Left at East Gate, questions to Larry Warren

[larry warren]

one more FACT, my ex wife was never a member of a small or larg UFO group! keep the BS flyin guys

[larry warren]

Oh and another from GBs book,she says Jim confirmed he told me to shut up because i ran around the base talking about the events! another false trail for you all, i was at the SP table, at the mess hall and said to the guy accross from me "what the Fck
happened to us " thats when jim said to shut up ! and that aint running around the base, a buddy i happened to go to the same
high school with, was on the base as air crew, the para rescue, saw him 10 years ago, and he never heard about the events from me or anyone!and he and i hung out on the base before and after the events, so when halt and others say i ran around with my hair on fire, they speek dust. that guys name is larry walls by the way, as for the pictures anyone want the story on them? and why i never put them out, and no i never took them, but photos do exist. john , you fellas should get your house in order, because if you think the brit press will give you a fair shot because of your long service, and your twisting of what happened to me, guess again pal ,if i were you id leave the press out of it. also why would little old me sitting in my dorm room get draged into this and worked over? WHY THEN HALT SAID ON THE ENO SHOW WITH ME THAT I WAS THERE? WHAT A MESS DUDE!

[John Burroughs]

Larry I posted what I posted to show Adrian has talked about the incident.But of cource your not saying he didnot say that! I know you sent her questions about what she wrote but guess what she did respond back to what you had to say! Larry the reason I ask these questions is because there is alot of stuff out there you have said including numerous videos you made and interviews you have done that don't add up.And nobody said anything about attacking you in the British press! Maybe they brought you in because you kept talking about the incident and because you did they wanted to find out what you knew who knows! You might want to check out what Halt had to say on yesterday's show that was hosted by Nick Pope ! If someone know how to post that part please do! If not its on the justice page you can also hear what he had to say about it being ET he left no doubt on why he feels its ET. Take a close look at what Adrian had to say about the incident its very interesting to say the least!

[larry warren]

John , i listened to the show, infact i thought you all did a great job on it! including halt.
as far as things not adding up, for many years , when you are alone in a thing this big and are trying to convea the scope of the thing and talking about things you know, things you think you know, and things you were told, im sure some things end up being incorrect infact ive never said i am right on everything, you are doing great work on this to confirm varrious aspects of the events, but i wish you guys would take a moment to look at what the spooks did to me and some others in the aftermath,
and no john, i was not pulled in after running around the base talking about this! and yes she did respond to me without addressing a single issiue i raise, but the womans dead and a friend of nicks so i really dont want to go after her even though
i have every right too!
as for the british press, i was refering to how the press handled Col Halts statement in DC yesterday, it was beneith contempt !
and letting you guys know what to expect from them, thats all.

[larry warren]

Relating to the above post, i see on Ian Ridpaths web site he endorses Brunis Book, need i say more ?

[Frank]

and yes she did respond to me without addressing a single issiue i raise, but the womans dead and a friend of nicks so i really dont want to go after her even though
i have every right too!

For those interested in the facts: The Bruni-Warren confrontation:
http://twinbases.org.uk//ufo/georginalarry.htm

[John Burroughs]

Larry
Sorry that it has had to come to this! I want this out in the open because as people can see if its not out there for everybody to read people can say they were misquoted or I didn't say that. As far as trying to say the spooks did this to us I don't agree the fact is there are different things being said and its important to tie them all together and if it upsets people so be it. I looked at Ian Ridpaths site Larry and all I saw was he listed the Books that have been written on Bentwaters! What I did notice is Ian twisting the facts on our statements again saying the statements show we were following the lighthouse from the beginning which is not true. Again Ian Jim and I will be out there on the 28th of December the lighthouse is still there and the forest is as close as it could be to what it was in 1980. Please join us and show us that what we encountered was the lighthouse. Larry the reason why I'm trying to find out who told you I had my encounter at the staging area is because that is not where it happened. Its important to know who told you that. The next thing is Adrian not only told Bruni you were not there when his encounter first started happening but he also told me that when I talked to him on the phone after we met at Brubakers house. In Bruni book and what he told me was you came up on what was going on after he and I got close to it. So Appleseed was right in saying you were talking about what happened to me and Adrian. Did you or did you not come up on what was going on after Adrian and I were already there? If you did I would like to hear what you saw and what you remember its it important to me. What people were saying as the event was going on and who was there. And you said after that you blacked out! Well its interesting if you look at what Adrian said happened to the lights after he encountered it and what Ed C said happened to us in the SCI FI piece as we encountered it and what Jim saw after we first had contact. Also on the Bldg you said you were taken to what was its location and do you have any Idea who was in charge of the Bldg? These are all very important question and are questions only!

