TZUTC: -0500   
   MSGID: 352.fidonet_ufo@1:3634/60 2d96b3c3   
   PID: Synchronet 3.19b-Win32 master/a2a9dc027 Jan  2 2022 MSC 1928   
   TID: SBBSecho 3.14-Win32 master/a2a9dc027 Jan  2 2022 MSC 1928   
   BBSID: RICKSBBS   
   CHRS: UTF-8 4   
   SUBJECT: The SWAMP GAS JOURNAL                               FILE: UFO1212   
      
   Volume 6   
   Number 1 (last issue was Volume 5, Number 3)   
   ISSN 0707-7106   
   January 1992   
      
                           The Continuing Circle Saga   
      
        By now, it is likely that everyone knows about the   
   Bower/Chorley hoax admission.  When the story first broke, it was   
   carried extensively by the media, and it seemed that cerealogy   
   was doomed.  TV and newspapers here in Canada boldly proclaimed   
   that "all" the circles in England were explained as the work of   
   BC.  Suddenly, all media interest in any fortean phenomena was   
   extinguished; for the most part, this condition still persists   
   today.   
        Of course, things are not as cut-and-dry as they might seem.   
   As an objectivist, I was immediately suspicious of the BC   
   claims.  "Skeptics" such as CSICOP members were delighted at the   
   admissions and didn't bother to consider any problems with the   
   explanation.  But it should have been intuitive that there was   
   something wrong with the claims.  A "complete" explanation is   
   usually never encountered in science, and there are always   
   loopholes or flaws in the design of "immutable" laws.   
        The first problem with the BC story is that the two men   
   could not have made all of the British circles and agriglyphs.   
   In addition, there would be no way for them to have made the   
   circles in other parts of the world.  This problem with the claim   
   is easily circumvented by noting that BC are only two of the army   
   of hoaxers who might have been at work.  This might also   
   explain why characteristics of circles vary somewhat between   
   sites.   
        The next question to be addressed is whether or not BC   
   really made the circles at all.  This problem is not trivial, and   
   it seems that it has not been fully resolved.  When the media   
   first covered the story, BC had been filmed before, during and   
   after the creation of an agriglyph.  Terence Meaden, Colin   
   Andrews and Pat Delgado were each shown to make pronouncements of   
   authenticity at some circle sites, though later explained that   
   they had been pressured for a quick response by the media at the   
   time.  But nearly everyone who viewed the single agriglyph made   
   by BC in front of the cameras agreed that the site was sloppy   
   and "suspicious".   
        Although the numbers of circles claimed made by BC started   
   out at 1000 or more, the figure has been pared down to a more   
   reasonable 100 or 200.  Even this figure seems a bit high, but   
   might be possible, if we allow BC to have a lot of energy and   
   several years to work on their technique.  On (the National   
   Geographic's) Explorer TV show in November, other hoaxers were   
   shown to take considerable planning in order to produce a complex   
   in complete darkness before the cameras (not done by BC). Even   
   so, they were seen by a chance witness, and when a cerealogist   
   was called in for his opinion, it was dubbed a hoax without much   
   delay.   
        The source of the story is a bit of a problem as well.  The   
   tabloid which initially broke the hoax story had earlier ran   
   a story that suggested ancient Sumerians were communicating with   
   humans through the circles.  Investigation by cerealogists   
   found that the story had been generated through a "public   
   relations" firm called Maiden Bridge Farm.  MBF was operated by a   
   husband and wife who had an unlisted telephone number (a bit odd   
   for a PR firm) and which was disconnected shortly after they   
   were located by the cerealogists.  It seems that MBF paid some   
   money to BC to come forward with their claims, contacted the   
   tabloid to get a reporter's interest, then backed out of the   
   picture.  This immediately aroused the interest of conspiracy   
   theorists, who suggested that the MoD or a subversive group had   
   deliberately set cerealogists up for a fall.  Although a   
   plausible scenario, there is of course no hard evidence for the   
   theory.   
        The most frustrating thing about the whole affair is that it   
   should be very easy to settle the arguments about BC's   
   involvement.  It would appear to be a simple task: get BC to give   
   accurate descriptions of all the sites for which they were   
   responsible, including dates, locations, type of crop, etc.  As   
   far as I have been able to determine through reading the latest   
   cerealogy journals and letters from my British colleagues, this   
   has not been done.  The closest that has been accomplished is a   
   series of verbal, heated debates between BC and agitated   
   cerealogists in the media.   
        However, the damage has been done.  Cerealogists have been   
   "burned" by some hoaxers, and the media have been warned away   
   from the phenomenon.  But what will the future bring?   
      
