - Currently is the FIDO_UFO moderator and owner of a
camera business. Knows his optics pretty well and has done some
investigation in his own right in the Gulfbreeze area.
Jim Speiser - The guy I like to refer as the "curmudgeon of
ParaNet" :-)
He's asked the hard questions and brought up several inconsistencies
of the whole affair on ParaNet. In this case, he is very much a
skeptic.
Unfortunately, this case has also caused much division in UFOlogy
with
the extremes of positions. It's quite probable that there has been
some dis-information involved as well.
There seems to be two issues here...one regarding sightings and
photos
by Ed Walters and the other involving witnessed sightings _without_
Ed Walters. In the latter case, there has been quite a lot of those.
These sightings are *still* going on today. Some have speculated
that the recent skyquakes in the Gulfbreeze/Tampa area may be
associated with UFO's.
Who knows...if you're ever down in the panhandle of Florida and have
some time to spend..you just might be able to witness this phenomenon
for yourself. Bring a good camera or vidcam and do NOT trust the
autofocus, but learn to do it manually and you'll get good pictures.
Since there are quite a lot of these files, I would suggest that you
save them when they hit your system as I don't plan on re-posting
them
again. This is a one time shot. There's going to be about 38 files
altogether totalling around 290K.
Don
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2876) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: 1/30/89 Gulf Breeze Ufo Update.
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 19:36:39 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.193639.10814@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
1238 01-30-89 12:11 aes
Researchers say photos show UFO
GULF BREEZE, Fla. (UPI) _ UFO experts are debating the
authenticity
of photographs of an eerie cylindrical object glowing in the night
sky
over the Florida Panhandle town of Gulf Breeze.
More than 135 residents in the past 18 months have reported seeing
a strange craft hovering in skies over Gulf Breeze, the Tampa Tribune
reported Sunday.
One resident, asked to be identified only as "Ed," has produced
photographs showing a cylindrical craft ringed with lights and what
may
be windows.
The pictures have sparked a battle between two UFO investigating
groups.
The Mutual UFO Network, a 20-year-old group of scientists and
layman researchers, believes Ed's pictures are real. The Center for
UFO
Studies, a non-profit group founded by the late astronomer J. Allen
Hynek, does not.
The network cites a 90-page study by Navy physicist Bruce
Maccabee,
who says Ed could not have fabricated such convincing photographs.
"A professional magician would have a difficult time doing this,"
he said.
The center relies on its researchers and on Robert Nathan, of
NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. He said the photos show glaring
inconsistencies typical of double exposures.
Mark Rodeghier of the Center for UFO Studies said the case has
"deteriorated into a shouting match" between the two groups, and that
the network's endorsement of the pictures biased Maccabee's study.
"Except those intimately connected with the network, 90 percent of
serious UFO researchers think (the) Gulf Breeze (case) is a hoax,"
Rodeghier said.
But residents of the town of 6,000 think they know what they saw.
"I was exhilarated," said Brenda Pollak, a City Council member
who claimed to see a large, lighted craft twice in one night last
spring
over Pensacola Bay. "I can tell you now _ for every one person who
has
reported seeing the craft, there are 10 who talk about it but don't
want
anyone to know."
=====================================================================
=======
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2877) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Upi Article Gulf Breeze, Fla Ufo
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 19:38:11 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.193811.10902@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
NEWS CLIPPING SERVICE
DATE OF ARTICLE: January 30, 1989
SOURCE OF ARTICLE: NEWS
LOCATION: PARKERSBURG, WV
BYLINE: NONE (UPI)
========================================================
THIS FILE WAS PROVIDED BY THE UFO NEWSCLIPPING SERVICE
AND PREPARED BY PARANET ALPHA -- PARANET INFORMATION
SERVICE
========================================================
LOOK, UP IN THE SKY
...
FLORIDANS SURE PHOTOS PROVE
...
UFOS VISITING PANHANDLE AREA
Gulf Breeze, FLA. (UPI) -- Photographs of an eerily lit
cylindrical object drifting through the night sky have scientists
debating whether unidentified flying objects are visiting the
Florida Panhandle.
More than 135 Gulf Breeze's 6,000 residents have reported
seeing a strange craft hovering in the skies over the past one
and a half years, the Tampa Tribune reported Sunday.
One resident, asked to be identified only as "Ed" to protect
his anonymity, has produced startling photographs of the alleged
UFO. Those pictures, showing a cylindrical craft ringed with
lights and what may be windows, lie at the heart of a simmering
battle between two UFO investigating groups.
The Mutual UFO Network, a 20-year-old group of scientists
and layman researchers, believes Ed's pictures are real. But the
Center for UFO Studies, a non-profit group found by the late
astronomer, J. Allen Hynek, does not.
The network cites a 90-page study done by Navy physicist
Bruce Maccabee. Maccabee said Ed could not have made such
perfect fakes, and that the pictures are real.
"A professional magician would have a difficult time doing
this," he said.
Maccabee also cites circumstantial evidence in Ed's favor,
including sightings by others who described UFOs identical to
those in Ed's photos.
The center relies on its own researchers and on Robert
Nathan of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Nathan, who conceded
he had not studied the pictures as completely as did Maccabee,
said the photos show glaring inconsistencies typical of double
exposures.
Mark Rodeghier of the Center for UFO Studies said the Gulf
Breeze case had "deteriorated into a shouting match" because his
group was forced to play devil's advocate when the network
endorsed the pictures. That endorsement biased Maccabee's study,
he said.
"Except those intimately connected with the network, 90
percent of serious UFO researchers think Gulf Breeze is a hoax,"
Rodeghier said.
For many Gulf Breeze residents, what the experts think is
beside the point -- they know what they saw.
"I was exhilarated," said Brenda Pollak, a City Council
member who said she saw a large, lighted craft twice in one night
in spring of 1988. Ms. Pollak said she watched the craft hover
over Pensacola Bay while, unknown to her, Ed shot pictures of the
UFO from only a few blocks away.
"I can tell you now -- for every one person who has reported
seeing the craft, there are 10 who talk about it but don't want
anyone to know," Ms. Pollack said.
"I'm not saying that I believe it's from another planet, but
it's something I had never laid eyes on in my life," added
Shirley McConnell. Mrs. McConnell and her husband, who is the
medical examiner for Florida's District 1, say that last June the
craft hovered within 75 yards of their house for nearly four
minutes before drifting off.
"People can say whatever they want about me, but I know what
I saw. Ed didn't make this up," Mrs. McConnell said.
=================================================================
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2878) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Interim Report - Carol A. & Rex C. Salisberry
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 19:41:42 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.194142.10992@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
From: Carol A. & Rex C. Salisberry 23 September 1990
Navarre Beach, Fl. 32566-7235
To: Walter H. Andrus, Jr.
103 Oldtowne Road
Sequin, Tx 78155-4099
Subject: Interim Report on the reopening of the Walters' UFO Case
Background: The investigators, Carol & Rex Salisberry had not been
involved with the prior investigation of the Walter's Case and had
accepted the MUFON assessment of its validity without close personal
scrutiny. When Tommy Smith came forward with his allegations on 15
June 1990, the investigators doubted them and, in fact made several
public statements in support of the Walter's Case. After the press
conferences on 19 June 1990, wherein Mr. Charles Flannigan ( Florida
MUFON State Director) announced the reopening of the Walters' Case
and
the commitment by MUFON to finding the truth, we were asked by Mr.
Flannigan to assist him in the next phase of the investigation.
During
a meeting of Mr. Walter Andrus, MUFON International Director, Mr.
Flannigan, and Mr. Salisberry on Thursday 5 July 1990, Mr. Andrus
expressed his capacity to accept the result that the Walter's Case
was
a total fraud if that was proven to be the case. We deemed this to
be
a critical commitment on his part , because we didn't want the
results
of our work to " be swept under the rug" if they were contrary to
the
then prevailing views of many MUFON officials and others. Upon
receiving this commitment from Mr. Andrus we proceeded with the
investigation with an open mind and with the greatest degree of
objectivity that we could muster. Our previous, personal supportive
views of the case had to be subjugated so as not to influence the
fact
finding process.
Tentative Conclusions: Although there is much work remaining to be
done in the investigation of this case, we have arrived at result
that we deem should be brought to the attention of MUFON before it
is
uncovered and released to the public by outside interests. On 9
September 1990, our analysis of Photo 19 of the Walters' case
indicated a very high probability that the reflection on the road
could not have been made by an object hovering over the road as
described by Mr. Walters and validated by Dr. Maccabee. It is a
virtual physical impossibility for the reflection to occur as
depicted
in Photo 19. Perhaps one of the easiest methods of producing the
photo
is by use of a small model (photographed at close range) and double
exposure techniques as demonstrated by Mr. Mark Curtis of WEAR TV.
Mr.
Curtis and his associate, a biologist and model maker, have been
harshly criticized by their critics. We were allowed to witness
their
effort and know that their intent was to demonstrate that the
process
was feasible and their purpose was not to duplicate the Walters'
photo. (It is interesting that they too introduced the fatal flaw of
creating a reflection which was not possible under the
circumstances.)
The detailed account of our analysis of Photo 19 is shown in
Attachment 1.
Mr. Flannigan and Mr. Salisberry telephoned Mr. Andrus on Sunday
evening 9 September 1990 to inform him of the results of the
analysis.
During the conversation it was suggested that two independent
experts
be contacted to confirm the validity of our analysis. Those two
experts were provided the details of the analysis and have orally
responded with their confirmations of the validity of the results.
With Photo 19 shown to be a probable hoax, Photo 14 is likewise
categorized since it is essentially identical to Photo 19 except for
geographic location. With these two photos reassessed as probable
hoaxes, the other photos which depict an image of the same model
should be considered as highly suspect. Intellectual and scientific
integrity then dictate that the suspect photos be downgraded in the
overall assessment of the validity of the case.
Another aspect of the Walters' case which has come into question is
whether or not he knew how to take double exposures prior to 11
November 1987. Mr. S. Peter Neumann, of WEAR TV and a resident of
Gulf
Breeze, has informed us that Mr. Walters had told him and his wife
much earlier than 11 November 1987 that Walters sometimes used
double
exposure photography to amuse the young people who attended the
parties in the Walters' home. Mr. Neumann has declined to provide us
with a written and signed statement to this effect, but indicated
that
he would provide the same information to anyone calling by
telephone.
Additionally, the young people whom we have interviewed relate that
Mr. Walters consistently "had a camera in his hand" at the various
activities at which he was present. These young people also
confirmed
that Mr. Walters sometimes took what appeared to be trick photos and
that they could not understand how it was done.
Discussion: It is emphasized that the reassessment of the Walters'
Case should not be cause to believe or disbelieve the hundreds of
other UFO related experiences in the Pensacola area. Each reported
case had been evaluated on its own merits and should stand as
reported. It is even quite probable that the Walters family have had
experiences with UFO related phenomena; however, this is difficult
to
assess at this point because of the previous preoccupation with the
photos which may have distorted the data.
Recommendation: MUFON should release the results of our analysis to
the public as soon as practical. We consider this important to
maintain our integrity as an objective UFO investigative
organization.
Attachment One
Preliminary Analysis of Photo 19 of the Walters' UFO Case made by
Rex
C. Salisberry on 9 September 1990.
ASSUMPTIONS:
(1) The object and the light ring at the bottom are circular
(source - Mccabee, 1988 MUFON Symposium Proceedings).
(2) The distance from the camera to the object is 185 (+/- 5)
feet (source - Maccabee, page 145 of 1988 MUFON Symposium
Proceedings)
(3) The diameter of the light ring at the bottom is 7.5 feet
(source - Maccabee, same as #2).
(4) The tilt of the object away from the observer is about 13
degrees ( source - Dr. Willy Smith, page 14 of his " The Gulf Breeze
Saga")
(5) The height of the object above the road is about 3 feet
(source - Maccabee, same as #2).
(6) The height of the camera was about 5 feet.
(7) The reflection on the Flat and relatively level road
should
have a round or slightly oval shape. Regardless of the shape of the
reflection, since the cross dimension of the light is roughly equal
to
the cross dimension of the reflection, fore-and-aft dimensions of
the
light and the reflection should also correspond.
APPROACH:
It seemed to be a prudent scientific approach to determine what
the reflection should appear to be under the given assumptions and
then compare that result with the photograph.
ANALYSIS:
(1) Since the three-dimensional appearance of the reflection is
converted to two dimensions on film, the two dimensional
presentation
to the camera should be determined. The horizontal presentation is
unchanged because of the geometry of the scene, however the height
and
depth presentations are converted to a vertical only presentation as
follows:
5ft-> |
|90__________> (Angle A )
185ft
Angle A = arctan 5/185 = arctan (0.027027) = 1.54815 degrees
The fore-and-aft dimension (x,) of the reflection on the road is
given
by ^ <-7.5ft
/90
/_____________13 degrees
x,
x, = (7.5 feet)/(cosine 13 degrees)= 7.6972813 feet
The vertical dimension (y,) as it would appear to the camera is then
given by
|
5ft | ^y,
| |
|90_______________7.6972813______>Angle A =
1.54815
185ft
y, = ( 7.6972813 feet)( sin 1.54815 deg.) = 0.2979574 feet = 2.49549
inches.
(2) Computation of the comparable vertical dimension from the photo
facing page 129 of Walter's book is as follows:
The ratio of the vertical dimension to the horizontal dimension
is approximately 1 to 4 as measured on the photograph.
Then by proportion Yz / 7.6972813 feet = 1/4
Yz = (7.6972813feet)/4 = 1.9243203 feet
which is over 9 times greater than the expected value computed in (1)
(3) If the road surface was sloped up abruptly below the object at
an
angle of about 14 degrees, the presentation of the reflection as
shown
on Photo 19 could have been attained.
. |
. |1.9243203 feet
. |
Angle B <________________90|
7.6972813 feet
Angle B = arctan (1.9243203)/(7.7972813)= 14 degrees
(This computation is not precise but is a close enough approximation
upon which to draw a conclusion.)
Since the road is known to not have a 14 degree slope at the point
indicated in the photo, this possibility is ruled out. However, a
similar reflection to the one shown in Photo 19 was produced by Mark
Curtis for WEAR TV which indicates that the reflection could have
been
made by using a small model and double-exposure camera techniques.
Mr.
Curtis and his associate made the mistake of slanting the top of
their
light pipe and then covering it with thin paper to create the image
for reflection. The fatal flaw produced a similar " fat " reflection
as the one shown in Photo 19.