[John Burroughs]

Larry
I tried to add more to the last post but it but it kicked me off! What I'm asking is not when you got out there or if anything else happened just do you remember coming up on what Adrian was saying was happening or not! And if you do can you go into a much detail as you can! Thanks John

[stephan]

sorry John, Larry for my late reply. Got some lengthy discussion in regard to the Ufos & Nukes Press C. on another forum...

anyway, I see you are meanwhile trying to clear up stuff among yourselves, so my involvement is not really necessary. But there are a few points I'd like to add. I'll quote and comment each quote (lw= Larry Warren; jb= John Burroughs)

Stephen
Adrian Bustiza has gone on the record! If you look for a thread called Larry Warrens story started on Feb 11, 2010 you will see what Adrian had to say in you can't tell the people. There are also some very interesting exchanges that go on after that posting! http://www.rendlesham-incident.co.uk/fo ... ?f=3&t=688
So you do have something to refer to dealing with Adrian.

thanks, that's quite a long thread and I'm am not a very fast reader (and currently it seems as if I'm doing nothing else but reading (not only here of course) ) ... but at first glance I've picked a few statements from there (from what I understand the first posts are directly taken from Bruni's book):

Larry recalls being at the site with Bustinza when the big UFO landed (Bustinza insists he was not there when the landing took place but arrived soon afterwards. He also refers to an entirely different landing site than Larry) [...] Right in front of him appeared a huge machine, which at first seemed to be triangular in shape but was constantly distorting. It reminded him of a huge soluble aspirin (Bustinza also mentions that it looked like a soluble aspirin).

[...]

Bustinza has no memories of Larry being at the landing site either. He explained the difficulty of trying to follow what was going on at the time:

I don't recall seeing him [Larry] out there, but there was a lot of confusion going on.

there's a little discrepancy here as there's a difference in meaning of the words ''to insist'' and ''to recall''. On the one hand it is said that he insisted Larry was not there while on the other hand Bustinza is quoted as saying he did not recall seeing him out there, even admitting that there was a lot of confusion. So this leaves a lot of room for speculation as to the question if Larry was or was not there. I would suppose he was but Bustinza - due to the confusion on the ground - did not notice him.

But for a definite answer it would be very helpful to get a direct response from Adrian. I remember seeing him in a documentary, saying a few things. Unfortunately I don't know which documentary it was. Probably other forum members know it, if so plz. post!

John, please read back over this thread, in fact read thru the part of my book when i talk about what i saw, you will never find me say that i saw us repair a space ship ! simply because i never have, in this and numerous posts over what, two or three years weve gone over that more than once, ive explained why i was telling chuck about it on CNN, and that the way it was used in the show seems like i saw it, it was not like that at all, chuck asked me about what Busty said to Larry fauctt, we whent into it a bit, i never said i saw that and did not.

yes, I can confirm what Larry says, here's proof from LAEG (emphasis mine):

The News of the World runs an article on the incident [...] Relative to Art Wallace [pseudo for L. Warren], the update is a stew of inaccuracies and distortions:

[...]
[from the N.o.t.W. article]Evidence that the U.S. Air Force may have helped repair the damaged craft.

and here:

LF. Larry said that something happened to their machine. Do you remember that?

AB. Yeah

LF. And our government helped them repair the machine. They flew a piece in from Germany, I believe.

so it's Larry Fawcett who claimed that Larry Warren said that and it's NOT Larry Warren who said that. Larry Warren unambiguously later in the book states:

Next was a clip from my 1983 BBC interview with Bob Friend, but HBO had edited it: what I said had not happened was presented as though it had. I seemed to be saying we had helped repair the UFO and that one of the aliens had even shaken Gordon Williams's hand.

so we see that Larry Warren actually did not say it.

And Steven i cant endorse the above book for afurther reason, Busty told me she changed what he said to her, just like she wrote that i saw quote, Airanautic entites,
And "a huge space ship" ive said neither and dont even know what the first means! i called GB a few years ago. found out she was sick, and she asked me not to tell anyone, ofcourse i did not, and nick pope can confirm that, near the end of the call, i asked why she did me over like she did in the book, her answer, There were pressures, i sorry. end quote.

interesting to learn that. Makes me wonder about who may have pressed her...

one more FACT, my ex wife was never a member of a small or larg UFO group! keep the BS flyin guys

yep, most certainly not, if you read the book folks. The UFO issue was (one of) the reasons for your divorce as far as I remember ...

