I'm writing this as a response/background to the recent discussions about Maurice Chatelaine, Billy Meier and his 'exposure' by his ex-wife, the validity of reports of certain UFO radio program presenters, the alien autopsy film, and the discussion that we need a spokesmen/woman for the UFO community. That seems a whole lot that apparently have no relation to each other, other than that the "general" subject are UFOs. But I see those subjects related in a way that explains -why- we apparently are going nowhere. I guess when 10 years ago something was written in the newspapers or shown on TV, that would give a possible certainty about the accuracy of the report, and therefore the report contained at least something that was true (let's forget about the exceptions here for a moment). But with the big boom in communication technology and the Internet, any idiot, fool and/or potential cult leader can publish their opinions, write stories, and state them as being the truth. That applies to the web, and in the newsgroups things are even worse. I've stopped reading newsgroups about UFO's because most of the articles are of the "I had sex wit an alien !!!" type. I think that's also why most of us are subscribed to this e-mail list. Because we want serious work done, and not to be bothered with nonsense, and when it comes up, expose it. But when I look at the discussions, they usually go like; "I spoke to him/her and he/she said such and so" and someone replies "I think ......", "My theory is....." and someone else; "When I talked to him/her he/she said something different". It seems to me that the source of information has become more important than it ever was. And that point is our first problem; most people do not want to talk openly about UFOs, but often they will agree to talk about it anonymously. Now most news reporters (except the tabloid style) check their sources thoroughly. But as I said earlier, any idiot can cook a story from "anonymous sources within the government" and spread it though the Internet. And while we're at it, go to a search engine, and look for "Bill Cooper" and "Lear". you'll get a list of sites from here to Tokyo that published their stories, like they where highly trustworthy sources, having worked for the government, Lear being the son of such and such. Of all those sites only two sites mention the tv-show where Lear wants to tell the public that he fabricated the Krill document as a joke, being caught shorthanded by Cooper, who said he'd seen the document many years ago when he was in the navy ! Some researchers, and I think Stanton Friedman is a good example of this, emphasize their prior achievements and their scientific carrier to create the impression that they, of any person, certainly know what they are [114 lines left ... full text available at <url:http://www.reference.com/cgi-bin/pn/go?choice=message&table=04_1997&mid=2617395&hilit=UFO> ] -------------------------------- Article-ID: 04_1997&2563997 Score: 93 Subject: Re: Goes-9 glitch of 4/16/97, 1530Z