(4) It is possible that the camera elevation could have been higher
than the 5 feet assumed, so the camera elevation needed to produce
the
photo image of the reflection is roughly calculated by using a
proportion as follows:
|
Y3 | |< 1.9243203 feet
| |
|_________|____________________
7.6972813 feet
|<.............185 feet.......>|
Y3/185 feet = 1.9243203 feet/7.6972813 feet
Y3 = (1.9243203) (185 feet)/7.6972813 = 46.25 feet
Visual inspection of photo 19 indicates that a camera elevation of
46.25 feet was not possible.
(5) It could also be argued that the fore-and-aft dimension of the
reflection on the road could have been greater than the approximate
7.7 feet calculated in (1) above. Therefore a calculation of the
fore-and-aft dimension needed to produce the reflection of Photo 19
is
as follows:
| .
5 ft | | <1.9243203 feet
|90........|.....X2.......
|> 185ft <|
X2 = (185) ( 1.9243203feet)/5 = 71.2 feet
Again, a visual inspection of Photo 19 rules out this possibility.
(6) Other arguments could be offered, e.g. heat from the bottom of
the
UFO heated the wet road which caused steam to rise. The reflection
on
the water droplets in the steam would then cause the reflection to
appear " fatter " than expected. Such arguments employ circular
logic
and hence must be discounted. Additional, the case file does not
contain any evidence to indicate that the road was subjected to heat.
(7) Anyone can perform a simple demonstration to convince himself of
the validity of the above analysis. Construct a model of the scene
using a scale of 1 inch = 1 foot as follows:
(1) Cut a 7.5 inch diameter circle from a piece of white paper.
(2) Place the 7.5 inch circular piece of paper on a flat surface to
represent the reflection on the road.
(3) Move away 185 inches to simulate the distance from the camera to
the object.
(4) View the circle from an elevation of 5 inches above the
elevation
of the circle as shown below ( You can cut a peep hole 5 inches
above
the bottom edge of a piece of cardboard to help in setting the
proper
height above the circle of paper):
(Eye)>|
|5 inches
|____________________________()7.5inch white
disc
185 inches
One can then easily see that the circle appears as a thin line and
not
as the "fat" reflection shown in Photo 19
Conclusions: It is virtually impossible that the object as described
in Walter's book and Maccabee's analyses could have caused the
reflection as shown in Photo 19. A small model and double exposure
camera techniques could have been used to produce the reflection as
described in (3) above.
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2879) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: And More Latest News Of Gulf Breeze
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 19:44:01 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.194401.11062@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
Message number 868 in "MUFONET"
Date: 10-30-90 09:11
From: John Hicks
To: all
Subj: ED WALTERS NEWS ARTICLE
PENSACOLA NEWS JOURNAL
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1990
..............................
INVESTIGATORS DOUBT UFO AUTHOR
BY CRAIG MYERS
NEWS JOURNAL
..............................
Two investigators for the MUTUAL UFO Network said Friday they
believe Gulf
Breeze author Ed. Walters faked some of the photos of UFOs that
appear in his
book.
" We believe that UFOs exist," said Rex and Carol Salisberry of
Navarre of
their study of several of Walter's photos. " We entered this
investigation
with a natural and favorable bias toward the Walter's case, " but "
our
investigation and analysis lend to the conclusion that several, if
not all of
the photos are probable hoaxes."
Walters, who co-wrote " The Gulf Breeze Sightings" with his wife
Frances,
maintains the photos are real and that they were taken during
numerous
encounters between November 1987 and March 1988.
Walters has appeared on numerous radio and television shows,
including "
Unsolved Mysteries " and the Oprah Winfrey Show, to recount his
experiences
with UFOs.
He was reported to be out of town Friday and could not be reached for
comment.
In July the couple was named " Investigators of the Year " at a MUFON
Symposium in Pensacola.
Walt Andrus, MUFON's international director, said Friday that his
organization is not yet ready to give its stamp of approval to the
Salisberry's four month investigation of the photos.
" I don't know how they arrived at that decision." Andrus said from
his
office in Sequin, Texas. " It is certainly premature. He has no
business
talking to reporters. It has never been cleared through here. He
can't make
representations for the organizations."
Andrus, who has for two years endorsed the Walters case, appointed
Salisberry
in July to take a second look at the case after questions surfaced
about the
credibility of Walter's photos.
The first question arose after a model was found in the Walter's
former
residence in Gulf Breeze in March. The Styrofoam and drafting paper
model was
found in the attic of the home and strongly resembled a drawing
Walter's made
of one of his UFO sightings.
The second question arose when Tommy Smith, formerly of Gulf
Breeze, said in
July that he witnessed Walter's fake UFO photos. Smith said Walters
asked him
to take some faked UFO photos to the Gulf Breeze newspaper and
claim they
were real.
But Andrus on Friday said Smith is lying and the UFO model was
hidden in the
attic by someone who wants to discredit Walters.
"Tommy Smith can't prove any of his statements- they are outlandish
lies,"
Andrus said.
The Salisberrys said Smith's testimony and the model contributed to
their
conclusion, but more convincing was an analysis of Walter's
so-called " road
shot " that shows a UFO hovering over a road.
Salisberry said the reflection of the spacecraft, which should be
flat,
actually is at an angle that does not match the road's surface. The
triangular shape of the reflection also does not match the round
light source
on the bottom of the craft, he said.
The Salisberrys said the photo and a second photo probably was
created by a
double-exposure-- a process by which a model is photographed and
the image is
exposed again onto the same frame of film.
" With these photos reassessed as probable hoaxes, the other
photos... should
be considered as highly suspect, " Salisberry wrote in the
preliminary
report.
Seven MUFON members investigated the sightings in 1988 and
concluded Walter's
story was true. The Salisberrys were not among the original
investigators,
but joined MUFON in November 1988.
Andrus said that while the Salisberrys are good investigators, they
cannot
yet speak for MUFON.
" They ( the Salisberrys ) do not have grounds to arrive at that
conclusion
until it is submitted to us. We will have to look at their facts,"
Andrus
said.
The Salisberrys have not yet submitted their report to MUFON.
Phil Klass, a contributing editor to Aviation Week & Space Technology
magazine and a longtime Walters critic, said Andrus is too " proud
and
stubborn " to accept the report.
" I think the Salisberrys should be commended for being willing to
change
their earlier opinion," said Klass.
But Dr. Bruce Maccabee, a photographic analyst who has defended
Walter's
photos. said the road reflection does not discredit the photo.
Maccabee said his analysis of the photo shows light from beneath
the object
was projected at an angle-like car headlights shinning ahead of a
car on a
wet road.
Maccabee said Friday he still is open-minded about the Walter's
sightings,
but said it would take more convincing evidence than Salisberry's
report to
convince him of a hoax.
" Nothing I have seen has changed my mind," Maccabee said.
Salisberry said his conclusion on Walters' photo does not shake his
own
belief in UFOs. And he said his report won't end the Walters' debate.
" The problem with Walters' story isn't a UFO problem, it is a human
problem". Salisberry said. " If the Walters' case is typical of
most UFO
cases, the debate will probably go on for years in spite of any
evidence pro
or con."
*********************************************************************
*********
--- via Quickpoint XRS 3.2- (286)
* Origin: UFINET//PARANET//MUFONET (407)649-4136 (1:363/29)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2880) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: 10/30/90 News-journal Ed Walters
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 19:47:44 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.194744.11132@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
**************************************************************
UFO REPORT POLITICAL, OFFICIAL SAYS
By Craig Myers
NEWS JOURNAL (TUESDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1990)
**************************************************************
A report that Gulf Breeze resident Ed Walters may have faked
photographs of UFOs is designed to hurt Walters' campaign for
city council, a Mutual UFO Network official said Monday.
Dan Wright, who heads UFO investigations for MUFON, said
Monday the organization is " concerned that one of our
investigators may have taken sides in a political dispute."
Walters co-wrote " The Gulf Breeze Sightings," which recounts
encounters he claims to have had with UFOs between November
1987 and March 1988. He is a candidate for City Council in
Gulf Breeze on the Nov. 6 ballot.
Walters would not comment Monday, but said earlier this month
that his alleged UFO encounters were not an issue in the
campaign.
The issue resurfaced Friday after Rex and Carol Salisberry,
investigators for the UFO network, released a summary of a
preliminary report that said Walters likely faked at least two
photographs reproduced in his book.
The Salisberrys, MUFON investigators of the year in 1989-1990,
were asked in July to reopen the case.
The new probe was prompted by the discovery of a model in the
attic of Walters' former home in Gulf Breeze. The plastic foam
and drafting paper model strongly resembled a drawing of an
alleged UFO in Walters' book.
In another incident, a former Gulf Breeze man said he helped
Walters fake UFO photos at least once in 1987.
On Monday, Wright said that Gulf Breeze Mayor Ed Gray, a
longtime critic of Walters, may have "pressed" the Salisberrys
to release their report before election.
" It is possible that Gray may have found a sympathetic ear,"
Wright said in a telephone interview from Lansing, Mich.,
where he lives.
But Salisberry said that Gray had absolutely no influence on
the report's release. " I could care less about the City
Council race," Salisberry said. " I don't live in Gulf
Breeze."
Gray would not comment on Wright's allegations.
In his report, Salisberry questioned the legitimacy of the
so-called " road shot " which shows a UFO hovering over a
road.
The reflection of the spacecraft, which should be flat,
actually is at an angle that does not match the road's
surface. The triangular shape of the reflection also does not
match the round light source, Salisberry said.
Salisberry said that he told MUFON International Director Walt
Andrus in September that he believed Walters faked some, if
not all, of his photos. It was then, he said, that he learned
some MUFON members were trying to discredit him.
Before the personal attacks began, he said he decided to make
public his findings. " I told them we would not tolerate being
discredited," he said. " We were already being categorized as
debunkers that have a history of shooting the messenger."
Wright on Monday said evidence still indicates Walters' photos
are legitimate and that MUFON has no interest in the City
Council race.
" If we find Rex didn't take into consideration all factors
and didn't make all the necessary contacts, we may have to
determine it is an incomplete report," Wright said.
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2881) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Styrofoam Saucer Found In Ed Walters House
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 19:49:12 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.194912.11202@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
THE TAMPA TRIBUNE, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13, 1990
-------------------------------------------
By DAVID TORTORANO
of United Press International
PENSACOLA - A model flying saucer that cast doubts on a man's
claim he photographed UFOs two years ago has been tested and is being
returned to the man who found it, a newspaper editor said Tuesday.
Ken Fortengerry, managing editor of the Pensacola News Journal,
said results of the tests would not be known for a couple of weeks.
He declined to say what tests were performed.
The discovery of the 9-inch model was the latest twist on a
story
that began in 1987, when contractor Ed Walters took photographs of
objects that appeared to be flying saucers near his home in Gulf
Breeze, a suburb of Pensacola.
The photographs prompted a wave of sightings from other
residents
that continue to this day. Walters claimed he had dozens of
additional
encounters, including a face-to-face confrontation with a 4-foot
alien.
His book about the encounters is selling well.
A private group that investigates UFO sightings calls the Gulf
Breeze flurry among the most notable sightings in U.S. history.
Skeptics have long claimed the pictures were faked, but offered no
proof.
Then came the model.
It was found in April by a man who moved into a house once
owned
by Walters. The newspaper got possession of the model and on Sunday
printed pictures by staff photographers using the model.
They look similar to Walters' pictures.
"This is a very critical piece of evidence and a very
controversial story," said Fortenberry, who said the newspaper was
besieged with calls Monday from the media asking about the model.
The model was to be returned to the owners Tuesday.
The man, who wished not to be identified, said he was
installing
an ice-maker in his home and had gone to the attic to trace some
pipes
when he found the model under some insulation.
"It was not a shock or startling or anything," said the
resident,
a scientist. He knew of Walters' involvement in sightings and figured
the model was one that Walters may have built for a reenactment. "I
thought nothing more about it."
Later, he saw a diagram of the Walters' UFO.
"I recall thinking to myself, that model looks a lot like this
diagram," he said. Last week he received a visit from a reporter from
the newspaper.
"This, frankly, I find a little suspicious," said the resident,
who said the reporter showed up at the door and asked whether he had
found any photographs or models. That's when he told him.
"I wish I had lied," he said.
Walters insists there was ample opportunity for someone to
plant
the model.
"The house was on the market for 10 months, during which time
it
was opened during the day and sometimes closed up and locked up at
night," said Walters. "Sometime, somebody planted this model."
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2882) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Gulf Breeze Sighting. February 1991
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 19:51:03 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.195103.11272@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
Date: 03-12-91 00:19
From: John Hicks
To: all
Subj: GB sighting
STRANGE LIGHT IN SKY DRAWS ATTENTION
by David Baker, THE GULF BREEZE SENTINEL, March 3, 1991.
On February 23, 1991 two Pensacola men were sighing on the three
mile
bridge. AT approximately 7:50 p.m. the fishermen's attention was
drawn to a
bright red light which suddenly appeared over Gulf Breeze.
The two men said the light would dim then come back bright red,
stay that
way for a while and then dim again, all the while moving slowly in
their
direction. They detected no sound from the object.
Before the object disappeared it blinked to green momentarily,
changed to a
brilliant white and slowly faded away. The sighting lasted about
four minutes
and there were nine additional witnesses.
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2883) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Gulf Breeze Newsclipping 1/30/90
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 19:52:14 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.195214.11342@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
1238 01-30-89 12:11 aes
Researchers say photos show UFO
GULF BREEZE, Fla. (UPI) _ UFO experts are debating the
authenticity
of photographs of an eerie cylindrical object glowing in the night
sky
over the Florida Panhandle town of Gulf Breeze.
More than 135 residents in the past 18 months have reported seeing
a strange craft hovering in skies over Gulf Breeze, the Tampa Tribune
reported Sunday.
One resident, asked to be identified only as "Ed," has produced
photographs showing a cylindrical craft ringed with lights and what
may
be windows.
The pictures have sparked a battle between two UFO investigating
groups.
The Mutual UFO Network, a 20-year-old group of scientists and
layman researchers, believes Ed's pictures are real. The Center for
UFO
Studies, a non-profit group founded by the late astronomer J. Allen
Hynek, does not.
The network cites a 90-page study by Navy physicist Bruce
Maccabee,
who says Ed could not have fabricated such convincing photographs.
"A professional magician would have a difficult time doing this,"
he said.
The center relies on its researchers and on Robert Nathan, of
NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. He said the photos show glaring
inconsistencies typical of double exposures.
Mark Rodeghier of the Center for UFO Studies said the case has
"deteriorated into a shouting match" between the two groups, and that
the network's endorsement of the pictures biased Maccabee's study.