Oh and another from GBs book,she says Jim confirmed he told me to shut up because i ran around the base talking about the events! another false trail for you all, i was at the SP table, at the mess hall and said to the guy accross from me "what the Fck
happened to us " thats when jim said to shut up !

To be precise, he (allegedly) said ''Hey, Warren, shut the fuck up!'' (LAEG, p.50). I did not want to quote that before but as you mention it ... I was wondering (while reading) what Jim might have wanted to express by that. Did he want to protect or threaten you. But you've made it clear that latter was definitely not the case.

Larry the reason I ask these questions is because there is alot of stuff out there you have said including numerous videos you made and interviews you have done that don't add up.

John, it would be very helpful if you could give a very brief overview of the things that ''don't add up'' (and which haven't been already cleared up). Perhaps a small list pointing out these issues

i see on Ian Ridpaths web site he endorses Brunis Book, need i say more ?

I looked at Ian Ridpaths site Larry and all I saw was he listed the Books that have been written on Bentwaters!

actually here's what you can find written on his site:

Articles and books about the Rendlesham Forest UFO case:


NEW: The Rendlesham Files – Dr David Clarke reveals the previously undisclosed background to the Halt memo and the MoD’s response to it from interviews with those who were involved behind the scenes.

Read Dr David Clarke’s 25th anniversary assessment of the case, originally published in the 2005 December issue of Fortean Times.

Read James Easton’s 21st anniversary summary of the case, from the 2001 November Fortean Times.

Wikipedia entry on the Rendlesham Forest Incident.

Read Evan Davis’s blog of his visit to Rendlesham Forest in 2010 August.

Sky Crash by Brenda Butler, Dot Street, and Jenny Randles (Neville Spearman, 1984).
UFO Crash Landing? by Jenny Randles (Blandford, 1998).
See also Jenny’s chapter titled Rendle Shame Forest in The UFOs That Never Were (London House, 2000).
You Can’t Tell the People by Georgina Bruni (Sidgwick & Jackson, 2000).


Content of this site last updated 2010 September.

All original content © Ian Ridpath. All rights reserved.

source: http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham.htm

it's somewhat peculiar that ''Left at East Gate'' is NOT mentioned while it is one of the most important books in regard to the case. Makes me wonder, too ... perhaps Ian himself could comment on that ? Bruni's book is also mentioned here: http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham2b.htm

here's the place where your book is mentioned, Larry:
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham1d.htm

[AdrianF]

The main page at this very site is your best friend..

http://rendlesham-incident.co.uk/evidence/witness-interviews/larry-fawcett-interviews-adrian-bustinza-1987/

[DeanF]

"LAEG wrote:One lesser-known speaker infuriated me. He stated that a credible UFO witness must have at least a bachelor's degree to be taken seriously. [...] I walked out of his lecture. [...] I said that a garbage man was just as qualified as a Ph.D. to report a UFO sighting."

I understand what the guy was trying to say, however I do feel he was being a bit arrogant. Just a small point, a bachelor's degree isn't the same as a PhD.

I have a degree in Engineering, and if you look around at some of my other posts, you will see that I've got a good understanding of the real world - ok, I realise that sounds terrible! - but let me try to elaborate further, we've all got an understanding of the real world because we live in it, haven't we? - what I mean is, the real world in terms of the particles, atoms, radiation, what makes the universe tick. What causes an electric current, what are radiowaves, what is alpha radiation, how do we measure it? What is a plasma, how are plasmas created?

There are people without a formal education that see something unusual and immediately assume it's a UFO because they don't understand it, because they don't have the knowledge to explain what they're seeing.

When people talk about UFOs, they describe various phenomena: light, radiation, high speed movement and accelerations.
These are scientific, physics and engineering related things. The people that can really make sense of what they've seen, that can really make sense of the UFO phenomena (if anyone can that is!) have to be scientists, engineers with university degree qualifications.
They (we I should add) have studied light, plasmas, quantum mechanics, radiation, electromagnetic waves, we've studied the laws of physics, from Newtons Laws of mechanics through to quantum theory, to Faraday's laws, we've studied them at University. Admittedly, some of those concepts we study in 6th form at A level, but then for some taken them further at University.

