---

Here are some of my papers on other websites. Click on the title of the paper to view.

• Acceleration
  • Location: National Institute For Discovey Science (www.nidsci.org)
  • Abstract: "Visual and photographic sighting of UFOs carrying out "impossible" high speed maneuvers are presented for study. For the first time we are able to quantify the amazing acceleration of these craft."
  
  
• Still In Default (.pdf)
  • Location: National Institute For Discovey Science (www.nidsci.org)
  • Abstract: "For nearly 40 years [more than 50] years, the science establishment has ignores the UFO problem, relating it to the domain of "true believers and mental incompetents" (a.k.a. "kook and nuts" [according to the former editor of Applied Optics magazine]). Scientists have participated in a "self-cover-up" by refusing to look at the credible and well reported data."
  
  
• Atmosphere or UFO? | A Response to the 1997 SSE Review Panel Report
  • Location: The Journal of Scientific Exploration (www.jse.com)
  • Abstract: "Radar and radar-visual sightings were among the various types of UFO sightings discussed by the review panel sponsored by the Society for Scientific Exploration in the Fall of 1997. Although several well-described cases involving radar were presented to the panel, including cases in which apparently structured objects were seen coincident with radar detection, the opinion of the panel was that, whereas a few of the cases might represent "rare but significant phenomena," "rare cases of radar ducting," or "secret military activities," none of the cases represented "unknown physical processes or pointed to the involvement of an extraterrestrial intelligence." One of the panel members (Eshleman) proposed a general explanation for the radar cases in terms of atmospheric effects including refraction and ducting. There is no indication in the complete report that the panel members offered specific explanations for any report, or that any panel member was able to prove that atmospheric effects of any sort could account for the radar and radar-visual sightings. This paper, a response to the panel opinion, demonstrates that careful consideration of atmospheric effects is not sufficient to explain at least some of the radar, radar-visual, and photographic sightings that have been reported over the years."