"Except those intimately connected with the network, 90 percent of
serious UFO researchers think (the) Gulf Breeze (case) is a hoax,"
Rodeghier said.
But residents of the town of 6,000 think they know what they saw.
"I was exhilarated," said Brenda Pollak, a City Council member
who claimed to see a large, lighted craft twice in one night last
spring
over Pensacola Bay. "I can tell you now _ for every one person who
has
reported seeing the craft, there are 10 who talk about it but don't
want
anyone to know."
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2884) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Ufo Sighting: Gulf Breeze, Florida 07/26/91
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 19:57:28 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.195728.11475@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
Date: 08-04-91 00:25
From: John Hicks
Subj: Gulf Breeze news
In an article in the August 1 Gulf Breeze Sentinel, Vicki Lyons
of MUFON
wrote that about a dozen people saw the "red light" UFO hovering
over the
Bob Sikes (Three Mile) Bridge at about 9:15 p.m. Friday, July 26.
The sighting lasted a few minutes, and ended when the UFO
brightened to
white and disappeared.
Believe it or not, Ed Walters was driving across the bridge at
approximately that time.
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2885) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Gulf Breeze Newsclipping 10/30/90
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:02:33 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.200233.11563@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
**************************************************************
UFO REPORT POLITICAL, OFFICIAL SAYS
By Craig Myers
NEWS JOURNAL (TUESDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1990)
**************************************************************
A report that Gulf Breeze resident Ed Walters may have faked
photographs of UFOs is designed to hurt Walters' campaign for
city council, a Mutual UFO Network official said Monday.
Dan Wright, who heads UFO investigations for MUFON, said
Monday the organization is " concerned that one of our
investigators may have taken sides in a political dispute."
Walters co-wrote " The Gulf Breeze Sightings," which recounts
encounters he claims to have had with UFOs between November
1987 and March 1988. He is a candidate for City Council in
Gulf Breeze on the Nov. 6 ballot.
Walters would not comment Monday, but said earlier this month
that his alleged UFO encounters were not an issue in the
campaign.
The issue resurfaced Friday after Rex and Carol Salisberry,
investigators for the UFO network, released a summary of a
preliminary report that said Walters likely faked at least two
photographs reproduced in his book.
The Salisberrys, MUFON investigators of the year in 1989-1990,
were asked in July to reopen the case.
The new probe was prompted by the discovery of a model in the
attic of Walters' former home in Gulf Breeze. The plastic foam
and drafting paper model strongly resembled a drawing of an
alleged UFO in Walters' book.
In another incident, a former Gulf Breeze man said he helped
Walters fake UFO photos at least once in 1987.
On Monday, Wright said that Gulf Breeze Mayor Ed Gray, a
longtime critic of Walters, may have "pressed" the Salisberrys
to release their report before election.
" It is possible that Gray may have found a sympathetic ear,"
Wright said in a telephone interview from Lansing, Mich.,
where he lives.
But Salisberry said that Gray had absolutely no influence on
the report's release. " I could care less about the City
Council race," Salisberry said. " I don't live in Gulf
Breeze."
Gray would not comment on Wright's allegations.
In his report, Salisberry questioned the legitimacy of the
so-called " road shot " which shows a UFO hovering over a
road.
The reflection of the spacecraft, which should be flat,
actually is at an angle that does not match the road's
surface. The triangular shape of the reflection also does not
match the round light source, Salisberry said.
Salisberry said that he told MUFON International Director Walt
Andrus in September that he believed Walters faked some, if
not all, of his photos. It was then, he said, that he learned
some MUFON members were trying to discredit him.
Before the personal attacks began, he said he decided to make
public his findings. " I told them we would not tolerate being
discredited," he said. " We were already being categorized as
debunkers They have a history of shooting the messenger."
Wright on Monday said evidence still indicates Walters' photos
are legitimate and that MUFON has no interest in the City
Council race.
" If we find Rex didn't take into consideration all factors
and didn't make all the necessary contacts, we may have to
determine it is an incomplete report," Wright said.
**************************************************************
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2886) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: 11/19/88 Gulf Breeze Sentinel Article
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:08:24 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.200824.11839@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
Gulf Breezes Sentinel
Volume 28, Number 49
November 19, 1988
[The following letter was printed in the above periodical. It was
accompanied
by three photos showing an object with port hole like spots around it
periphery. The quality is superb considering it is a photocopy of
the
original newspaper. Here in lies the story.]
"To Whom it May Concern:
On the night of November 11th I took the pictures you now see
before you. I
was reluctant at first to show them to any one but my family but my
wife
convinced me to show them to Ed. Ed in turn said that the photos
should be
shown to the press. That is why he is presenting them to you.
I had just sat down to dinner when I saw the object from my
window. I
rushed to my bedroom to get my Polaroid. I rushed outside and
started taking
pictures. I got off four pictures (5,6,7,8) and then had to change
film. I
got one more good picture (1) before it shot straight up and
disappeared.
There may be some reasonable explanation for what I saw but I
don't think
so. The "ship" looked about the size of a small house. It was,
however,
quite some distance away and hard to tell. It hovered in the sky
for several
minutes and then left. It did not spin or rotate but it did seem
to bob up
and down while weaving slightly. It glowed from the bottom as if
that may be
the power source. The markings (windows?) on the top there
appeared to be a
dome or bump that was quite bright. There was nothing colorful
about it - no
flashing lights, no beams coming from it. None of that "Star Wars"
stuff; it
was just a dull gray-blue "thing".
I don't think that it was military but you may want to check It
was quite
big and I don't think I was alone in seeing it. I wish to remain
anonymous but
if these photos and story spark any interest from your readership I
may
identify myself. I am a prominent citizen of the community however
and need
anonymity at this time. I know what I saw and would feel much
better if I
know if I was not alone.
Let me reassure you that this is not a hoax. I saw what I saw,
took
pictures of it, and have given these pictures to you. I wish I
could come
forward but can not; for while I have nothing to gain, I have
everything to
lose. Thank you for your time and understanding."
[End of article.]
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2887) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: 4/20/89 Gulf Breeze Newsclipping
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:07:18 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.200718.11774@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy.sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
Strange things are still flying around the small community
of Gulf Breeze, Florida. Three recent articles on the subject,
published in the Gulf Breeze Sentinel, are presented
below (with permission).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Gulf Breeze Sentinel, April 20, 1989
UFO'S SIGHTED OVER GULF BREEZE, AGAIN?
WITNESS LYNN SOLEY IS A WELL KNOWN GULF BREEZE ARTIST,
AND HER HUSBAND IS A PRINTER AT PENSACOLA MAGAZINE
"When we first saw it, it was about 10:00 p.m. Monday," said
Mrs. Lynn Soley of Breeze Street in Gulf Breeze, of an unidentified
flying object.
"We were in the front yard. My husband spotted it in the sky
and he went in and got his binoculars. We all took turns looking
at it. It was flashing red, yellow, green, and blue lights, with a
white light. And then, on the upper right hand side and from time
to time, it would move down the lower right side and then over
to the lower left hand corner of the thing."
"At one point, it turned on its side or something and the white
light was in the center with red flashing lights going around it in
a circle. Then, when we lost sight of it, we rode over to Shoreline
Park where we saw three more just like it. Then we saw, in one
part of the sky, what looked like a big, bright star. The funny
thing
was, though, when the four UFO'S vanished, so did the big white
star. It disappeared too."
SENTINEL: How many people saw it, and can you tell us who they
were?
SOLEY: While at Shoreline Park, we ran into a fisherman and a man
walking his dog. They were looking at it. We were all sharing the
binoculars. And then very shortly, of course, came Gulf Breeze
Police and two police officers saw it.
SENTINEL: They said they saw it, too?
SOLEY: Yes, they had our binoculars. We shared binoculars. My
husband is a printer and the thing that amazed him about this one,
as well as the one he saw about 13 years ago, he said, was that the
colors of the lights were not like the colors we have here. Like
the red lights were not any shade of red he had ever seen before.
And the same with the blue and the green.
And then my brother-in-law, who we walked out to the car
with, has been in radar with the Navy ten years active duty and
twenty with the Reserves. He said he didn't recognize it as
anything he had ever seen in the Navy, and that the lighting on
it was not like any aircraft lighting that he had seen before.
Then Tuesday night, Joe went out to the backyard and saw
another one--just like the other four we'd seen on Monday night,
but this one didn't stay there very long. It vanished in about
30 minutes.
SENTINEL: And where is your house?
SOLEY: On Breeze Street, off of North Sunset on the other side of
the peninsula, behind the Holiday Inn, more or less. And the
direction the thing was going in, it must have gone right over
our house and we missed it. It was like it was right over our
front yard and then starting veering southwest and finally,
at Shoreline Park. When they all left at once, they went southwest.
SENTINEL: That was Monday night at what time?
SOLEY: That was Monday night at 10:00 when we first saw it in
our front yard. We watched it for about an hour there, then went
to Shoreline Park and it was about 1:00 in the morning when
they got so faint and all but one had disappeared and about that
time the big white light was gone too.
SENTINEL: How far away would you estimate it was when you
saw it?
SOLEY: The first time we saw it--it's hard to say because I don't
know how big they really are--I would say it was probably over
the center part of Gulf Breeze between Shoreline and Fairpoint.
It would have been about in that general area when we first saw
it.
SENTINEL: Any sensation of noise?
SOLEY: No, no noise at all. It just hovered there and from time
to time they'd go up, down, or left to right, but they were
moving kind of slow. You figure we watched them for about
three hours until they got so tiny you could barely see them
anymore, and that's when the big, bright "star" was gone too.
SENTINEL: So, the summary is, you saw it Monday from your
home as you were going out to your car, you and your brother?
SOLEY: Brother-in law.
SENTINEL: What's his name?
SOLEY: Charles Higgs. It was him, my sister and his mother--three
of them. There were nine of us altogether that saw it. My
brother-in-law and my sister live in Little Rock, Arkansas. I
don't know the names of the policemen or the guys we saw at
the park.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Gulf Breeze Sentinel, May 4, 1989
SENTINEL WRITER FINALLY SEES UFO HERSELF
By Kimberly Stevenson
Since the first report of UFO sightings over Gulf Breeze, I have
diligently watched the sky for a glimpse of these extraterrestrial
visitors. A few times I thought I had seen somehting unusual,
but still a bit of skepticism prevailed.
However, last week, on April 27th, a Thursday night about 9:30,
I routinely looked out my back door towards the City of Gulf
Breeze, hoping again these UFOs would make an appearance so
that I could see them.
I was amazed to see something different in the sky. I walked
out on my back deck, turning off the kitchen light as I stepped
out and watched as a bright object shot at a tremendous speed
down and diagonally across the sky. It then made a circular
pattern, then shot straight up. The whole time it radiated colors
from it that grew in intensity from white, to blue, to green, to red.
No blinking lights just radiating colors of a nature I have never
seen.
I have lived in this area for seven years and have watched the
sky on numberous occasions and am quite familiar with the
air traffic in the sky. I am very familiar with aircraft of all
sorts
and know what an airplane, jet, helicopter and yes, the Goodyear
Blimp look like in the sky. I can assure you that what I saw
was not any of these.
As I watched this object, which appeared to be right over the
area of Shoreline Park, I reached inside the house and called
an associate from work who came immediately to my house
with a friend. I also called my neighbors next door, who came
out on their balcony and watched the object and said that they
could see two of them. We watched the object for at least 30
minutes. It sat in one spot for a very long time, then began to
slowly descend and move westerly, towards Perdido. I called a
friend, Kenneth Payne in Perdido who was at work. He went
outside with two other co-workers and they all saw the bright
object and confirmed it was moving slowly. This was a little
after 10 p.m.
Another young man on the beach was also watching the object
and we talked on the phone with him as he looked at it though
his binoculars; he too said he thought he saw more than one.
He was not available for an interview at the time this story was
written but will tell his story this week, along with other sightings
he had on Saturday and Monday.
I have written several stories about other people's experiences
of UFO sightings and not always believed them, but I am sincerely
convinced now that something strange is flying over Gulf Breeze.
Many reports of sightings have been flooding into THE SENTINEL
since last Thursday night. A report of a sighting on Tuesday night,
May 2nd, was from a woman who wished to remain anonymous,
called saying her and her family were eating at Pizza Hut when
they saw a bright object, they left the restaurant and followed it
up Highway 98 to Shoreline Park were several people were
already there with binoculars watching it. One gentleman she
said shared his binoculars with them. The woman reporting
the sighting, whose son-in-law was a pilot, said he saw a shape.
It had shining red, green, and white bright lights. The man with
the binoculars told the group that he had seen the UFO on other
occasions and when he saw it last week, it was so close and
bright, he could not continue to look at it.
Anyone else who has had sightings recently, please contact
THE SENTINEL. If you are still a skeptic, like I was, start watching
the sky, you might just see something that will change your mind.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Gulf Breeze Sentinel, May 11, 1989
UFO SIGHTERS SEE "MOVERS AND FLASHERS"
By Kimberly Stevenson
Since the reported sightings of unidentified flying objects on
Thursday, April 27, Carla Yoder and her neighbor Kathy Deagle
have been keeping a watchful eye on the sky.
They were among the many people who reported the objects
that appeared over Gulf Breeze. Now each night, they don
their binonculars and stand at the end of their street in the
Oriole Beach area looking for the extraterrestrial visitors.
"Now the initial shock and fear are gone. Now it is just
curiosity," Yoder said.
Yoder has been keeping notes and diagrams of the movement
and location of the shining lights, that radiate different colors
and appear to move in different directions each night. They
have seen them on April 27 and 29 and also May 1, 3, 5, and 6.
Yoder wrote in her notes, "The days in between were too
overcast and also on April 30 first noticed, looking straight up,
an object just a small white light moving steadily across the sky.
Saw this three more times on 5/5 and a shooting star. A flash
of light with a tail."
On April 27, as they watched the objects, they also noticed a
lot of air traffic flying overhead, helicopters, prop airplanes and
jets. The helicopters they said, appeared to be military, and
circled over the area.
The two neighbors have come to call the objects they are seeing
"Movers and Flashers." The movers travel steadily across the
sky and the flashers radiate color and move slowly.
Yoder and Deagle plan to keep a vigil on the Gulf Breeze sky
hoping to get a closer glimpse of these objects. "I wish one would
come close enough for us to see what it is," Deagle said.
"If it is something the military is doing, then I wish they
would
let us know," Yoder said as she lifted her binoculars towards the
sky.