I think anyone can report a UFO incident, and I think it's arrogant to say that people without degrees can't, but to really understand what's going on, to make sense of it, requires a graduate level scientist or engineer. I would suggest strongly, this is one reason why Stanton Friedman ( a nuclear engineer) is so damn good at what he does as a UFO researcher. He can look at things and say "that's rubbish" because his formal education at University in engineering gives him the knowledge of these physical phenomena, of the real world around us, and he can include or discount things based on that, which someone who hasn't studied science/engineering at University can't do.

[stephan]

am I a bit paranoid or are people following me into other forums LOL ... just joking

I think anyone can report a UFO incident, and I think it's arrogant to say that people without degrees can't, but to really understand what's going on, to make sense of it, requires a graduate level scientist or engineer.

this would imply that the UFO phenomenon can be explained by science. So far science can neither explain the accelerations of the UFOs nor the many other characteristics that have been observed. Science fails to explain how ''they'' get here (if they travel light-years to reach us) and science fails to explain such observations as shadows without a light source, beings going through objects and and and. What if modern science is unable to explain those things because the science involved here has yet to be discovered or we are dealing with something completely unknown ? So I totally disagree here.

But this thread is NOT meant to discuss the topic ''how can science explain the UFO phenomenon''. If anyone wants to start a topic about that please create your own thread. This thread is about questions asked to Larry Warren. What he says here goes and will be discussed.

[DeanF]

am I a bit paranoid or are people following me into other forums LOL ... just joking

I think anyone can report a UFO incident, and I think it's arrogant to say that people without degrees can't, but to really understand what's going on, to make sense of it, requires a graduate level scientist or engineer.

this would imply that the UFO phenomenon can be explained by science. So far science can neither explain the accelerations of the UFOs nor the many other characteristics that have been observed.

"this would imply that the UFO phenomenon can be explained by science. "
No, I'm not saying that. You're disputing my statement "but to really understand what's going on, to make sense of it, requires a graduate level scientist or engineer". So if scientists/engineers don't have the knowledge required to understand and investigate UFOs then who does?

Are you really suggesting that someone with a degree say in History, or no degree in science/engineering can do a more thorough job of investigating UFOs than someone who doesn't? I would certainly disagree with that.

[stephan]

"this would imply that the UFO phenomenon can be explained by science. "
No, I'm not saying that. You're disputing my statement "but to really understand what's going on, to make sense of it, requires a graduate level scientist or engineer". So if scientists/engineers don't have the knowledge required to understand and investigate UFOs then who does?

Are you really suggesting that someone with a degree say in History, or no degree in science/engineering can do a more thorough job of investigating UFOs than someone who doesn't? I would certainly disagree with that.

I'm saying that yes. If a scientist can't explain it perhaps a non-scientist can. So far I know no scientist who has explained the UFO phenomena. Many have tried but if they had been successful we won't still be orbiting Earth and the Moon or Mars in a distant future. We'd be ''there'' by now.

Now that you know my opinion I ask you to continue this topic in a different thread (as I've discussed it at least a hundred times or so in other forums and discussions and I'm somewhat tired of it, you know).

[tpreitzel]

I think anyone can report a UFO incident, and I think it's arrogant to say that people without degrees can't, but to really understand what's going on, to make sense of it, requires a graduate level scientist or engineer.

Nonsense. The very definition of "science" limits itself to observations based on human perception, i.e. the 5 senses, and analysis based on the verbally-based consciousness of humanity. I'd say the latter conditions are a really weak limitation of science and a flawed paradigm on which to assert ANYTHING with complete assurance. The victims of the RFI realize this latter point all too well. Unfortunately for science, the paranormal has been pushing science into realms traditionally associated with religion, e.g. aspects of theoretical physics. If Newtonian physics doesn't quite fit, try quantum physics. If quantum physics isn't entirely appropriate, try ... < Insert your favorite theory here.

True, science can play a role in investigating UFOs (paranormal phenomena temporarily manifesting to human perception), but by definition a limited one.

[DeanF]

[Nonsense. The very definition of "science" limits itself to observations based on human perception, i.e. the 5 senses, and analysis based on the verbally-based consciousness of humanity. I'd say the latter conditions are a really weak limitation of science and a flawed paradigm on which to assert ANYTHING with complete assurance. The victims of the RFI realize this latter point all too well. Unfortunately for science, the paranormal has been pushing science into realms traditionally associated with religion, e.g. aspects of theoretical physics. If Newtonian physics doesn't quite fit, try quantum physics. If quantum physics isn't entirely appropriate, try ... < Insert your favorite theory here.

