-=> Quoting Charles Daniels to Fred Austin <=-
    Hi Charles,
 >     Some passing comments on The Learning Channels'  currently running
 > alien  week.   Perhaps  some   here  have   already  seen   the  shows
 > previously,or are currently viewing them.
 CD> Are there any NEW documentaries running this week?  All of these
 CD> have been repeated a sad number of times and indeed these are pretty
 CD> much the exact same documentaries they showed during their last Alien
 CD> Invasion week not so long ago.
     Well I cannot say they are "brand" new, I haven't seen every  doc 
made.  There was one shown hosted by Gillian Anderson,one by Scotty of 
Star Trek, they were fairly new, but I think the majority were older,
most likely you have seen them before....
 CD> What I find personally annoying is how many of their documentaries
 CD> point out this one video in particular as a "good" example of UFO
 CD> home video footage where the camera is set in one place and NEVER
 CD> moves and the "UFO" swings back and forth, back and forth in a
 CD> motion that would be IDENTICAL to a small model suspended by a
 CD> string.
    Yes, good example varied form show to show.  Most of  the shows  I 
saw,  (not  all),  had  examples there  were obviously  not a  UFO.  I 
certainly could identified.  I found the theme of some shows to be
here is what they(people) call UFO footage, it was meant to discredit.  
Some shows were biased  that way.   The British  ones, they  are older 
shows.  I would like to have seen more focus on footage that could not 
be explained, since the topic was simply UFOs.  Or else call the show,
the UFO myth.
 CD> While in this particular case I am FORCED to agree with you totally
 CD> and whole heartly, as a rule this wouldn't bother me.  I think that
 CD> footage of any nature has the right to be examined and given
 CD> perspective from as many sources as possible.  Just because Sightings
 CD> has some guy with a PhD saying "Well this is obviously faked
 CD> because..."  doesn't mean that In Search Of can't have some other PhD
 CD> expert saying "Well this obviously couldn't be faked because..."
 CD> I think the problem with the documentaries on TLC is NONE of them
 CD> have such re-examining just more a display of "Oh yeah this is REAL!!
 CD> Cause..Well it's a UFO!"
    What these shows should do is, if you  are looking  at UFO's,bring 
forth unidentified footage etc, or cases, that are not blatantly fake.
At least go into them more if possible, I would think that would be of 
more interest  to all.   Perhaps, someone  seeing this  may even  know 
something   about   the  case,   resolving  it.    Showing  videotaped 
lightbulbs, or forged images does no one any good.  The other thing  I 
noticed, was when there was something of weight there in a case,  they 
just skimmed over it.
 CD> Yes my theory here is that footage after being debunked by a major
 CD> program or expert greatly devalues and other cheaper documentaries
 CD> that just don't care buy the cheaper stuff.
    Possibly  so.   I  think  the learning  channel should  become the 
entertainment channel.  This has nothing to do with learning, at least 
in the majority of the shows.  The most interesting show was partially 
Area 51.  The interesting part was the interviewer at least,  actually 
went around trying to get info.  Amusing when he was  flying near  the 
airspace and got warned off by  F-16s.  Security  is a  serious issue.  
At least he tried.  Proves dick, as to  UFO claims,  but it  does show 
the real world.  I can't say  there was  anything new  there, we  have 
heard all these stories etc.  What I would like to  see is  an attempt 
to get to the bottom of a few cases, drag out the cameras and let them 
roll on a few officials........
Happy Trails,
Fred.
 Internet: Fred.Austin@juxta.mn.pubnix.net   
           Fred.Austin@sphinx.hughestech.com 
--- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30
---------------