      
                             The Canadian Connection   
      
        In mid-summer of 1991, Gordon Kijek and the Alberta UFO   
   Study Group (AUFOSG) were prepared for an upcoming season of UFO   
   investigations.  Earlier in the year, Gord had asked me to assist   
   in the formation of the group, and I had sent him some   
   information about ufology groups and their operation.  In August,   
   Gord called me to tell me that a circle formation had been   
   discovered near Lethbridge.  He was unsure of how to investigate   
   the site, but I gave a few of my ideas and wished him luck.   
   Gord has seemed to be an able researcher, and I was confident   
   that he would have the matter under control.  Soon, he called me   
   about his findings and the news that other sites had been found.   
   The deluge had started.   
        Less than ten sites were reported in Alberta.  One was a   
   remarkable agriglyph (the first of such in North America) which   
   received considerable media attention.  Others were single   
   circles, quadruplets, and triplets.  One site near Okotoks was   
   judged immediately suspicious by AUFOSG because it appeared that   
   the centers of the circles had been disturbed; a speculated   
   method of producing fake circles involves using a stake at the   
   center of an inscribed circle using a chain to mark the   
   circumference.   
        It is interesting to note that in 1990, there were circles   
   reported throughout Western Canada, except in Alberta.  But   
   in 1991, the only province with circles was Alberta.  None of the   
   Canadian circles during the previous years had any associated   
   effects, though in 1991, the Alberta circles were said to cause   
   headaches, equipment malfunctions and give rise too "eerie"   
   sensations and noises.  These effects parallel those reported in   
   England by some cerealogists, and it was curious that they   
   would be found one year and not the next.  More curious was the   
   fact that Gord Kijek is prone to migraines, and he experienced   
   no problems when inside the circles.  He also called me on his   
   cellular phone from inside a circle, with no malfunctioning!   
        Do such effects really occur?  Michael Strainic, reporting   
   on the investigations of Chad Deetken on his trip to Alberta,   
   wrote an excellent article for the MUFON Journal which detailed   
   Deetken's findings.  Deetken has a different research   
   perspective than that of AUFOSG, including his investigation   
   style.  For example, in 1990, Deetken visited some circle sites   
   in Saskatchewan; during his time there, he decided to camp   
   overnight in a circle.  In the middle of the night, Deetken   
   reported a "feeling of terror" which overcame him, and he bolted   
   from the site.  He had earlier documented how the area was   
   permeated with some sort of "energy".  Not surprisingly, when he   
   decided to sleep overnight in one of the 1991 Alberta circles, he   
   experienced "tension" and "dizziness" during the night, as did   
   his companions.   
        Although suggesting that "paranormal effects" were   
   associated with the Alberta circles, Strainic also noted that   
   such effects were not often found.  Indeed, compass needles were   
   said to operate normally, as did recording equipment and cameras   
   taken to sites.  Strainic noted that anecdotal reports of animal   
   effects at circles were common, according to Deetken.  But this   
   was not the case in Manitoba, and such reports were not made to   
   AUFOSG in the Alberta cases.   
        One interesting series of effects involved microwave ovens   
   which were said to have malfunctioned, including one which   
   was said to have turned itself on.  AUFOSG members as well as   
   Deetken all checked into these reports, though there was   
   admittedly no confirming evidence of these events.   
        So, what happened in Alberta?  There exist two disparate   
   investigation records of the circle sites.  AUFOSG found   
   virtually no evidence of "paranormal effects", physiological   
   effects or equipment malfunctions at sites, but Deetken did. It   
   is likely that each investigator's inherent biases played   
   significant roles in the interpretation of data.  Michael   
   Strainic's fascinating report is of great use to other   
   researchers in the analyses of crop circle data, because it   
   parallels the British experience.  In this way, we can better   
   understand the British situation, and how cerealogy may be   
   operating in that country.   
      