Nonsense. Science is not about the 5 senses. If you believe that, then you're not a scientist or engineer.
"Unfortunately for science, the paranormal has been pushing science into realms traditionally associated with religion, "

Why unfortunately? You sound more like an advocate of new age religious mumbo-jumbo, crystal healing and reiki.
Science is about what we can observe, now. And science isn't limited, it isn't static. We continue to enhance our knowledge all the time.

I'm simply not interested in hypothesizing what UFOs might be, we can all come up with a load of new age mumbo-jumbo, or as you suggest put whatever theory you want to explaining the phenomena, the simple fact is, we can't explain the phenomena, not yet.

What I originally started off talking about was advocating that the people best equipped to understand, to investigate the UFO phenomena are scientists and engineers, and quite naevely I've now got people in the thread claiming that's rubbish.
It's only rubbish if you haven't had the scientific or engineering training.

I'm not saying that scientists/engineers can explain the phenomena, if we could explain it, we would be able to explain it and we wouldn't have the unanswered questions we have. I'm deliberately limiting the scope of my discussion to whether scientists/engineers are best placed to investigate the phenomena, and I believe they are.

Given a choice, of guy with a degree in history, given a choice with a spiritual healer( that likes to try to use quantum theory in a disingenuous way to explain how their healing techniques work), I'm saying that I'd rather place my money on a scientist or engineer at doing a thorough, analytical and reliable, accurate job of the investigation. Engineers can explain what a plasma is, engineers can explain about radiation, can a new age hippy do that?

Those that try to rubbish science and engineering, in my experience, are people that are not from a science/engineering background and don't understand any part of it. And they usually colour things up with spiritualism.

[tpreitzel]

Nonsense. Science is not about the 5 senses. If you believe that, then you're not a scientist or engineer.

More nonsense. Science TOTALLY rests on human perception and consciousness and you're simply indoctrinated by taxpayer-funded institutions to think otherwise. Who's observing and analyzing "scientific" data, a dog?

Why unfortunately? You sound more like an advocate of new age religious mumbo-jumbo, crystal healing and reiki.
Science is about what we can observe, now. And science isn't limited, it isn't static. We continue to enhance our knowledge all the time.

Frankly, I don't care what I sound like to you. Furthermore, your falsely assumptive accusations against members who disagree with your patent nonsense are annoying. I'm simply stating the obvious: Science is limited by definition, i.e. the obviously flawed paradigm of science involves human perception and human consciousness and NOTHING you can say in response will change that fact ... absolutely NOTHING. .

I'm simply not interested in hypothesizing what UFOs might be, we can all come up with a load of new age mumbo-jumbo, or as you suggest put whatever theory you want to explaining the phenomena, the simple fact is, we can't explain the phenomena, not yet.

As I've already stated, the theoretical aspects of science are the "new age mumbo-jumbo". Keep on pushing your nonsense that science is somehow totally objective and inclusive, but you won't get anywhere because humans are involved in the process.

What I originally started off talking about was advocating that the people best equipped to understand, to investigate the UFO phenomena are scientists and engineers, and quite naevely I've now got people in the thread claiming that's rubbish.
It's only rubbish if you haven't had the scientific or engineering training.

Like Stanton Friedman, your pomposity and blindness as an engineer has shown from the beginning of your posting history. Personally, I laugh at most "scientists". Although not all, many "scientists" are so indoctrinated through their government-funded "education" and enamored with their government degrees, that they can't even see something as clear as the limitations of science.

I'm not saying that scientists/engineers can explain the phenomena, if we could explain it, we would be able to explain it and we wouldn't have the unanswered questions we have. I'm deliberately limiting the scope of my discussion to whether scientists/engineers are best placed to investigate the phenomena, and I believe they are.

No, scientists are probably not the most qualified to explain UFOs. Actually, the most qualified are probably historians since the UFO phenomena has been around since the dawn of humanity. Why is that?

Given a choice, of guy with a degree in history, given a choice with a spiritual healer( that likes to try to use quantum theory in a disingenuous way to explain how their healing techniques work), I'm saying that I'd rather place my money on a scientist or engineer at doing a thorough, analytical and reliable, accurate job of the investigation. Engineers can explain what a plasma is, engineers can explain about radiation, can a new age hippy do that?

