tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7287379637820573973.post4670050113894695371..comments2018-03-02T17:35:07.594-08:00Comments on CONTACTEES: A History of Alien-Human Interaction: A Contactee and a Crashed UFONick Redfernhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7287379637820573973.post-42115068142365680722009-12-21T08:41:35.814-08:002009-12-21T08:41:35.814-08:00Lance:
That's very cool re the Straith letter...Lance:<br /><br />That's very cool re the Straith letter - rather like finding the cut and paste original of the Truman signature on the MJ12 docs LOL!<br /><br />I do recall that a high-def version of one of Adamski's films was shown at a conference of the now-defunct British-based "UFO Magazine" in the UK about 12 or 13 years ago.<br /><br />Not sure if it ever made it to one of their documentaries or videos, but it was shown at the conference, so I'm guessing a few of these may be floating around somewhere.Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7287379637820573973.post-8771097726604476602009-12-21T07:35:46.871-08:002009-12-21T07:35:46.871-08:00A close friend of mine did an excellent UFO docume...A close friend of mine did an excellent UFO documentary (which you can see on the Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) Blu-Ray) in which the Straith letter is mentioned. He found the letter with one of George's followers and was amazed at the condition of it:<br /><br />The holy relic, crisp and white, appeared as though it had been written the day before!<br /><br />Incidentally, this documentary is the only place I am aware of in which you can see one of Adamski's silly silly motion picture films in High-Def.<br /><br /><br />LanceLancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17280922104955532058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7287379637820573973.post-25979601785122716532009-12-20T18:19:18.141-08:002009-12-20T18:19:18.141-08:00Lance:
Okay, got it now, and understood re the re...Lance:<br /><br />Okay, got it now, and understood re the referral you meant.<br /><br />So as you'll know, re the interviews in the book: for the most part, I wanted to get fresh, new interviews. <br /><br />And Jim was one of those I interviewed (in July) for Contactees.<br /><br />So, I was very careful to ensure I got his views, recollections, ideas, theories and conclusions on Adamski and the Contactees - but pretty much all via a new intereview (aside from the Straith piece, which was provided by Greg Bishop).<br /><br />So, in other words, although I didn't quote Jim's expose of Adamski, his conclusions based upon his study of Adamski are in there - but in the form of the July 2009 interview.Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7287379637820573973.post-20929179932478969812009-12-20T18:10:38.101-08:002009-12-20T18:10:38.101-08:00Hi Nick,
No, not the Straith letter.
Moseley'...Hi Nick,<br /><br />No, not the Straith letter.<br /><br />Moseley's famous Adamski expose is perhaps his greatest contribution to the field--certainly his most serious and historic.<br /><br />In the issue, using witness testimony and research, he devastates Adamski's entire story. It was, for sure, the beginning of the end for Adamski.<br /><br />You should really check it out.<br /><br />LanceLancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17280922104955532058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7287379637820573973.post-66359415600622224772009-12-20T17:32:13.450-08:002009-12-20T17:32:13.450-08:00Lance:
Yep, that could indeed be the case re Wern...Lance:<br /><br />Yep, that could indeed be the case re Werner; but if he was going to make up such a story, why use such a bizarre and unbelievable story as Bethurum's as its basis?<br /><br />Do you mean the thing with Jim M and the Straith Letter? I'm presuming that's what you mean?<br /><br />If that is what you mean, yes that episode is indeed in the book, on pages 39-40.Nick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7287379637820573973.post-44936258745184401702009-12-19T11:38:19.089-08:002009-12-19T11:38:19.089-08:00Or perhaps "Werner" simply read the famo...Or perhaps "Werner" simply read the famous old local Bethurum account and tailored his story to along with it? I'm sure that somehow you see this as more profound than that but I'm too dense to follow along.<br /><br />Nick is it possible that your book does not mention the famous Moseley expose of Adamski? Jim told me that was the case and I was (as usual) incredulous.<br /><br />I'm gonna get it anyway but sheeze!<br /><br />LanceLancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17280922104955532058noreply@blogger.com