      
      
                                 Radioactivity?   
      
        Recently, it has been claimed that several crop circles are   
   radioactive.  Specifically, it has been reported that soil   
   samples taken from two British circles and some from recent   
   American sites have significantly-higher levels of radioactivity   
   than control samples from the same areas.  Further, this   
   radioactivity has been traced to higher-than-normal levels of   
   activity caused by certain rare, radioactive elements such as   
   Europium, Ytterbium and Rhodium.  If true, than this certainly   
   speaks for the creation of crop circles by aliens and utterly   
   invalidates any other theory, including hoaxing.   
        The claims are made by Michael Chorost and Marshall Dudley   
   in a MUFON paper.  Advance notice of their claims is already   
   in circulation, and many people are very excited about their   
   findings.  Mike sent me a copy of a draft and called me to   
   discuss the writeup, in case I had some comments.  As I read the   
   paper, I had some of my own reservations, but I decided to take   
   the paper to show two friends who are physicists at the   
   University of Manitoba.  They were less than impressed, to say   
   the least. However, I persisted (read: I annoyed them) until they   
   described exactly what they were doubtful about.   
        My own reservations concerned the sampling techniques and   
   the small amount of data upon which to base a claim.  Also, I   
   was worried that there had not been any testable theory posed in   
   advance of finding the data.  The Manitoba physicists found   
   more problems in the physical attributes.  Very rare radioactive   
   elements had been discovered through a comparison of peaks on a   
   readout of an energy spectrum produced by an analysis of the soil   
   samples.  Such peaks were not present in the control sample   
   readouts.  Because of the difficulty in producing these   
   artificial elements, Chorost and Dudley devote much of their   
   paper to ways in which deuteron (an energetic particle)   
   bombardment of the soil could create the rare elements.  In the   
   end, they concluded that this deuteron bombardment was   
   responsible for the presence of the radioactivity, and that such   
   a beam may have also have been related to the formation of the   
   circles themselves, though how and why is unknown.  They actually   
   don't say that a UFO was responsible, although this could be read   
   into their report.   
        However, the finding of these elements is not only strange,   
   it is downright impossible (uh-oh, I'm sounding like Donald   
   Menzel).  The reason is that if a deuteron bombardment did occur,   
   then many other elements would have been found as well.  For   
   example, even weak activation of soil by deuterons (or protons,   
   for that matter) will create Cobalt-56 out of Iron-56.  Since   
   there is a lot more Iron in soil than Ytterbium, the radioactive   
   Cobalt would be definitely found.  Since it wasn't, deuteron   
   bombardment probably did not occur.  An analogy is this: suppose   
   you went into a someone's room and found a few gold-coloured   
   coins on the floor.  You could see them as evidence that the   
   room's occupant was a bank robber, because of the "loot"   
   scattered about.  But if this were true, where would all the   
   other types of money be, like dollar bills and bonds?  And what   
   if the coins turned out to be wrapped chocolate?   
        Dudley and Chorost do caution that more intensive research   
   and more thorough surveys of fields are required for   
   comparative data.  It may be that the distribution of elements in   
   the soil just happens to be high in that particular area.   
   Another source of possible error is in the interpretation of the   
   energy peaks and the checking of an energy table.  In fact,   
   using the standard energy table, we found several other elements   
   that should have been created in the deuteron bombardment, but   
   were not mentioned.   
        Greg Kennedy, a circle researcher from Quebec, found the   
   claims of radionuclides in crop circle samples to be   
   unsupported by the data.  If radiation was found, he noted, it   
   certainly did not come from the "deuteron beam" suggested by the   
   American cerealogists.  It's possible that some sort of exotic   
   combination of elements were somehow in the soil samples, but it   
   was just as possible that the samples were contaminated in some   