Furthermore, you're the ONLY one in this thread espousing "new-age mumbo-jumbo", i.e. theoretical physics, and falsely accusing members who disagree with your nonsense of being "new age" hippies or laughably using quantum theory in some "disingenuous way to explain how their healing techniques work". Unfortunately for you, your nonsense that science is somehow totally objective will continue to bite you in the arse. Again, theoretical physics is doing just fine and dandy by itself in exposing it's own limitations. Wow, engineers can "explain" plasmas or radiation? What you really mean is: Engineers can "explain" plasmas or radiation as the phenomena manifests to human perception. After all, physics is based on human perception so the various concocted theories advanced are bound to be inadequate and full of holes ... which they are or we'd have only one. Yeah, that's it. A totally objective, unified physics based on human perception ... Hardy har har.

Those that try to rubbish science and engineering, in my experience, are people that are not from a science/engineering background and don't understand any part of it. And they usually colour things up with spiritualism.

Laughable. Science itself does an adequate job of denigrating itself. As I've already indicated, if one theory doesn't work, simply concoct another one as science has with Newtonian, quantum, and ... theories which ALL fail to accurately account for humanly observable phenomena.

[Adam]

[Nonsense. The very definition of "science" limits itself to observations based on human perception, i.e. the 5 senses, and analysis based on the verbally-based consciousness of humanity. I'd say the latter conditions are a really weak limitation of science and a flawed paradigm on which to assert ANYTHING with complete assurance. The victims of the RFI realize this latter point all too well. Unfortunately for science, the paranormal has been pushing science into realms traditionally associated with religion, e.g. aspects of theoretical physics. If Newtonian physics doesn't quite fit, try quantum physics. If quantum physics isn't entirely appropriate, try ... < Insert your favorite theory here.

Nonsense. Science is not about the 5 senses. If you believe that, then you're not a scientist or engineer.
"Unfortunately for science, the paranormal has been pushing science into realms traditionally associated with religion, "

Why unfortunately? You sound more like an advocate of new age religious mumbo-jumbo, crystal healing and reiki.
Science is about what we can observe, now. And science isn't limited, it isn't static. We continue to enhance our knowledge all the time.

I'm simply not interested in hypothesizing what UFOs might be, we can all come up with a load of new age mumbo-jumbo, or as you suggest put whatever theory you want to explaining the phenomena, the simple fact is, we can't explain the phenomena, not yet.

What I originally started off talking about was advocating that the people best equipped to understand, to investigate the UFO phenomena are scientists and engineers, and quite naevely I've now got people in the thread claiming that's rubbish.
It's only rubbish if you haven't had the scientific or engineering training.

I'm not saying that scientists/engineers can explain the phenomena, if we could explain it, we would be able to explain it and we wouldn't have the unanswered questions we have. I'm deliberately limiting the scope of my discussion to whether scientists/engineers are best placed to investigate the phenomena, and I believe they are.

Given a choice, of guy with a degree in history, given a choice with a spiritual healer( that likes to try to use quantum theory in a disingenuous way to explain how their healing techniques work), I'm saying that I'd rather place my money on a scientist or engineer at doing a thorough, analytical and reliable, accurate job of the investigation. Engineers can explain what a plasma is, engineers can explain about radiation, can a new age hippy do that?

Those that try to rubbish science and engineering, in my experience, are people that are not from a science/engineering background and don't understand any part of it. And they usually colour things up with spiritualism.

Hello everyone , Ive been following this thread for some time now . I haven't chimed in until now ,this tread has been great with Larry's input , until it got a little off topic. What you have wrote Dean f, I believe is total rubbish , anyone with an good understanding of what goes on in daily life can distinguish between a UFO or some other object . Anyone with any kind of knowledge about basic fundamentals of space and time can report a UFO . What you are implying is nonsense and a bit one sided . To say that only well educated people could properly report a UFO and decipher what there looking at is discriminating against less educated people to say the least. The only logical thing you have said is about Stanton friedman
Now can we get back on topic here with Larry and carry on with the topic at hand !

[stephan]

thanks tpreitzel and Adam for your input. Now let's get back on-topic, there are still a few questions remaining (those by me and I believe AgentAppleseed also asked one at the beginning). Larry, if you are there and if you have some time your answers will be much appreciated as always!