JS> I stress these points I have presented in the name of UFOlogy.
 JS> Too much "I believe" deters from legitimate research, because there
 JS> just aren't any aliens being found behind the bush. Too many people
 JS> are associating UFOs with alien visitors/invaders.
 JS> A healthy dose of reality is needed from time to time, and that too
 JS> is part of my job, so don't misunderstand my motives. ;-)
 JS> Now that the more "aggressive" skeptics have retreated to the
 JS> background to either re-group or sulk (I don't care which), our
 JS> remaining "staff" of skeptic contributors are called upon to keep the
 JS> rest of us in touch with reality. I call upon all UFO researchers,
 JS> UFOlogists, and investigators to continue their activities, but with
 JS> skeptism uppermost in their minds. My advice is best for our image,
 JS> believe me.
 A word or two on this important point your raised.  It is beyond doubt that 
UFOs exist....and 90% of all U.F.O.s (a figure somwhere in the correct 
ballpark) are deemed explain by natural phenomena.  So what counts as 
evidence for the ets hypothesis?   Would not you sighting be a small piece of 
evidence since this explanation seems to explain all the facts.  Same as the 
sighting over Tehran and many others.   With regards to the Skeptics.... 
..they claim to represent the name but a great deal of them suffer from the 
same ignorance as the worst of the ufo buffs.  They come in with a set 
viewpoint from the beginning, and believe error ridden claims from the 
'experts' like some in ufo field take to Lazar. The problems occur on both 
sides but at least here people can admit a problem exists. 
--- FMail 1.22
---------------