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2888) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Sentinel Newspaper Ufo Reports
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:05:02 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.200502.11703@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
The following two articles appeared in the Gulf Breeze Sentinel
on April 26, 1990. They relate to the continuing UFO sightings
that have been occurring in the Gulf Breeze, FL area over the
past few years. A photograph showing a large "light" in the sky
was also presented.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SCIENTIST STUDIES SIZE AND DISTANCE OF UFO
Multiple sightings and photographs help scientists locate the
size and distance of the red glowing object that flew over Gulf
Breeze on Wednesday, April 18, 1990. Several of the thirty-plus
witnesses who saw the object also video taped the sighting
which further aids the investigation. Using the 35 mm photos
of the object, the angle of elevation and distance to the object
was calculated to be approximately 3.4 miles when first seen
to approximately 1.7 miles when the object disappeared.
An optical study is now being conducted by a leading expert
from Washington, D.C., Dr. Bruce Maccabee. If, upon further
study, the image on the 35 mm negatives proves to be .0625 mm,
then the object was about 15 feet wide. The brilliant red glow of
the object was also witnessed by officers John Rhodes and Don
Stevens who said, "It was not an airplane or helicopter, it was
a very bright red light at least several miles away. We don't
know what it was."
Doug Wilkes witnessed the object and later reported to Police
Chief Brown, "I'm ex-military and an expert on helicopter profile;
this was no helicopter or flare or anything that I could identify."
From April 11 to April 18, there were five multiple witness
sightings involving as many as 60 people, four videotapes and
dozens of photos.
------------------------------------------------------------------
WITNESS DESCRIBES UFO SIGHTING
Andy O'Daniel came to the Sentinel last week to share his
UFO sighting of Wednesday evening, April 11th.
Andy said he was just stepping out of the dugout about 9:00 p.m.
when he saw a bright red/orange light rise from the trees
behind left field.
It went straight up, stopped, then came over the ball park and
stopped again "as if it was checking things out," said Andy.
Then it moved south out of sight. "I don't know what it was,"
said Andy. "But I know what it wasn't and it wasn't a plane,
helicopter, or balloon."
=====================================================================
=========
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2889) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Upi Dispatch About Gulfbreeze Sighting
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:09:42 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.200942.11909@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
UFO GROUP FASCINATED BY GULF BREEZES SIGHTINGS
02/28/88
GULF BREEZES, FL (UPI) [Via Moseley/Saucer Smear] -- A man
who took
21 photos of objects he says are flying saucers and claims he has
twice
seen diminutive aliens has generated interest from a group that
investigates UFO sightings.
Mutual UFO Network, or MUFON, in Texas says the Panhandle
case is
either an elaborate hoax or one of the most amazing encounters
ever. The
key is "Ed," a home builder with bizarre tales of encounters he
claims are
continuing.
In the March edition of MUFON's "UFO Journal," investigators
offer one possible explanation for why Ed is privy to sightings:
aliens
may have placed an implant in his head in an abduction years ago,
and the
implant is now being activated.
Hoax or not, it's garnered a lot of interest from a local
weekly.
It all began when the Gulf Breeze Sentinel on Nov. 19
published
Polaroid photos of a glowing object. The anonymous photographer
claimed
they were taken Nov. 11. He said he would come forward if others
saw the
same thing.
The following week the paper published accounts from other
residents
who claimed they saw a similar object, and other photos taken by
two other
anonymous photographers.
The newspaper has had nearly weekly updates ever since. This
week
the paper published a four-page insert with more photos and an open
letter
from "Ed." In addition to a picture purporting to show a UFO with a
light
beam shining down, the insert has a drawing of a 4-foot-tall alien
with
almond shaped eyes and carrying a silver wand.
Two daily newspapers that previously ignored the sightings
last week
ran stories, and a local television station had a three-part series
about
Ed's sightings. The editor of the Gulf Breeze paper said he has
talked to
reporters from Miami and Orlando and the National Enquirer in
Lantana.
The photographs have been scrutinized by many people who
claim to be
photo experts. Some say they are the real thing, others say they
are set
up. None has said how they were doctored.
Ed's reliability is the key, and he has made some incredible
claims.
The article in the MUFON publication said it was premature to
make a
judgment about the validity of the case, but does call the
sightings an
"incredible UFO photographic and CE-III (Close Encounter of the
Third
Kind) case."
It describes in detail 13 alleged encounters "Ed" had. They
range
from hearing a "humming" in his head to a Jan. 12 incident where he
claims
he was stopped by a UFO that landed in front of his truck and saw
five
aliens approaching.
He left, in great haste.
On several other occasions, Ed claims he was caught in a blue
beam
that held him fast in place. Once it levitated him toward their
craft,
then let him go for reasons unknown.
He has also told investigators he has heard voices, telling
him not
to be afraid and to stop resisting. He claims he is tipped off to
the UFOs
appearance by a humming sound in his head.
Because of the humming sound, MUFON investigators have
supplied Ed
with a two-way radio so he can tell them when an experience occurs.
He has
done so, but so far no investigators have seen a UFO.
The MUFON article ventured to theorize about why Ed has been
singled
out.
"There is a possibility that Ed may have had an implant
installed in
his head at some time in his life" that was only recently
activated, the
article said.
The MUFON article said it normally does not publish sighting
reports
until being thoroughly investigated. But it said it was making an
exception because it is an "ongoing" case with continuing sightings.
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2890) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: January 8, 1990 Ufo Sighting In Gulfbreeze
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:11:03 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.201103.11979@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
The UFO activity in Gulf Breeze, FL continues. According to a
full page story
in the GB Sentinel, several witnesses observed and photographed a
UFO on
January 8. (GB Sentinel, Jan. 11, 1990.) This time the witnesses
included Duane
Cook (Editor of the Sentinel) and his wife. Two photographs were
published. One
of the photos, taken by Chip Holston, appears to show "portholes"
in the craft.
The article in the paper gives the story as reported separately by
seven
different witnesses. After the UFO disappeared, numerous
helicopters were
observed in the same general area.
=====================================================================
==========
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2891) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Articles By Ware, Duane Cook, Editor
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:12:26 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.201226.12049@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
The following brief articles appeared in the November 10, 1988
issue of The Sentinel, Gulf Breeze, Florida. This issue discusses
some of the highlights of the UFO sightings that have
occurred in the area over the past year. The first article is by the
primary photographer "Ed". Others are written by: Donald Ware,
Florida state MUFON director; and Duane Cook, editor of The
Sentinel. The articles are reproduced here with the permission
of The Sentinel.
------------------------------------------------------------------
ED SHARES PAST YEAR'S EXPERIENCES ON UFO SIGHTING'S
ANNIVERSARY
On Nov. 11, 1987, as I opened the front door and stared at the
glowing object partly obscured by several pine trees, I stepped
into a phenomena that jolted me to the reality of UFOs. A
phenomena that is being witnessed all over the world and here
at home by dozens of our fellow residents. This reality may be
hard to accept for those who have not had a sighting, so I do not
try to convince or persuade. I have only reported my personal
sightings and incidents as they happened.
The resulting photographs and video tape I took of the UFO
have been validated by computer imaging (Dr. Maccabee, physicist
with the U.S. Navy). And, of course, there are otheres who feel
differently and offer little other than opinions.
When I was asked to use a 4 lens Nimslo 3-D sealed camera,
I did. When I was asked to use the SRS (Self Referencing Stereo)
camera, I did. The technical analysis of these photographs
produced page after page of data with the end result detailing an
object 14 foot in diameter at the bottom ring and 475 feet distant.
The accusation of hoax came fast from those unable to say
"maybe", and I was asked to take a lie detector test. Again the
ridicule was hurled toward me and yet another lie detector test.
As the controversy swirled, I began to hear preposterous tales
being spread by the debunkers about devil parties and "ultimate
pranks," etc. Those of you who know me will certainly laugh at
such claims, but the object was to discredit me in the eyes of those
who don't know me. There was a very serious attempt to destroy
my reputation by twisting spooky party games into ritual seances.
Having failed to discredit the photographic evidence, the out of
town critics have mounted a slander campaign hoping to brand me.
Thank you Gulf Breeze for ignoring these outrageous rumors.
Some of you may remember the front page headline "Expert
says Photos a Hoax." The next day the "expert" publicly retracted
his claim and apologized. A counterintelligence agency in
Maryland was given an audio tape of me being interviewed. The
resulting examination of the tape on a PSE (Psychological Stress
Evaluator) vindicated my word once more when the examiner
said the result "does not show any reaction to cause this examiner
to doubt his (Ed's) answers."
Soon I began to understand that no matter how many tests I
was subjected to and how many times the photographs were
analyzed, I was still open game for the out of town media and
clearly a target to be ridiculed by the out of town debunkers.
Many distant newspapers and TV crews played "hide and seek"
with reporting the accurate details, and several times I have
been blackmailed in their quest for a scoop to expose my name.
The official MUFON investigation was even infiltrated early
by a debunker who took a liquid sample suspected to have fallen
from the UFO for analysis only to issue a false report. Later the
sample was analyzed by an independant lab with startling results.
The debunker was exposed and fired in discredit. Another
debunker from Central Florida has recently been exposed and is
now being ignored by serious researchers.
From Nov. 11 to May 1, 1988 (my last sighting), I have been
stedfast to the truth as the storm of controversy, both positive
and negative, continued to build in the media. The most
troublesome question of the controversy is "Why have I had so
many sightings?" I can not explain the "why" questions, the most
disturbing one being, "Why Me?"
In an effort to understand, I have undergone a battery of
pshchological profile tests followed by six hours of regressive
hypnosis. The details of the hypnosis indicate previous encounters
as far back as 11 years of age. I was the first to shake my head
in confusion but have come to the adjustment that life goes on--
even life we may not understand.
Thanks to all those who have stood up and reported what they
saw. Thank you, Gulf Breeze for being a good neighbor.
------------------------------------------------------------------
GULF BREEZE UFO FROM THE INVESTIGATIVE PERSPECTIVE
BY DONALD M. WARE
During the past year, many residents in and around Gulf Breeze,
FL have been part of a unique experience in this country. Over
a hundred people reported objects that we could not identify as
planes, planets, flares, etc.. Some reported seeing alien beings,
and six reported blue beams coming from the UFO. One respected
Gulf Breeze family had 22 encounters with UFOs, including 18
separate photographic sessions. These sessions produced 41
photographs of at least five different types of flying objects. Five
different cameras were used providing sufficient data to determine
the size of some objects. For example, one object photographed
on 1 May 1988 was 14.8 (misprint?) feet high and had a light on
the bottom that was 14.8 feet in diameter. I have seen over
60 photos of UFOs from this area.
Investigations by Newspapers, TV and the Mutual UFO Network
were generally accomplished without ridicule. This encouraged
12 people to tell of their UFO experiences that involved "missing
time" or extremely strange dreams. Some of these people are
having trouble coping with their experiences. MUFON established
a support group including abductees, investigators, and a clinical
psychologist to help reduce fear of the unknown. I think the
support efforts, including time-regression hypnosis, have helped
several who seem to have been inside a UFO understand their
strange experiences.
I suspect that the increasing national media coverage of the
UFO phenomenon, spurred by the Gulf Breeze photos and sightings
will cause many more abductees to gain the courage to talk about
their experiences. Perhaps some will seek help in understanding
what happened to them. I hope investigators and psychologists
across the country will work together to provide this help.
Some people have been unable to fully accept the reality of
alien visitors, including some "armchair investigators." Perhaps
the Gulf Breeze photos will help people across the country accept
the reality described in the MJ-12 documents and other government
disclosures.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
TO CELEBRATE OR NOT TO CELEBRATE
BY DUANE COOK
How do you celebrate the anniversary of an event you are
not yet sure was good?
Well, maybe celebrate is not the appropriate term.
Perhaps reminisce is a better word to apply to our thoughts
and activities on this 1st anniversary of the now famous UFO
sightings by "Ed" and others in and around Gulf Breeze.
Initially we had no idea that printing Ed's photos would cause
such a worldwide interest in our fair community.
First, there were the wire services that broke the news
worldwide with a brief account of the first sightings.
Then came the National Enquirer with their offer to pay for
the right to print the photos if NASA Scientists found them
genuine.
MUFON (Mutual UFO Network) got involved in the investigation
early and became the authority to which the explosion of local
sightings were referred.
Dr. Bruce Maccabee, an optical physicist under contract with
the Navy, did the most extensive research on the Gulf Breeze
sightings and photographs and has pronounced theEd lives here and
they (the UFOs) just followed
him here to continue their interaction with him as they have done
at eight year intervals since he was a child?
And what about the many other sightings we've had? Is it just
coincidence that Charlie and Doris saw the same craft on the same
night that Ed photographed it, thus assuring the Sentinel's
unflinching support while maintaining its unquestioned credibility?
Then there are the ministers, the teachers, the law enforcement
officers, the district medical examiner and his wife, and even a city
council member.
Were these people just randomly in the right place at the
right time, or is there an intelligent plan guiding the selection of
who sees it and who doesn't?
Whether we call it a celebration, a reminiscence, or a review,
we all found it amazing that it's already been a whole year since it
all started.
And we wanted to share with you our thoughts and reflections
on this most interesting year.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Reports by several others also appeared in this issue of
The Sentinel but are not presented here.
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2892) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: 5/1/88 Gulf Breeze Report
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:13:51 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.201351.12119@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
GULF BREEZE, FLORIDA ACTIVITY SUMMARY
(As of May 1, 1988)
A. Biased one-sided investigation
1. The principal investigators have made public
statements auth-
enticating the photographs prior to the conclusion of the
investi-
gation. (Attachment #1, "For the Record" dated April 25, 1988)
2. Negative aspects of the reported events in and
around Gulf
Breeze, Florida have been restricted and covered-up by
principal in-
vestigators. In fact, the investigators have actually
taken sides
with the photographer of the objects to the point of
furnishing that
photographer with internal correspondence pertaining to the
investig-
ation and research of the reported events. (Attachment #2,
corres-
pondence referenced or distributed on a limited basis.)
B. Questionable factors concerning principal witness/es
1. The principal witness made his initial report to the
_Sentinel_
newspaper; not to an official agency such as the police
department,
for whatever reason he may give. This is a factor always
considered
when reviewing a UFO report. In the Hickson/Parker case,
for exam-
ple, the two witnesses went first to Keesler AFB,
Mississippi and
then to the local police department. (Report content)
2. No known person independent of the principal witness has
report-
edly observed the same object/s, despite the number of
photographs
taken, in presence of the photographer.
3. The witness has been writing and submitting
manuscripts to Mr.
