-=> Quoting George Jiri Opletal to Paul Andinach <=-
 PA> GJO> The high maneuverability is not supportive of this theory.
 
 PA> Not all UFOs have been reported to have exhibited high
 PA> maneuverability.
 GJO> True, however it is easier to classify objects that are in a field of
 GJO> their own.
   What I meant was that "high maneuverability" is not a valid argument for 
all UFOs, so some might be - what was it we were saying they might be?
 GJO> We seem to be talking about the most general definition of U.F.O.
   I was only aware of one definition of U.F.O. - "flying object that has not 
been identified".
   Are there others?
 GJO> That just the point, there is this unexplainable class.
   Perhaps I wasn't clear, but the point I was trying to make was that there 
was also this large explainable (explicable?) class.
 GJO> sure, by the strict definition, anything goes.
   Again, I wasn't aware that there was more than one definition.
Paul
... The aliens are ignoring us... doesn't that prove they're intelligent?
--- Blue Wave/Max v2.30 [NR]
---------------