June 2002

Hi everyone, I warned you all last time that I was going to change the name of my article to “Now Then”.
So here is the first “Now Then”.

Have you ever heard the expression “ the more things change...the more they remain the same”. It seems to apply to the UFO subject as well as to anything else.

People are still seeing and reporting UFOs. The skeptics are still unconvinced, even in the light of the latest revelations from Dr Greer's “Disclosure Project”. In spite of the now 450 ex military people who were exposed directly to UFOs and Aliens while in the military, the skeptics turn a blind eye towards it all and still ask us to “show us the evidence”. This is because no matter what evidence comes to light , they have made up their minds in advance , and will always take up a contrary position.

(If you haven't visited the disclosure site its well worth it…www.disclosureproject.org)
Another thing that hasn't changed is the way UFO witnesses get treated , often as unreliable or unbelievable. There is a definite pattern that I have observed over the years. First you get a very interesting UFO story, then you get the “experts” explanation. Sometimes these later explanations are so out of touch with the facts that they bear no relation to the original report, yet these explanations are put forward, and even sometimes accepted without question. To many people, a far fetched Prosaic story is more acceptable than a mundane UFO explanation. What is it about the ET Hypothesis that so many people find difficult to accept?

I prefer to take the position that the ET Hypothesis is probably correct. Why should I argue with the people who first came up with it? After all, they were the worlds leading minds of the day in that period of modern history.

A friend of mine recently lent me a copy of an old book, in fact, a UFO “Classic”. 'Behind the Flying Saucers' by Frank Scully is a good read. It's funny how accurate this book now looks in the light of today's revelations thanks to the Disclosure Project. The attacks on this book have been comprehensive, or , rather I should say the attacks on the Author of this book have been comprehensive. It was a thorough character assassination on Scully and his associates. It looks to me that the stronger the character assassination, the more likely the story is to be true. And there is nothing all that unusual or far fetched in this particular book. There may be the odd mistake, but that's all. It contains very detailed descriptions of crashed and recovered Flying Saucers, and details the thoughts of the scientists regarding their discoveries. The attacks on the author and his friends, even if they were for the right reasons, have no bearing on the contents of the book, which after 50 odd years seems to hold up pretty well.

There have been reports from all over the world lately that seem to be describing the same phenomenon. Orange lights, or fireballs have been reported all over Australia in recent months, in synch with other countries. As yet, even the debunkers have failed to come up with anything like a reasonable explanation.

Give them time, watch out for the sudden arrival of some ridiculous explanation which could just be possible , provided you are willing to stretch your imagination beyond the bounds of common sense.

Don't be surprised if a new UFO flap occurs somewhere, and after a short while a seemingly plausible explanation pops up, just to keep everyone from prying too deeply into it.

A couple of weeks ago the people of the Melbourne Nexus Group gave everyone the opportunity to attend a lecture given by a visiting speaker from interstate. David Oates presented his theories and examples of the “Reverse Speech Phenomenon”. To get acquainted with this amazing experience you can go to the archived radio shows section at www.rense.com and look for the show featuring David Oates. Alternatively you can go to www.reversespeech.com and listen to the many examples there. One of the best reversals involved a politician who had been asked a question about how much NASA knew about the 'CYDONIA' site on Mars. His reversed reply stated that 'we are involved there', implying that there is far more going on in the space program than they are telling us. Is anyone surprised? It's funny how this ties in neatly with an 'off the record' story told to me by a visiting NASA scientist a couple of years ago. He confirmed that the guys at S.E.T.I. are in continual contact with 'others', but that both they, and he will deny it whenever asked. But that's strictly 'off the record”.

Cheers. GS.


	Now Then EXPLORING THE EVER CHANGING AND CHALLENGING FIELD OF UFO STUDIES By George Simpson © AUFORN Victoria Hi everyone, I warned you all last time that I was going to change the name of my article to “Now Then”. So here is the first “Now Then”. Have you ever heard the expression “ the more things change...the more they remain the same”. It seems to apply to the UFO subject as well as to anything else. People are still seeing and reporting UFOs. The skeptics are still unconvinced, even in the light of the latest revelations from Dr Greer's “Disclosure Project”. In spite of the now 450 ex military people who were exposed directly to UFOs and Aliens while in the military, the skeptics turn a blind eye towards it all and still ask us to “show us the evidence”. This is because no matter what evidence comes to light , they have made up their minds in advance , and will always take up a contrary position. (If you haven't visited the disclosure site its well worth it…www.disclosureproject.org) Another thing that hasn't changed is the way UFO witnesses get treated , often as unreliable or unbelievable. There is a definite pattern that I have observed over the years. First you get a very interesting UFO story, then you get the “experts” explanation. Sometimes these later explanations are so out of touch with the facts that they bear no relation to the original report, yet these explanations are put forward, and even sometimes accepted without question. To many people, a far fetched Prosaic story is more acceptable than a mundane UFO explanation. What is it about the ET Hypothesis that so many people find difficult to accept? I prefer to take the position that the ET Hypothesis is probably correct. Why should I argue with the people who first came up with it? After all, they were the worlds leading minds of the day in that period of modern history. A friend of mine recently lent me a copy of an old book, in fact, a UFO “Classic”. 'Behind the Flying Saucers' by Frank Scully is a good read. It's funny how accurate this book now looks in the light of today's revelations thanks to the Disclosure Project. The attacks on this book have been comprehensive, or , rather I should say the attacks on the Author of this book have been comprehensive. It was a thorough character assassination on Scully and his associates. It looks to me that the stronger the character assassination, the more likely the story is to be true. And there is nothing all that unusual or far fetched in this particular book. There may be the odd mistake, but that's all. It contains very detailed descriptions of crashed and recovered Flying Saucers, and details the thoughts of the scientists regarding their discoveries. The attacks on the author and his friends, even if they were for the right reasons, have no bearing on the contents of the book, which after 50 odd years seems to hold up pretty well. There have been reports from all over the world lately that seem to be describing the same phenomenon. Orange lights, or fireballs have been reported all over Australia in recent months, in synch with other countries. As yet, even the debunkers have failed to come up with anything like a reasonable explanation. Give them time, watch out for the sudden arrival of some ridiculous explanation which could just be possible , provided you are willing to stretch your imagination beyond the bounds of common sense. Don't be surprised if a new UFO flap occurs somewhere, and after a short while a seemingly plausible explanation pops up, just to keep everyone from prying too deeply into it. A couple of weeks ago the people of the Melbourne Nexus Group gave everyone the opportunity to attend a lecture given by a visiting speaker from interstate. David Oates presented his theories and examples of the “Reverse Speech Phenomenon”. To get acquainted with this amazing experience you can go to the archived radio shows section at www.rense.com and look for the show featuring David Oates. Alternatively you can go to www.reversespeech.com and listen to the many examples there. One of the best reversals involved a politician who had been asked a question about how much NASA knew about the 'CYDONIA' site on Mars. His reversed reply stated that 'we are involved there', implying that there is far more going on in the space program than they are telling us. Is anyone surprised? It's funny how this ties in neatly with an 'off the record' story told to me by a visiting NASA scientist a couple of years ago. He confirmed that the guys at S.E.T.I. are in continual contact with 'others', but that both they, and he will deny it whenever asked. But that's strictly 'off the record”. Cheers. GS.