Budd Hopkins' agent, Ms. Phyllis Wender, for possible
publication of
a book. (Correspondence from Mr. Donald Ware, Mr. Budd
Hopkins and
verbal confirmation by the photographer)
4. Some residents in the Gulf Breeze, Florida area have
related a
number of disturbing incidents in regard to the principal
witness
that causes concern to several investigators and
researchers in the
UFO phenomenon community. One example is a statement alleged
to have
been made during the summer of 1987 by the witness: "The
Ultimate
Prank". (Interview with sources by four witnesses.)
5. The witness has not impressed me, as well as other
investigators
and researchers, of having had a truly traumatic
experience. (De-
rived from several personal visits with the witness,a
review of a
fairly lengthy video tape and investigation report content)
C. Conflicting and inconsistent characteristics to actual
known pat-
terns of the UFO phenomenon
1. The area in which the majority of related experiences
are said
to have taken place is a heavily populated residential and
business
location. The great majority of high quality UFO encounters
occur in
rural areas away from such populated areas.
2. The number of reports made by local residences were
prompted pri-
marily by the news media (assisted by the principal
investigators).
Flaps or waves (large distribution of sighting reports
over a geo-
graphical area) created by the phenomenon itself cover a
larger area
than what has occurred in the Gulf Breeze/Pensacola reports.
This is
additional evidence that the reports were primarily
generated by the
news media although some of the independent sighting
reports may
very well be legitimate reports.
3. Although one experience related by the witness involved
an "at-
tack" by the UFO as it moved over and in front of his
vehicle (in an
isolated location for that particular incident) there
were no E/M
effects reported. Also, the progression of events are
dissimilar to
other low level encounters in higher quality cases.
4. Repeated sightings and experiences related by the
witness are
similar to other questionable reports and "contactee"
claims. In
most high quality reports the witness experiences a
single short
duration encounter. In longer term encounters the
witness/es often
relate a time and/or memory lapse following the experience.
5. Repeated abilities by the witness of being able to
resist the
anomaly (UFO/occupants) have been claimed. This is
contrary to the
results of studies in the field.
6. Several similarities with Mr. Whitley Strieber's book
_Commun-
ion_ have been found. The most curious similarity is the
related
smell of "Cinnamon" with the Gulf Breeze report which can
be found
on Page 19 of Mr. Strieber's book. This is the only known
reference
to that smell in UFO literature to date. It is also of
interest to
note that the book _Communion_ was released during the
winter/spring
of 1987 and that on page 11 of Mr. Strieber's book he
states: "I
have never seen an Unidentified Flying Object."
7. The abundance of photographs taken by the witness is a
negative
aspect in itself contrary to the actual exhibits of the UFO
phenom-
enon. Most high controversy reports involve a large number
of pic-
tures -- especially when the photographer claims to be a
contactee.
8. The majority of high-quality photographs depicting disc
or vert-
ically positioned cylindrical-shaped objects do not exhibit
propul-
sion units as shown in the Gulf Breeze, Florida photographs.
9. The objects depicted in the Gulf Breeze photographs
are always
tilted in a manner showing a portion of the base but never
the top
towards the camera. This is also a curious feature
because of the
number of photographs taken.
D. Questionable factors concerning the photographs
1. The first 5 photographs taken on November 11, 1987
depict a
rapidly darkening of the sky that is not consistent with
the 3-4
minute duration that the witness related.
2. Accurate cloud movement data for the altitude depicted
has not
been completed although there are questions concerning the
speed of
the clouds in the first 5 pictures. Mr. Ray Stanford (PSI)
informed
me this date that he has reinstated has analysis of weather
data and
that information supported by documents from weather bureau
stations
will be provided in the near future.
E. Inherent flaws with the depicted object/s
1. The circular base at the bottom of the object is
tilted in a
manner that creates a non-symmetrical ellipse. An ellipse
must al-
ways be symmetrical. There are, however, certain factors
caused by
the atmosphere and photographic lens that may reduce
imaging the
true symmetry of an ellipse.
2. There is an ambient light on the entire surface of
the object
depicted in the first 5 photographs (especially in
photograph no. 5)
that can not be easily attributed to sky light
(reflected from
clouds at a distance), the object itself, the moon, the
sun, or
local utility lighting. This indicates the possibility of
artificial
illumination by the photographer.
3. There is a distinct flaw at the base of the object on
the out-
side edge of the rim. This is evident in photograph numbers
11, 14,
and 17.
4. In photograph number 16 inside the bottom base of the
object a
circular light is visible. There is a dimmed area
visible at one
portion of that circular light which is similar to a
kitchen fluor-
escent light where an electrical connection may be. Mr. Ray
Stanford
(PSI) is conducting comparative research with such
lighting fix-
tures.
5. There is possible evidence of an overlap between the
object and
a tree in photograph number 7. The object appears to be in
front of
the tree or integrated with the tree itself. Dr. Willy Smith
is con-
ducting analysis of this photograph as well as others.
6. The object depicted in the first 5 photographs appears to
be non-
symmetrical; that is, the upper and lower portions of the
object are
off-center from one another. This may be caused by
reflections off
of a glass surface or another form of medium between the
object and
the lens of the camera.
7. According to Dr. Willy Smith (UNICAT Project) there is
at least
one "window" that does not line up horizontally with
adjacent "win-
dows" on the object.
8. The spacing between the "windows" on the object are not
propor-
tional to one another horizontally. This is obvious to the
unaided
eye and measurements reveal mathematical inconsistencies
contrary to
good geometry.
Robert D. Boyd
CUFOS Investigator Coordinator
MUFON State Director, Alabama
/s/
May 1, 1988
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2893) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Letter To Citizens Of Gulfbreeze-bob Oechsler
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:15:09 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.201509.12210@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
The following letter from UFO investigator Bob Oechsler appeared
in the May 12, 1988 issue of the Gulf Breeze Sentinel.
Reprinted by permission
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"An Open Letter to the Citizens of Gulf Breeze"
Dear Gulf Breeze Citizenry:
For those who don't know me or my contributions to the
investigation of UFO related activity in Gulf Breeze, I am a UFO
Investigator/Reporter from the Annapolis, Maryland area. My
involvement in your local sightings case has been quite extensive
with well over 100 hours of research and telephone interviews
with investigators, witnesses, photographers, meteorologists, path-
ologists, technologists and the media. I've been reporting the
events
on radio in Baltimore and have included "live" interviews with Ed,
Duane Cook and others. I have battled the skeptics and have
reported my findings to the UFO Intelligence Community. During
this period of time, I have had to investigate numerous sightings of
UFO activity in the Annapolis Bay Bridge area which has served to
limit my otherwise total involvement in the Gulf Breeze Sightings.
Please be assured that not all "distant experts" are
scientifically
critical of the extraordinary events that have been occuring in your
peninsula city. Before getting too far into this letter, allow me
to set
the record straight on one issue of significance to no one by myself.
Mr. R--- S------- is not a resident of Annapolis, Maryland. You
remember RS, the author of a report with a Strange Breeze blowing
through his head whose Psychic Premonitions lead him to believe
that The Sightings were all an elaborate hoax. Mr. RS resides and
receives his mail in College Park, Maryland, some 35 miles from the
quaint little peninsula capitol of the state of Maryland which so
happens to be the city where I call home. And so now you see the
reason for my interest in setting the record straight.
It should be noted that statistically speaking, there are now on
record over 50 sightings of UFO activity in the Gulf Breeze area that
have no connection to the noted photographer Ed. There are now
on record five photographers of UFO's only one of which has not
been in direct contact with MUFON investigators. There is now re-
ported to be a second video tape of a moving and hovering UFO;
the photographer is in no way related to Ed. And, there are over
100 witnesses of sightings who have asked to file reports, with
some accounts involving five and six witnesses.
Remember the "Jan Tide" with the funny looking blimp of
radar equipment floating about in Pensacola Bay that was suppose
to leave in late January or early February? Well you may have
noticed that it is still there over 90 days later. And, in case no
one
has noticed, there is now a similar companion vessel out there
with the insignia NASA on the side. Let's also not forget about that
cute little Army vehicle with the 150-foot telescoping RADAR
globe that had to be moved out of Ft. Pickens due to excessive
curiosity of visitors. A civilian employee of Pensacola NAS has
reported that there are now 18 of those RADAR vehicles operating
in the Gulf Breeze area.
What does all of this mean? We're checking the records, but
it is doubtful that there has been a significant increase in drug
smuggling activity in the area. Why has the Network News Media
taken such a hands-off approach to reporting these events outside
of the Pensacola area? Is there Government INTEREST in this case
of UFO activity? Is the Government turning some subtle screws to
clamp down on exposing what's really happening here? If so,
WHY? The answer may lie somewhere in the MJ-12 documents
that I've enclosed with this letter. These documents have been
available for over a year now, and have been widely published in
their entirety in (among others) The Danville Newspapers in
Pennsylvania and at least one major newsletter out of Cranston,
Rhode Island. Experts who have researched these documents
thoroughly say they are authentic. A memo from President
Truman makes direct reference to the MJ-12 operation. There
is more, much more, but this should be enough to encourage any
doubters out there that UFO's are REAL. Their purpose is now
fundamentally known. We may be powerless to stop it, although
some experts feel otherwise.
A letter to the President of the United States was mailed today
along with correspondence to several members of congress and
the Senate. The purpose is to seek official help in matters related
to the Gulf Breeze Sightings. Matters that involve the purpose
behind the visitations. Help is very much needed here. Although
exceptionally competent as I stated in my report to the UFO
Intelligence Community on April 21, 1988, there are but less than
a handful of part-time qualified investigators available in the
area to handle the massive workload. Scientific monitoring and
evaluation by civilian technologists is all but vacant here, except
for the exhaustive efforts of Dr. Bruce Maccabee, Ph.D. The
reassuring hand of Budd Hopkins has been quite welcome therapy
for those in need, but it is not nearly enough.
Will help be on the way? We'll keep you posted as the gears
and cogs of our bureaucracy oil up for action. The critics and
skeptics will not be able to sweep this intrusion under the carpet
with the guise of a hoax for long. Our prayers are with you and
all whose lives have been changed forever.
Bob Oechsler
UFO Investigator/Reporter
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2894) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Statement From Bob Oechsler Re Gulfbreeze
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:16:33 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.201633.12281@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
The follow are two reports by UFO investigator/researcher
Bob Oechsler, from Annapolis, Maryland. They provide insights
and technical information relating to the Gulf Breeze, Florida UFO
phenomena. The reports were received 9/22/88.
DBC
---------------------------------------------------------------------
THE GULF BREEZE PHOTOGRAPHIC SIGHTINGS CASE AS VIEWED
FROM WITHIN THE INVESTIGATION
One of the most often asked questions by investigators
unfamiliar
with the Gulf Breeze Case is to provide the single most compelling
piece of evidence that proves the case valid.
In the final analysis of the Gulf Breeze UFO photographic
sightings
case, it's not the photographs or the 8 mm home video of the flying
UFO, or the landing site or any one particular sighting or piece of
physical evidence that makes this case authentic.
It's the people behind the story that make this case
believable in
spite of it's incredibility. The UFO phenomenon is rich in a
foundation
of historical documentation. This case has a certain uniqueness with
no precedence in the literature. It has challenged the investigation
team right to the core of their individual areas of expertise.
Putting the case in perspective, however, has been an even
greater
challenge. There probably can be no singly conclusive piece of the
puzzle that would validate the case. Given adequate resources
someone probably could closely duplicate the photographic evidence.
Missing, however, is any evidence that any of the principals in this
case involving six months of active UFO sightings has the
technological
background, resources or ability to duplicate the evidence.
So we must ultimately evaluate the human factors in which we
are on firmer ground. We must ask ourselves can more than 135
witnesses be lying about what they saw, is it possible that a dozen
well trained investigators and professionals be so naive and
incompetent as to allow even a sophisticated hoax to go undetected
under their very eyes for half a year. Are at least nine victims of
missing time collectively hallucinating, and how can we deny the
concerns of a mother whose three year old daughter has since last
summer reported ghosts in her room, ghosts with big black eyes,
who take her away and bring her back. And upon seeing photos of
the UFOs the child told her mother that she'd seen that and had
been in it!
The evaluatable evidence in this case is abundant and available
for close scrutiny. It is imperative to note that no specialist to
date
has been capable of duplicating even one single piece of the
evidence,
and I've personally witnessed a number of such attempts. One day
someone will inevitably duplicate some of the evidence as will we
one day be capable of duplicating the technology many have
witnessed this year. But for now we must consider, has an alien
culture from the stars initiated a long awaited Glasnost Policy of
their
own. If indeed that is the case, what will it mean to our society
and
the rest of the peoples of the Planet Earth in the years to come!
Broadcast Reporter
Bob Oechsler
Investigator/Researcher
Annapolis, Maryland
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
INVESTIGATIVE ANALYSIS
The photographic and video taped evidence in the Gulf Breeze
case was brought to my attention approximately two months after
the first reported sightings of UFO activity on November 11th of
1987. An exhaustive series of polygraph tests were conducted on
the primary photographer in the case, one of five known to the
investigative staff. It seemed pertinent under the circumstances
that additional methods be employed to verify the veracity of the
witnesses. Following a background check of the primary
photographer with his verbal permission, various investigation
interviews were subjected to Voice Stress Analysis using state of
the art Psychological Stress Evaluator equipment operated by one
of the nation's top expert analysts. There were no reactions in the
analysis that would indicate that any of the three witnesses
interviewed were telling anything short of the truth about what
they observed.
Meteorologic and Site Survey analyses were performed as a
check against the details reported for the first photographic
sighting.
The conclusion verified that the photographs were likely to have
been taken on the day and time period reported as no other similar
conditions existed over a two week period prior to publication
of the photographs.
An investigation into the photographic equipment used was
conducted through field tests and close consultation with Polaroid
Corporation engineers. It was determined that the camera used
through February 7th could perform double exposure techniques
with the 108 type film. Investigators provided the witness with a
35mm Nimslo stereo camera and employed controls that were not
subsequently breached as determined following inspection of the
camera and film after a photographic sighting. A more sophisticated
Polaroid Sun 600 camera was purchased on March 7th. The following
day the camera was first used during a photographic sighting
opportunity. It was determined by the Polaroid engineers that a
double exposure was possible but extremely difficult to effect. On
March 17th a second Polaroid Sun 600 camera was combined with
the first in a stereo array to create a parallax for measuring the
distance and size of objects by comparing two photographs taken
simultaneously. The degree of difficulty in a double exposure had
now increased beyond reasonable proportions. The final piece of
equipment used was a Sony 8mm home video camera with sound
and without zoom capability. A one minute and thirty eight second
two part video tape was shot on December 28th.