   way.  Greg tested samples of the Alberta circles given to him by   
   Mike Strainic from Chad Deetken.  No anomalies were found.  He   
   also has been looking at samples from other Alberta circles which   
   originated from Gord Kijek.  Now, if there are no radionuclides   
   in the Alberta samples, it does not necessarily negate the   
   American results (of the British cases).  It could mean: a) the   
   Alberta circles are fakes; b) the British circles were hoaxes;   
   c) a different "beam" created the Alberta circles; d) the testing   
   was inconsistent; or e) somebody screwed up.  But who?  I   
   think the only way to resolve this is to get several independent   
   labs (and I wouldn't hesitate to get Phil Klass involved here)   
   to test the same samples for comparative analyses.  Along with   
   this would be a standardization of experimental cerealogy.  And   
   there are a number of procedures that would probably satisfy most   
   skeptics.   
        What I suggested to Mike was the following experiment.   
   First, postulate that a deuteron (or proton) bombardment will   
   cause some observed effects.  Take samples from inside and   
   outside a circle site.  Test them on the same instrument.  Record   
   your results.  Next, send the same samples to a different lab   
   without passing on your data or findings.  While the second lab   
   is analyzing the samples, recalibrate your instrument.  Obtain a   
   new set of samples, with a different control sample, and analyze   
   this new set using the same procedure.  Have the other lab repeat   
   its steps and test the new set of samples.  Then, you'll have   
   four sets of data for comparison.  Look specifically for certain   
   elements.  Cobalt-56 is a standard test element.  Check for   
   Iron, Magnesium, Sodium, then Lead, Strontium, etc.  If there are   
   significant differences found (and I would use an alpha of   
   about 0.05), then you have something that you can point to and   
   say: "This needs further examination!"   
        Sure, it's a long procedure, but remember, what you're   
   trying to do is prove an external mechanism for the creation of   
   crop circles, which are already widely assumed to be caused by   
   hoaxers.  The skeptics have already launched their arguments   
   against the reality of the crop circle phenomenon; Dennis Stacy   
   sent me a preprint of an article in the Skeptical Inquirer on   
   this topic.   
        Another reason why so much care needs to be taken is that in   
   all the history of UGMs (unidentified ground markings),   
   "saucer nests" and "UFO landing sites", a very, very small number   
   had any associated radioactivity.  Cerealogists often argue   
   that crop circles are different from other UGMs, but it should be   
   obvious that they are really quite similar.  Crop circles are   
   kinds of UGMs, and the link with UFOs definitely exists.  Bower   
   and Chorley claim they even got the idea for their artistic   
   endeavours from the Tully "saucer nests" of the 1960's.  It would   
   be rather odd for UGMs to suddenly be laced with   
   radioactivity;  it is more likely that cerealogists are   
   frenetically searching for evidence to show that crop circles are   
   unlike other UGMs, and believe that they have found the radiation   
   as their proof.   
        Now, much to my wife's consternation, I do have some   
   radioactive soil safely stored in a cement container in my house.   
   It came from the Michalak site, from the "saucer nest" found near   
   Falcon Lake in 1967.  The area was so radioactive that the   
   Government closed the area for health concerns at the time.   
   Nuclear waste dumps were checked, and Michalak went to a nuclear   
   research establishment for testing.  For many years, it was   
   widely assumed that the radiation was either due to a clever   
   "seeding" of the area with radium particles by a hoaxer, or was   
   actually caused by a spacecraft with a leaky reactor.  However,   
   recent tests sponsored by UFOROM gave another interpretation:   
   that the radiation came from natural uranium ore, and the odd   
   peaks found in the energy spectrum came from byproducts of radon,   
   a gas.   
        But, of course, things are not quite that simple.  This   
   latest interpretation requires that researchers at a major   
   government nuclear research establishment failed to recognise the   
   peaks as being due to natural uranium and radon.  While this   
   is possible, one can wonder what other mistakes might have   
   occurred, and what were their consequences?   
      