An extensive analysis of the two part video tape was started in
March and continues today. Various enhancement techniques were
performed at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. Among those tests
a variable speed element was employed to make tapes for viewing
the entire tape at one tenth speed. A Sony Video Editor model
BVU820 was used with a digital time base corrector to supply a direct
signal to a Video Hard Copy Unit made by Tektronix, model 4632.
The thermal printer generated photo images of both phases of each
frame. A ten second portion of the video tape requires 600 single
copy prints. Each print is measured to define altitude, flight path,
rotation characteristics, frequency of beacon lights, ring
aberrations,
attitude in flight, air speed/velocity, acceleration/deceleration
and an analysis of direction reversals. A preliminary analysis of
the
audio track indicated that no sound could be identified with the
object. More sophisticated equipment is being sought. A preliminary
analysis concludes that the object observed in the video tape closely
resembles objects photographed with the Polaroid cameras. The
object has a clockwise or left to right rotation. The dome or
beacon
light blinks on and off at no consistent rate or pattern and
displays a
variable luminosity with each cycle. The object loses altitude
moving
to the left of the camera just prior to blinking out. A ghost image
appears in the first phase of the next frame approximately two object
widths to the right that may be related but is apparently not visible
through the transmission medium. There are certain restrictions in
the evaluation of the video tape. Due to the horizontal resolution
lines, we are viewing the object through what is analogous to jail
bars
turned sideways. Nonetheless it appears conclusive that the
bottom or power source light has a variable luminosity characteristic
which is not synchronic with the beacon light on top of the object.
As an experienced robotics technician I've built many remote
controlled devices in the past ten years. As a prototype designer
I am well versed in exotic techniques used to operate various
sizes of apparatus from very small to very large using sometimes
inexpensive semi-automated frequency controlled equipment.
The specifications detailed in this case, most notably the absence of
audible sound from the UFO craft in the 8mm home video and the
rotational characteristic, create enormous difficulty when an attempt
is made to re-create what is observed by constructing a model to
examine the technology.
Further research is continuing in many areas relating to this
photographic sightings case. It is quite clear to this
investigator that
we are examining a truly anomalous technology.
On May 9th, 1988, I initiated an official appeal for assistance
through the Office of the President of the United States and various
members of the Sanate and House of Representatives. Government
or at least military interest in the events that were occurring in
Gulf Breeze, Florida was quite apparent in light of newspaper
reports bearing photographs of vessels with elaborate radar gear,
military vehicles with telescoping radar gear (all deployed in the
vicinity of the sightings) and a reported visit to the primary
photographer's residence by purported officials requesting original
photographic materials. Responses received from the Office of the
Secretary of the Navy revealed concern over evidence of federal
airspace rules violations, responses from congressional
representation
revealed concern over human rights violations. The Office of the
Chief of Naval Operations (Air Warfare) ultimately declined to
investigate citing scarce Navy financial and personnel resources.
It might be interesting to note that in a civilian capacity, Navy
physicist, Dr. Bruce S. Maccabee conducted an extensive photo
analysis of the evidence and found no evidence contrary to the
existence of anomalous objects in the photographs.
Bob Oechsler
UFO Investigator, Researcher, Broadcast Reporter
Annapolis, Maryland
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2895) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Film Crew Watch Ufo In Gulf Breeze, Fl
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:18:00 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.201800.12351@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
MUFONET-BBS Network - Mutual UFO Network
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
News-Wire
~~~~~~~~~~~
Date: 01-30-91 22:27
From the Gulf Breeze Sentinel, by Bruce Morrison.
ABC JOINS LOCAL UFO SKY WATCH
The Los Angeles based production company, Ohlmeyer Productions,
working on
the ABC special, "America's Best-Kept Secrets," joined a local UFO
sky watch
on Friday night, January 11, 1991, and filmed the frequently-seen
"red light"
over Gulf Breeze.
The cameraman, Ron Ladd, said, "It was a long distance away
illuminating
the clouds and traveling very slowly to the east. It just appeared
from within
the clouds and after a minute or so it disappeared. I caught it on
film. It
was sometimes very bright and then would fade, maybe because of the
clouds."
An earlier witness Jeff Lawrence said, "What we saw on November
11, 1990
looked like the UFO that Ed Walters photographed three years ago. I
know what
we saw."
Eight local area residents were also present during the sighting
along with
the production company's producer, Jeff Androski, and former NASA
systems
specialist Robert Oechsler. Mr. Oechsler was the first to see the
glow of the
UFO as it appeared beneath the clouds.
Mr. Oechsler is here on assignment from Washington and is an
expert in
remote controlled mechanics and photo analysis. He was equipped
with infrared
film to photograph the unidentified red object and said, "I have
tried to
consider all the options to this Gulf Breeze mystery. I would like
to explain
it away as a military aircraft, balloons, flares, temperature
inversions, or
hoax, but none of these options hold up under scientific study.
Balloons don't
travel opposite the wind, flares don't change color or hover
motionless and I
can assure you that what I saw and filmed over Gulf Breeze was not
an airplane
of helicopter.
I have designed some very sophisticated remote control systems but
duplicating the soundless flight and brightness of this unknown
object would
be next to impossible. I can only say that I don't know what it is."
The ABC special will air in February. One segment will present
information
about the mysterious grass circles in Gulf Breeze Shoreline Park
along with
the unidentified flying red object that dozens of local residents
continue to
photograph.
=END=
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2896) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:35p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Japanese Film Crew Film Ufo, May 10, 1991
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:20:24 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.202024.12491@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
From the Gulf Breeze Sentinel, May 16, 1991........
On May 10, 1991, I, Jun-ichi Yaoi and my Japanese film crew
arrived in Gulf
Breeze in the hope of documenting the local UFO sightings. NIPON
television
network, the largest/oldest commercial broadcasting company of
Japan, sponsors
our investigative documentary to be aired as part of the two-hour
special
nationwide in Japan.
Bob Oechsler, a former NASA systems specialist, from WAshington,
D.C.,
accompanied us as a consultant to advise and analyse any evidence
that we might
be able to capture on film.
At approximately 11:30 p.m. Bob Oechsler told us that a "red UFO"
had been
sighted to the northwest of the Holiday Inn where we were staying.
We were
preparing for bed but we quickly got our cameras and set up a "sky
watch" near
the hotel swimming pool overlooking the Pensacola Bay.
Fifteen or twenty minutes passed. Then, out over the water, a
bright red
object suddenly appeared. The sky was clear over Gulf Breeze and
the Bay, with
most of the rain clouds still visible over Pensacola. What we saw
and filmed
was amazing! It was brilliant and I must say, beautiful. As
recorded on our 36
to one zoom lens, the UFO moved to the northeast for one minute and
twenty
seconds before suddenly winking out and the returning for a few
seconds as a
small white ball of light which then also winked out.
Our film of the UFO clearly shows a circular ring of red "energy"
with a
center glowing orange core. It will be further analyzed to identify
any
structure. We have interviewed dozens of local witnesses who have
taken video
and photos of the UFO but we are particularly impressed with the
similarity
with photographs taken by Ed Walters in 1988.
Jun-ichi Yaoi, director
5-7, Kojimachi, Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo, Japan
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2897) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:36p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Ed Walters/gulfbreeze Refutes Willy Smith
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:26:14 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.202614.12793@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
The following was provided by Mr. Edward Walters, a central
figure in the Gulf Breeze UFO flap.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
July 13, 1989
This testimony from Antonio Huneeus and Manuel Fernandez
demonstrates that Willy Smith's efforts to debunk the Gulf
Breeze sightings have been motivated, emotional and fraudulent.
Antonio Huneeus said, "In Feb. 1989, I mailed a letter to Willy
Smith with a fake Gulf Breeze type UFO photo which was done for
research, showing a UFO hovering over the N.Y. Chrysler Building.
I told Smith that I knew the photographer and even forwarded the
photographer's phone number. I knew the photo was a fake and
only thought it was an interesting copy that Willy Smith would
like to see. Later, (Feb. 27, 1989) Willy Smith mailed out a
statement about the photo and said, 'Here is a copy of one of the
photos allegedly taken by Ed Walters.' I, Antonio Huneeus want
to go on the record and report that Willy Smith's statement is
not true and he knows it."
Manuel Fernandez is the professional photographer who made
the fake photos. Manuel said, "It is not true that Ed Walters took
the (Chrysler Bldg.) UFO photo. Willy Smith even called me and
asked if I could fake some more. He sent me a color daytime
print of Ed Walter's yard and asked me to fake a Gulf Breeze type
UFO on them. I was suspicious but made the photos and sent
them (slides) to Willy Smith.
With his fake photo evidence in hand, Willy Smith wrote a letter to
Robert Reid on April 6, 1989. Smith said, "I wonder if the
3 photos, taken in the same exact location as the Nov. 11, 1987
photos which I have received anonymously from Gulf Breeze,
were sent by you." W. Smith also wrote a letter to Dr. Maccabee
in which he repeated that he received these photos "anonymously."
Manuel, the photographer said, "I did not send the 3 photos
anonymously, this is not true. I made them at Willy Smith's
request, using the print that he sent of Ed's yard. I don't want
anything to do with Willy Smith, he is not telling the truth and
I won't cover up for him. This is not what a true scientist would
do."
Willy Smith as been a constant fountain of fake stories that he
supports with fake evidence. Willy Smith has even changed his
educational background from an Engineering PhD by claiming
to have a Masters in Astronomy and Physics and a PhD in
Physics. Two letters from the U. of Michigan verify that he does
not have a Masters in Astronomy and Physics nor a PhD in
Physics.
Since Willy Smith has exposed himself as a hoaxer, I will treat
him as such and ignore him. There are serious UFO questions to
be studied from which Willy Smith has disqualified himself.
Sincerely,
Antonio Huneeus
Manuel Fernandez
Edward Walters
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2898) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:36p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Debunkers V/s Believers Re: Gulf Breeze.
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:27:46 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.202746.12864@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
TIMES, St. Petersburg, FL - July 8, 1990
DEBUNKERS vs BELIVERS
Tales of another world are not alien to the national UFO
convention.
by Chris Lavin
Times Staff Writer
PENSACOLA - Sitting in the lobby of the Hilton Hotel,
Gilbert Landis turned to the person next to him and , without a
giggle, said this:
"I'm here because 10,500 years ago my wife and I made a
mistake."
A few seats over, Clark McClelland from Orlando was talking
about secret autopsies performed on alien creatures and Nazi
scientists who escaped to secret Antarctic bases where they have
been building flying saucers.
Just down the hall, a preacher lectured about UFOs and the
Bible. The parting of the Red Sea, he said may have been caused
by the propulsion system of an alien spacecraft.
So it went during the weekend at the national convention of
the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) - an annual gathering of
scientists and others who belive the aliens have landed.
If this was any other year in any other city, the convention
would probably drift off like a UFO, an oddity never to be heard
of again. But this was Pensacola, and it seems most of the
population of nearby Gulf Breeze had reported a UFO sighting in
recent years.
So the conventation took on special meaning - to those who
belive in the extra terrestrial and those who spend their time
challenging UFO believers.
Specifically, most of the Believers and Debunkers came
loaded for a showdown over photographs taken by Gulf Breeze
builder Ed Walters. The photos purported to show a UFO that
Walters says hovered over his home, paralyzed him with a blue
beam and left him and his wife, Francis, scared and bewildered.
Since the publication of his book - titled "The Gulf Breeze
Sightings: The Most Astounding Multiple Sightings of UFOs in U.S.
History - Walters has been accused by Debunkers of using a model
and trick photography to perpetrate a fraud.
The battling has been, well, out of this world.
"It's the wildest, most preposterious story I've ever
heard," says Philip J. Klass, a longtime UFO debunker. "Just
think of it. Multiple visits to the same house, little creatures,
voices in his head, talking about bananas."
Yes, Walters says, it does seem odd. But he insists the
evidence and sightings by hundreds of others, including a Gulf
Breeze town council member, corroborate his story.
Walter's story began November 11, 1987, when he saw the UFO
and snapped photographs. This encounter was close and continual -
recurring through numerous sightings during the next three years.
Walters says the UFO called him "Zehass," and he recounted
conversations apparently coming from the UFO. In one encounter,
Walters told of hearing alien voices speaking in Spanish
complaining about being fed too many bananas. "I know this sounds
bizarre," Walters wrote, "and I was tempted not to tell about it,
but bananas are what they were talking about."
Walters says he was hungry for an explaination of what he
had seen. He notified MUFON investigators and passed his photos
on to the Gulf Breeze Sentinel, a small weekly paper that reports
UFO sightings.
But as word of Walters' photos spread, more and more
residents of this Gulf Coast town reported seeing the UFO.
Walters soon learned a quick lesson about UFO sightings: The
person who says he or she saw the UFO will be closely examined.
Walters was plunged into the little-known but continuous war
between the Believers and the Debunkers - both of whom questioned
Walters for their own purposes.
When the analysis was done, the outcome was no suprise.
MUFON investigators backed Walters and his photos, skeptics such
as Klass were not convinced. "You know, Walters is a convicted
felon," Klass says. "Yes, car theft and forgery. He's slick, real
slick."
But Walters says his problems with the law dated back to his
teen years. As an adult, he says, he has been a successful
builder and a pillar of the community.
With Gulf Breeze being the hottest UFO spot in the world,
MUFON decided to bring its annual conference to Pensacola. When
the 600 or so MUFON members arrived Friday, they found a city
split over the reality of UFOs, but unified on the economic
impact of this convention.
A Gulf Breeze jewlery company had created "Gulf Breeze
Sighting" watches and medallions. There were T-shirts featuring
Walters' blue beam, and visitors could pay to be photographed
with a life-sized statue of the Gulf Breeze alien.
But even as the conference began, it was clear west Florida
wasn't going to claim a special place in UFO history without a
big fight.
In recent weeks 22-year-old Tommy Smith of Pensacola has
told reporters he helped Walters create double-exposure UFO
photographs. And the Pensacola News Journal reported that a UFO
model similar to Walters' photos was found hidden in a house
formerly owned by Walters.
But in an impassioned speech, Walters said evidence proves
Smith's claims are false. The model, Walters says, was found to
be constructed by materials discarded from his construction
business in 1989, two years after he made his initial
photographs.
Debunkers, Walters alleges, constructed and planted the
model to discredit him.
The new allegations have stirred MUFON to reopen its
analysis of the Gulf Breeze sightings, but if the atmosphere at
this convention is any indicator, don't expect investigators to
undermine Walters' claim.
This convention drew a wide variety of UFO types. But
virtually all shared a strong belief in UFOs and an equally
strong belief that the U.S. government is hiding vast storehouses
of information on UFOs and alien life.