   Circle Roundup:  After Granum, Alberta, near the beginning of   
   September, there were no more Canadian UGMs reported.  In the   
   United States, there were cases reported in North Dakota, New   
   York, Kansas, and the noted case near Argonne.  However,   
   summertime down under has produced a new crop of circles and UFO   
   reports in Australia.  Reports of "over 100" circles on the   
   island continent are making headlines as I write these notes.   
   Here in North America, we wait for springtime to see what might   
   occur.   
      
   From the Mailbag:  Laurence Sokoloff, whom some have likened to   
   an alien, sends me obscure articles he comes across during his   
   literary endeavours.  His latest came from Paris Match for 12   
   Decembre 1991, with the accompanying note: "Chris - This article   
   is about French scientist Jean-Pierre Petit, who maintains that   
   startling scientific discoveries have been revealed to him by   
   aliens from the planet UMMO, located about 15 light-years from   
   Earth.  His book on the subject, Inquiry into the Aliens Who Are   
   Already Among Us, has become a best-seller in France.  Of course,   
   these are people who like Jerry Lewis."  Thanks for the   
   article, Larry!   
      
      
                Snailmail et al   
      
        It would be difficult to list every missive I have received   
   over the past 6 months, and downright dangerous.  More than   
   a few people have pored through previous LoCs and WAHFs in   
   previous issues and complained that I missed their names.  If it   
   happens, it's an accident, really!  However, let me throw caution   
   to the wind and comment on a few letters.   
        Len Stringfield sent me his latest Status Report VI (thanx,   
   Len!); it is a very readable survey of current crash-   
   retrieval stories, ranging from Roswell to Carp to Christian   
   Page's "alien" photo from Montreal.  Christian, by the way, is   
   rapidly emerging as one on Canada's finest ufologists, with the   
   added dimension of contributing UFO info from French Canada   
   which was generally inaccessible until recently.  Mike Strainic   
   and Lorne Goldfader in BC have been contributing cases and other   
   info to my Canadian UFO Survey. Mike's article in MUFON about   
   Chad Deetken's circle expeditions has already been commented   
   upon.  John Schuessler has sent me his UFO Potpourri; Bonnie   
   Wheeler sent along her Cambridge UFO Research Group Newsletter   
   (honestly, Bonnie, what is your xerox bill?); Bob Girard's   
   Arcturus Book Service Catalog is worth reading just for his   
   annotations!   
        A special thanks goes out to John Salter, who continues to   
   document his fascinating experiences and keep his close   
   friends abreast of the latest (TV makes you look thinner, John!).   
   MUFON rep Eric Aggen publishes UFO Paradox occasionally, and   
   it is usually chock full of interesting Lazar or alien tech   
   stories.  I am proud to say that I am among the non-subscribers   
   to Saucer Smear, published by James Moseley.  Where else can you   
   read a running tirade between believers and skeptics, with barely   
   a hint of sarcasm?  Jim is definitely worthy of his title,   
   Supreme Commander!  Smear is absolutely essential to any   
   fortean's reading.   
        As for cerealogy, Paul Fuller's Crop Watcher and Pat   
   Delgado's CPR Newsletter are the two circlezines I receive most   
   regularly.  Coming from two different "camps", they provide   
   complementary (and often discordant) views on the British circle   
   scene.  I would like to note that Jenny Randles has resumed her   
   exchange of Northern UFO News with SGJ, which was interrupted by   
   a span of 10 years.  Ah, but that was back in the days of UFOSIS   
   ...   
        As I am not a paying member of MUFON, I only get its Journal   
   intermittently.  However, Walt Andrus and Dennis Stacy have   
   both been corresponding with me and we have been sending things   
   back and forth throughout the year.  Dennis sent me a draft of   
   an anti-cerealogy article from an upcoming Skeptical Inquirer,   
   and asked me for a few comments and ammunition for his response   
   to CSICOP.  Oddly, my package to him was returned unopened.  MIB?   
   CIA? M-O-U-S-E ...   
        Eric Herr in San Diego is compiling a list of physical trace   
   cases that support his magnetic propulsion system theory.   
   John Musgrave has moved to BC, and has been somewhat quiet of   
   late.  (How's trix, John?)  What can I say about Paul Cuttle, the   
   intrepid fortean who keeps Canada Post in business?  I wish I had   
   the time to track down all the material you find, Paul!   
        As an experiment, I have been encouraged to offer the SGJ as   
   a textfile in the UFO International echo, available on   
   computer BBs's.  If it doesn't work, I would like to thank the   
   people who post me or netmail me with info.  Linda Bird in   