There were scientists such as Brian T. O'Leary, a former
NASA astronomer and Princeton University instructor, who says his
own psychic experiences have convinced him that the United States
needs a new science that can explain psychic phenomena and,
perhaps, UFOs.
"I began commuinicating telepathically, I experienced moving
out of my body and floating over cities, I healed myself with my
mind," O'Leary said.
And then there were other Believers who lacked O'Leary's
academic credentials, but had stories to tell.
Landis, for example, the 10,500-year-old San Diego resident,
said NASA and the U.S. government is secretly aware of a
60-member "Universal Association of Planets" whose spaceships are
Earth's UFOs.
"You know what the astronauts saw on the back side of the
moon?" Landis said. "There was a refueling station and a
structure that looked very much like a hotel. And the canals on
Mars? Dry docks for space ships."
Landis' treatise on the history of the universe was
interrupted by McClelland, who wants everyone to know that Earth
is simply a giant genetic experiment being orchestrated by alien
life.
But all at this convention seemed unified by a belief there
is something out there and we all need to learn more about it.
Many are like George Kruse, a free-lance photographer from
California who was drawn to MUFON when he discovered during a
hypnosis session that he had been abducted by aliens.
"I was taken and I couldn't move," Kruse says. "They looked
down my throat and inserted a needle (into me). I remember I
didn't like it."
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2899) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:36p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Statement From Florida Sd Don Ware
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:28:53 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.202853.12934@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
The following was sent to me from Donald M. Ware with permission
to upload it here. Don is Florida state director of MUFON and has
been overseeing the Gulf Breeze UFO investigation. He is a retired
Air Force officer (Lt. Colonel) now residing in Ft. Walton Beach, FL.
DBC
7-19-88
---------------------------------------------------------------------
POSITION STATEMENT ON THE 1987-88 UFO SIGHTINGS
OF GULF BREEZE, FL
As MUFON State Director living only 44 miles from Gulf Breeze,
I have helped coordinate the activities of seven local investigators
and three internationally known investigators of the many UFO
reports in this area. There have been at least 68 reports of objects
that, after various amounts of investigation, we have not been able
to identify as either naturally produced or made by man. These
include 135 witnesses of which 4 reported alien beings, 6 reported
blue beams, and 9 reported periods of missing time suggesting
abductions. Over 60 UFO photographs have been taken.
I am convinced that these sightings are proof of alien
visitation.
The level of technology demonstrated indicates they can come and
go at will and can reside in a variety of places: the bottom of our
oceans, inside major high altitude ice fields, in earth orbit, on the
moon, on Mars, etc..
One might ask why one couple in Gulf Breeze has been allowed
18 photographic sessions. The most obvious reason to me is the
aliens want people to see the photographs. I hope this causes more
people to give serious thought to the idea that we, as an intelligent
species, are not alone in the universe.
Donald M. Ware
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2900) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:36p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: 11/10/88 Gulf Breeze Sentinel Articles
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:31:33 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.203133.13074@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
The following brief articles appeared in the November 10, 1988
issue of The Sentinel, Gulf Breeze, Florida. This issue discusses
some of the highlights of the UFO sightings that have
occurred in the area over the past year. The first article is by the
primary photographer "Ed". Others are written by: Donald Ware,
Florida state MUFON director; and Duane Cook, editor of The
Sentinel. The articles are reproduced here with the permission
of The Sentinel.
------------------------------------------------------------------
ED SHARES PAST YEAR'S EXPERIENCES ON UFO SIGHTING'S
ANNIVERSARY
On Nov. 11, 1987, as I opened the front door and stared at the
glowing object partly obscured by several pine trees, I stepped
into a phenomena that jolted me to the reality of UFOs. A
phenomena that is being witnessed all over the world and here
at home by dozens of our fellow residents. This reality may be
hard to accept for those who have not had a sighting, so I do not
try to convince or persuade. I have only reported my personal
sightings and incidents as they happened.
The resulting photographs and video tape I took of the UFO
have been validated by computer imaging (Dr. Maccabee, physicist
with the U.S. Navy). And, of course, there are otheres who feel
differently and offer little other than opinions.
When I was asked to use a 4 lens Nimslo 3-D sealed camera,
I did. When I was asked to use the SRS (Self Referencing Stereo)
camera, I did. The technical analysis of these photographs
produced page after page of data with the end result detailing an
object 14 foot in diameter at the bottom ring and 475 feet distant.
The accusation of hoax came fast from those unable to say
"maybe", and I was asked to take a lie detector test. Again the
ridicule was hurled toward me and yet another lie detector test.
As the controversy swirled, I began to hear preposterous tales
being spread by the debunkers about devil parties and "ultimate
pranks," etc. Those of you who know me will certainly laugh at
such claims, but the object was to discredit me in the eyes of those
who don't know me. There was a very serious attempt to destroy
my reputation by twisting spooky party games into ritual seances.
Having failed to discredit the photographic evidence, the out of
town critics have mounted a slander campaign hoping to brand me.
Thank you Gulf Breeze for ignoring these outrageous rumors.
Some of you may remember the front page headline "Expert
says Photos a Hoax." The next day the "expert" publicly retracted
his claim and apologized. A counterintelligence agency in
Maryland was given an audio tape of me being interviewed. The
resulting examination of the tape on a PSE (Psychological Stress
Evaluator) vindicated my word once more when the examiner
said the result "does not show any reaction to cause this examiner
to doubt his (Ed's) answers."
Soon I began to understand that no matter how many tests I
was subjected to and how many times the photographs were
analyzed, I was still open game for the out of town media and
clearly a target to be ridiculed by the out of town debunkers.
Many distant newspapers and TV crews played "hide and seek"
with reporting the accurate details, and several times I have
been blackmailed in their quest for a scoop to expose my name.
The official MUFON investigation was even infiltrated early
by a debunker who took a liquid sample suspected to have fallen
from the UFO for analysis only to issue a false report. Later the
sample was analyzed by an independant lab with startling results.
The debunker was exposed and fired in discredit. Another
debunker from Central Florida has recently been exposed and is
now being ignored by serious researchers.
From Nov. 11 to May 1, 1988 (my last sighting), I have been
stedfast to the truth as the storm of controversy, both positive
and negative, continued to build in the media. The most
troublesome question of the controversy is "Why have I had so
many sightings?" I can not explain the "why" questions, the most
disturbing one being, "Why Me?"
In an effort to understand, I have undergone a battery of
pshchological profile tests followed by six hours of regressive
hypnosis. The details of the hypnosis indicate previous encounters
as far back as 11 years of age. I was the first to shake my head
in confusion but have come to the adjustment that life goes on--
even life we may not understand.
Thanks to all those who have stood up and reported what they
saw. Thank you, Gulf Breeze for being a good neighbor.
------------------------------------------------------------------
GULF BREEZE UFO FROM THE INVESTIGATIVE PERSPECTIVE
BY DONALD M. WARE
During the past year, many residents in and around Gulf Breeze,
FL have been part of a unique experience in this country. Over
a hundred people reported objects that we could not identify as
planes, planets, flares, etc.. Some reported seeing alien beings,
and six reported blue beams coming from the UFO. One respected
Gulf Breeze family had 22 encounters with UFOs, including 18
separate photographic sessions. These sessions produced 41
photographs of at least five different types of flying objects. Five
different cameras were used providing sufficient data to determine
the size of some objects. For example, one object photographed
on 1 May 1988 was 14.8 (misprint?) feet high and had a light on
the bottom that was 14.8 feet in diameter. I have seen over
60 photos of UFOs from this area.
Investigations by Newspapers, TV and the Mutual UFO Network
were generally accomplished without ridicule. This encouraged
12 people to tell of their UFO experiences that involved "missing
time" or extremely strange dreams. Some of these people are
having trouble coping with their experiences. MUFON established
a support group including abductees, investigators, and a clinical
psychologist to help reduce fear of the unknown. I think the
support efforts, including time-regression hypnosis, have helped
several who seem to have been inside a UFO understand their
strange experiences.
I suspect that the increasing national media coverage of the
UFO phenomenon, spurred by the Gulf Breeze photos and sightings
will cause many more abductees to gain the courage to talk about
their experiences. Perhaps some will seek help in understanding
what happened to them. I hope investigators and psychologists
across the country will work together to provide this help.
Some people have been unable to fully accept the reality of
alien visitors, including some "armchair investigators." Perhaps
the Gulf Breeze photos will help people across the country accept
the reality described in the MJ-12 documents and other government
disclosures.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
TO CELEBRATE OR NOT TO CELEBRATE
BY DUANE COOK
How do you celebrate the anniversary of an event you are
not yet sure was good?
Well, maybe celebrate is not the appropriate term.
Perhaps reminisce is a better word to apply to our thoughts
and activities on this 1st anniversary of the now famous UFO
sightings by "Ed" and others in and around Gulf Breeze.
Initially we had no idea that printing Ed's photos would cause
such a worldwide interest in our fair community.
First, there were the wire services that broke the news
worldwide with a brief account of the first sightings.
Then came the National Enquirer with their offer to pay for
the right to print the photos if NASA Scientists found them
genuine.
MUFON (Mutual UFO Network) got involved in the investigation
early and became the authority to which the explosion of local
sightings were referred.
Dr. Bruce Maccabee, an optical physicist under contract with
the Navy, did the most extensive research on the Gulf Breeze
sightings and photographs and has pronounced them real for
lack of any evidence to the contrary.
And now we find ourselves contemplating why Gulf Breeze?
Is it because they (the UFOs) knew Ed would share his photos
with the whole town via the Sentinel and subsequently the local TV
stations?
Or is it because Ed lives here and they (the UFOs) just followed
him here to continue their interaction with him as they have done
at eight year intervals since he was a child?
And what about the many other sightings we've had? Is it just
coincidence that Charlie and Doris saw the same craft on the same
night that Ed photographed it, thus assuring the Sentinel's
unflinching support while maintaining its unquestioned credibility?
Then there are the ministers, the teachers, the law enforcement
officers, the district medical examiner and his wife, and even a city
council member.
Were these people just randomly in the right place at the
right time, or is there an intelligent plan guiding the selection of
who sees it and who doesn't?
Whether we call it a celebration, a reminiscence, or a review,
we all found it amazing that it's already been a whole year since it
all started.
And we wanted to share with you our thoughts and reflections
on this most interesting year.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Reports by several others also appeared in this issue of
The Sentinel but are not presented here.
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2901) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:36p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: 10/30/90 Letter To Pensacola Newspaper
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:29:51 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.202951.13004@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
The following is a letter from Don Ware and Charles Flannigan
concerning a recent article in the Pensacola News Journal
dealing with the Ed Walters UFO photographs. The letter was
sent to both the Pensacola News Journal and the Gulf Breeze
Sentinel.
---------------------------------------------------------------
October 30, 1990
Dear Editor,
As the primary investigators of the famous Gulf Breeze UFO
case now involving over 70 photographs, Charles Flannigan
and I feel we must comment on the "road shot." This photo,
#19, has received doubtful comment in newspapers and TV
recently. One investigator said that the reflection on the road
doesn't form a round spot, so the photo most be a double
exposure. A careful look at the surface of Shoreline Drive,
191B where the UFO hovered, will help explain the reflection
resulting from the large bright light source on the bottom of
the UFO.
Looking down on the surface, you can see that about 30% is
mostly white with some tan rock. This rock has a hard smooth
surface. It is embedded in comparatively soft dark asphalt,
and the light colored rocks have become oriented with mostly
flat surfaces up. Over time, some asphalt has worn away 1 to
2 millimeters below the hard rock surfaces. A series of photos
taken with a 100,000 candlepower light shining at various
angles on the road shows enhanced reflectivity at shallow
angles. This seems to be the result of spectral reflection from
the light colored rocks. Because the asphalt is worn down
below the surface of the rock, only the rock is visible when
looking farther down the road. This causes more photons to
reach the camera than you would normally expect from
light reflected at a small angle. Now the shape of the
reflection from the UFO becomes easier to understand.
For those who still have doubts about the authenticity
of this photo, you might look carefully at two photos in a
copy of THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS. Turn to page 129 and
look at the daylight photo of the road. Compare the brightness
of the double-yellow line between the hood and windshield
wiper with the brightness near the spot where the UFO hovered.
Now look one page back at photo #19 and make the same
comparison. (Good light is helpful here.) The double-yellow
line appears brighter near the UFO. This tells us that light
from the UFO is reflecting off the line; hence, NO DOUBLE
EXPOSURE (emphasis theirs).
We have had the good fortune of getting to know Ed and
Frances Walters well since our extensive investigation of the
many Gulf Breeze UFO encounters of 1987 and '88. They are
two of the most considerate, hard-working, and lovable people
we know. They have shown great courage and composure
under public attack by several UFO debunkers. We wish them
the best of luck in all of their endeavors, whether it is a $1-a-
year job or the sale of a mind-broadening book.
Charles D. Flannigan
MUFON Field Investigator
State Director
Donald M. Ware
MUFON Field Investigator
Eastern Region Director
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2902) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:36p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Message Reply On Ed's "ghost" Photos
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:33:57 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.203357.13160@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
Message #8792 - Gourmet Gab
Date : 18-May-90 12:43
From : John Hicks
To : Don Allen
Subject : Gallifrey
> Did Ed tell you how he had managed to capture those "ghosts"
> on film (recent Sentinel article showed a young girl at Ed's
> house and the appearence of a ghost either behind or beside
> her)?
Yes, he described what he was doing and showed me some pictures.
The ghost
pictures are pretty much a disinformation campaign by Willy Smith.
BTW, when
the first burned area was found in the field, Willy Smith insisted
he smelled
gasoline while no one else did. Specific testing for petroleum
products found
none. Also, Willy Smith hired a photographer in New York to fake a
picture of
an Ed-style ufo in front of the Chrysler Building, ostensibly to
show how it
could be done. Smith then passed off that picture as one of Ed's
pictures
until the photographer contacted MUFON and let the cat out of the
bag. So, I
think anything Willy Smith says is highly suspect.
Anyway, back to the ghost pictures.
According to Ed, the game is that "The ghost is *in* one of you,
and only
the camera can tell which."
Ed takes a couple of normal pictures of the kids, no ghost. Then
he picks
one, focuses the camera for long distance (called infinity, but he
didn't know
that) and takes a picture of the kid about four feet away. The
out-of-focus
picture shows the far wall sharp while the kid's a little blurry.
The flash
causes the eyes to go totally white in the same way that many
pictures of
people result in red eyes, or of animals result in bright green
eyes etc. The
"ghost" of course has totally white eyes.
In the picture Willy Smith is trying to call a ghost picture, it
was
supposed to be a regular picture of the kid, no ghost. However, it
was shot in
front of a sliding glass door which Frances said she had never
cleaned in the
five or so years they had lived in the house.
Maccabee said that he has confirmed in tests that fingerprints
and smears
can really reflect blobs of light while the angle to the glass is
such that
clean glass doesn't reflect light back to the camera. I've also
seen this many
times myself.
Anyway, Smith claims that the photo which shows the blobs of
light is
supposed to be a ghost picture, but when you see Ed's examples of
"ghost"
pictures and the pictures that show the kid that the "ghost" is
gone, you can
see that Smith is taking little bits of information completely out
of context
in a debunking effort.
Absolutely no signs of double exposure or manipulations other than
intentionally wrong focusing can be seen in any of the pictures.
> Total Non-sequitor: Since you're a photographer...what camera
> setup
> would you recommend and film,speed,etc to capture a UFO in
> flight?
I extrapolated a ballpark exposure based on the known exposure
settings of
Ed's pictures taken with the Polaroid 108 film. It comes out to a
ballpark
exposure setting of 1/60 at f2.8 with ISO 3200 film. This is for
the craft
itself, providing it's apparent self-illumination would be about
the same. My
gut guess was 1/60 at f2 with ISO 1600 film, which amounts to the
same.
Of course, if what you see is a bright light, you'd use less
exposure, while
if you see a dark disc you'd use more exposure. If you see lights
on a dark
disc you'd need to decide whether to go for the structure of the
disc and let
the lights overexpose or to go for the lights and let the disc go
to black.
In any case, you need to use manual settings rather than
autoexposure
because the metering system will see all that black sky and give an
exposure
of several seconds. This is what happened recently when Ed and
several others
tried to photograph a dark disc that had a dull red light on the
bottom.
Everyone's camera gave an exposure of three to five seconds and all
anyone got
was blurry blobs.
jbh
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2903) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:36p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Message About Hyser Report
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:35:20 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.203520.13302@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
Message #5474 - INFO.PARANET
Date : 10-Nov-91 2:12
From : John Hicks
To : all
Subject : Hyser report
Here's the scoop on the Hyser report (so far).
Rex Salisberry says he has a copy of William Hyser's report on
some of Ed
Walter's photos but can't release it to us yet because of a
committment he
made to Hyser to not release the report without his (Hyser)
permission.
Jerry Black sent a copy to Phil Klass, and Phil quoted a little
of it in his
newsletter. Rex said Hyser went through the roof.
Anyway, the gist of the report is that Hyser found quite a few
things in the
photos that were *consistent with* multiple exposures, but nothing
that
constituted *proof* of multiple exposures.
I think we've already discussed most of those items and picked
the photos
apart, but of course we don't have any clout so we don't really
count. ;-)
Also, in the October 1991 _Photomethods_, (a journal for
commercial/
industrial photographers) Hyser went through an example of how to
do a
multiple exposure and have the object appear to be behind another
darker
object. The example was a ufo behind a church steeple at night
(surprise!)
Anyway, he presents the idea of the film's threshold sensitivity
as being
the key to having a foreground object appear black against a
slightly light
object.
Look at Ed Walter's photo #1, in which we see a ufo behind a tree
branch.
Keep that in mind.
Now I'll walk through the threshold sensitivity thing, in plain
English. In
the graphic arts and photolab industries, the process is called
flashing, so
you guys familiar with that stuff will now already know what I'm
talking
about.
Photographic film (paper etc.) requires a minimum amount of light
for an
image to "stick." For example, let's say the threshold is five
photon (units
of light). If the film receives only four photons, they'll most
likely
dissipate before you develop the film. If the film receives more
than five
photons, they "stick" and you have a latent image (waiting to be
developed).
So, an area of film that receives only four photons will be black
(clear)
and an area that receives six photons will have density.
Listen closely now.....
A ufo model is first photographed against a black background, and
is exposed
just below the threshold, say, just under five photons. If you were
to develop
the film, you'd see no image.
*But* you make a second exposure on the same sheet of film. The
second
exposure consists of a black tree and an illuminated skyline. You
make this
exposure slightly underexposed.
Where the tree overlaps the ufo, the film doesn't receive any
additional
light, so you have a total exposure still of just under five
photons; no
image. The combination of the skyline *and* the ufo
below-the-threshold image
make up more than five photons, so not only do you have the skyline
image,
you've kicked the ufo image over the five-photon threshold too; you
have an
image of a ufo against a skyline, with a (black) tree that appears
to be in
front of the ufo.
*But* such a multiple exposure isn't without artifacts. The very
dark image
of the ufo will tend to take on the colors of the background. Sort
of a
chameleon effect.
Also, to heighten the contrast between the ufo image and the
skyline, you
can develop the film for a longer time (Polaroid 108 too).
Now, take another good close look at the Ed Walters photos......
My opinion? (since you didn't ask)
This process is certainly workable, and wouldn't be anywhere near
as
cumbersome as masking techniques in the darkroom, then printing
onto Polaroid
etc. But it'd be hard to control. But certainly workable.
I think we have another valid hoax theory. Not proof, but a
theory that can
explain photo #1.
William G. Hyser is a consultant in optical instrumentation,
photogrammetry,
forensic engineering, electrical contact physics and illumination
engineering.
Perhaps best of all, he's not a ufologist.
jbh
---
* Origin: Moderation? What's that? -*- Fidonet UFO Moderator
(1:363/29)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2904) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:36p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Jim Speiser Message About Ed And The Model
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:36:34 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.203634.13520@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
Message #5717 - UFO
Date: 11-11-91 13:09
From: Jim Speiser
To: All
Subject: Ed and the model
Replies: -> #5721
One of the reasons I reject Ed Walters' claims regarding his
photographs of the Gulf Breeze object is the sheer NUMBER of
little controversies surrounding the photos and events there. One of
those controversies, of course, is the model that was found in Ed's
former residence. Ed has been very good at putting out fires, by
misdirecting people's attention to little details that would seem to
exonerate him. But now there is another controversy arising out of
the
model, and that is the apparent attempt by someone to "go back in
time"
and change the relevant evidence, or get rid of it altogether.
The evidence hinges on the house plans made by Ed Walters which
appear
on the inside of the UFO model. Ed claims the plans were drawn up in
September of 1989, two years after his first UFO photos were made
public. But, according to Phil Klass' "Skeptics UFO Newsletter", July
1991 issue....
<<
It can now be revealed that in early January, 1987, Walters and Russ
McElhinney decided to build a a house "on speculation" at 712
Jamestown
Drive which would have a Living Area of 1740 sq. ft. and whose garage
entrance would be PARALLEL to the long dimension of the house -- as
in
the UFO-model house plan. On Jan. 16, 1987, Walters and McElhinney
filed
a building permit request with the Gulf Breeze City Hall and 12 days
later, on Jan. 28, they filed a building permit reqeust with Santa
Rosa
County ... However, the Slab Area shown does NOT match the 2393 sq.
ft.
visible on the UFO-model drawing.
But if one calculates the Slab Area for the Thomas house plan, it
does
not total 2393 either. When I pointed this out to Maccabee, he
replied
that "the term `slab area' does not mean just the area where there is
concrete slab. How Ed arrived at the [2393] number is a
straightforward
caluclation for him, even though it may seem strange to you (and
me)."
(The "Spec House" was never built. A short time later, Mr./Mrs.
Gerald
Folkers contracted with Ed to build a somewhat different design at
712
Jamestown Drive.)
Soon after the small UFO-model was discovered, Ed Walters visited the
owners of his former residence to inspect the model they had found. A
short time later, Ed and his wife Frances visited City Hall to
examine
house plans. Later it was discovered that the lower right corner of
the
"spec" house drawing - where the Living Area and Slab Area figures
normally are shown - had been torn off by some "person unknown."
WHO WOULD HAVE ANY REASON TO VISIT THE GULF BREEZE CITY HALL AND TEAR
OFF THE CORNER OF THE "SPEC HOUSE" PLAN THAT SHOWED ITS LIVING/SLAB
AREA
FIGURES? Several potential suspects come to mind: The KGB, The Pope,
Dolly Parton, Barbara Bush, Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, Saddam Hussein,
Donald Trump, and VP Dan Quayle. If you can think of any other
possible
suspects, please submit name(s) to SUN.
>>
I plan to scan the 1/28/87 building permit application into the
system
and will distribute it. Again, not the smoking gun, but just
another of
those "little controversies" that mar this case.
Jim Speiser
Note: This message originally appeared on ParaNet a few months ago.
I'm
reposting it here because the controversy over the plans has come
up here
recently and I wanted to try and clarify a few things.
JS
--- QuickBBS 2.75
* Origin: REMOTRON ASSOCIATES INC Scottsdale, AZ Freq FILES
(1:114/37)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2905) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:36p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Ed Walters On Photo Analysis
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:38:52 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.203852.13738@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
The following is an open letter from Edward Walters, one
of the primary witnesses in the Gulf Breeze UFO flap. He
addresses the isssue as to who has examined his original
photographs. He also indicates what he plans to eventually do
with the originals.
-------------------------------------------------------------
July 27, 1989
A few Gulf Breeze critics, and one in particular, have distorted
the record as to the professional access and study of the
original photos of the Gulf Breeze UFO. Here is a partial list of
the experts who have studied the ORIGINALS.
JIM TURNER, Photographer and film processing specialist
CURT SHIELDS, Photographer and special effects specialist
MARIE PRICE, Photographer, touch up expert
AL AUDLEMAN, Photographer, re-photographing expert
CHRISTOPHER STARK, Photographer, special effects specialist
MARK CURTIS & replica specialist, ABC News
DR. ROBERT NATHAN, Scientist, optics, etc.
DR. ARNOLD PALMER, Astronomer
DR. BRUCE MACCABEE, Physicist, Optics, etc.
ROBERT OECHSLER, Analyst of polaroid film and chemistry
DR. MARK CARLATTO, Computer analyst
VINCENT DIPEITRO, Photographic analyst
JOE GRECO, Photographic analysis scanning equipment
RICHARD VANDENBERG, Photographic expert
EDWARD WEIBE, Electronic engineer, computer analysis
JOHN GARDNER, Acoustical physicist, video tape analysis
DR. EBERT, computer analysis
NBC photographers, and many, many photographers w/Cosgrove
Productions
This list goes on and on with others and their associates that I
do not have the names of. Certainly this shows that the originals
have not been withheld from skeptical study. The unanimous
conclusion from the above: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE
A HOAX.
I have and will continue to withhold the originals from people
like P. Klass and Willy Smith. Both proclaimed "hoax", before
seeing the photos and listening to a single one of the dozens of
other witnesses. Given their history of debunking and Smith's
fake evidence hoax (discovered recently), it would be irrational
to trust the originals in their hands. If the originals 'disappear'
they could then argue "hoax" with their altered copies and we
would not have the originals to prove that their copies had been
tampered with.
WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS FOR THE ORIGINALS
The protection of the originals is crucial in the support of the
witness testimony. But....the testimony also supports the photos.
One without the other means nothing. As Dr. Maccabee says, "A
UFO photo does not a UFO make" .....therefore, the attempts to
discredit my testimony by the debunkers has been severe.
Distortions and misquotes have been fabricated with abandon.
Locations and details have been intentionally changed leaving
the unsuspecting listener or reader to believe that I am a
hoaxer, prankster, ritual seance master, con man, and all the
other witnesses are deluded.
The documentation of the precise witness testimony is as
necessary as the protection of the originals. They go hand
in hand. During the past year it became obvious that a book
was the only way to completely document my testimony.
The media stories were not detailed and misquotes only
allowed the critic to yell "hoax".
When the testimony from the book is available to the public
and all interested scientists, I will contract with a computer lab
and have ALL the photos put on computer imaging tapes. The
computer lab will not be asked to issue an analysis -- only
supply clear, exact copies of the originals in the computer
format. Requests from serious researchers to study the tapes
will be encouraged. The originals will be safe, the documented
testimony will be available and the tapes will further the
technical study of the UFO.
(signature)
Edward Walters
P.O. Box 715
Gulf Breeze, FL
32562
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2906) Sun 17 Nov 91 12:36p
By: Don Allen
To: All
Re: Gb: Mufon Message - Maccabee Talks About Gb Witnesses
St: Sent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@UFGATE newsin 1.27
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Date: 16 Nov 91 20:40:22 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Message-ID: <1991Nov16.204022.13828@bilver.uucp>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
The following is part of a series on the Gulfbreeze UFO's.
------Begin included
text---------------------------------------------
Date: 11-02-91 21:22
From: John Powell
Subj: MUFON Meeting
I just attended a Maryland MUFON meeting, (I guess you could call
it a
meeting but it seemed more like a mini-convention to me), and l
heard some
interesting stuff:
[Disclaimer: I have great sympathy for reporters. It is _darn_
hard to
listen and think _and_ take legible notes! <grin>]
Maccabee:
-+-------
Said he knows, by name, 12 other people who have clearly seen the
UFO/Ed-craft.
Showed a bunch of Red-light UFO videotape. Several different
sequences where
something is seen falling/dropping/lowered from the object. When
analyzed,
he said the odd thing about the 'light' that is 'dropped' is that
it shows no
detectable signs of acceleration - so whatever it is that's
happenning isn't
simply a dropped light/flare/etc... [Newton would be alarmed...
<grin>]
He mentioned a significant GB sighting on 10/30 that was witnessed
by many
people and lasted 9 minutes. Because of the duration and the
number of
witnesses he suggested that there could be other implications.
He stated again that he thinks GB, including Ed, is real and 'the
most
important event in UFOlogy today...' [That's not a direct quote.]
He also mentioned that there have been several times when witnesses
have seen
kites and balloons with flares but these were infrequent and easily
spotted.
He mentioned a sneaky radar confirmation where a MUFON
investigator, I think
he said it was Morrison, witnessed a Red-light UFO, called an Air
Traffic
Controller at one of the Naval Air Stations in Gulf Breeze and
claimed to be
on a boat and 'saw something weird.' The Controller said they had
spotted it
too, had no idea what it was, but were already checking into it...
In a
next-day official inquiry the NAS said they tracked nothing...
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best
of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything
else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!dona - Why did the JUSTICE DEPT steal
PROMIS?
/\/\ What is research but a blind date with knowledge. William
Henry /\/\
--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's leading UFO Investigative News
Network (1:30163/150)@
SEEN-BY 104/422 428 605 107/816 30163/100 150
@PATH: 30163/150 104/422