   Arizona has been very helpful in providing info on UGMs down her   
   way.  And her pix of the "Starthenon" are out of this world!   
   Dark skies, Linda!  Sheldon Wernikoff, a BBS regular, has   
   thankfully snailmailed me some stuff to save a lot of typing.   
   His access and interest in circles is a significant contribution   
   to the field.  I must thank Harsha Godaveri who got me onto the   
   BBs's in the first place, and who uploaded my disks until my   
   feeble system was up and running.  The bad news is, Harsha, I've   
   contracted three different viruses since being on the BBS's, and   
   I'm going to give up until it gets a bit safer.  I don't want   
   to lose another hard drive!   
        Michael Chorost has been keeping me abreast of his detailed   
   work on circles, including his catalogues of cases and his   
   articles in various journals.  Similarly, another MUFON   
   contributor, Vince Migliore of California, has sent along his   
   comments about the circle scene.  I have had many letters from   
   people along the lines of: "please send me everything you have   
   about crop circles and/or UFOs".  Sorry, but I don't send more   
   than three filing cabinets at a time through the mail.   
        It is fascinating to receive information from researchers   
   with differing viewpoints; the "alien technologists", the   
   "Lear/Cooper" camp, the "nuts-and-bolts" theorists, the "plasma   
   vortex" theorists, the mystics, the contactees, the debunkers,   
   etc.  It has always been my philosophy and approach to the field   
   that the only way to get an adequate understanding of the   
   phenomena is to examine all (both) sides of the arguments, no   
   matter how esoteric or stoic.  A pet peeve of mine is the   
   preponderance of new "experts" who lack any kind of background in   
   the genre.  Circle researchers who have never studied other   
   kinds of trace cases are one kind of irritant, as are ufologists   
   who haven't done their homework and haven't bothered reading   
   any of the historical literature that would shed light on their   
   "new" cases.  Until Bower and Chorley mentioned the Tully saucer   
   nests, many cerealogists had never heard of the case.  Similarly,   
   "plasma vortex experts" sometimes scratch their heads when   
   told of Phil Klass' articles in AW&ST, or of Persinger's TST.   
   Actually, I think one problem is the overwhelming amount of   
   information that has been published on the subject during the   
   last forty or fifty years.  Chester Cuthbert, the Canadian expert   
   on the paranormal, also has one of the largest collections of   
   science fiction literature.  He told me that when he began   
   collecting SF, it was possible to get everything published during   
   the course of a year.  Then, when SF actually became popular   
   and it went commercial, he couldn't keep up, so he had to   
   specialize.  One of his "specializations" back then was flying   
   saucer literature, which sprang out of SF literature.  But by the   
   late 1950's, saucer literature was blossoming and it started to   
   become difficult to collect even this small field.  The situation   
   has progressed to the point where UFOlit is nearly impossible   
   to collect in its entirety.  A single one of Bob Girard's   
   catalogs now contains more titles than were ever published a mere   
   20 years ago! (In the Seventies!)  Even with the help of   
   compilers like George Eberhart, getting a complete overview of   
   the UFO or circle field is not easy, and it's not getting any   
   better.  Vanity presses continue to churn out accounts of contact   
   with the space brothers;  collecting only Billy Meier material   
   could send you into the poorhouse in a year!   
      
   Miscellanea   
      
        A number of interesting books of note have been added to the   
   UFOROM library, among them:  Angels and Aliens by Keith Thompson   
   (1991); UFOs Over Canada by John Robert Colombo (1991); The   
   Algonquin Experiments by James Penman Rae (1978); UFO Report 1992   
   edited by Timothy Good (1991); and Things That Go Bump in the   
   Night by Emily Peach (1991).   
        Colombo's latest tome is a collection of anecdotal accounts,   
   all in the first person, of UFO sightings in Canada over two   
   centuries.  The lack of the investigation reports of the cases   
   gives it more of a folkloric approach to the subject rather than   
   an overview such as the earlier UFO Sightings, Landings,   
   Abductions by Yurko Bondarchuk.  Nevertheless, it   
   provides a refreshing viewpoint of the witnesses' own   
   interpretations of their experiences, and is a worthwhile read.   
        On a different topic, it looks like the infamous Carp UFO   
   crash/retrieval is not quite dead.  Len Stringfield included   
   comments about the matter by Clive Nadin, Christian Page and   
   myself in his latest Status Report.  I continue to get the latest   
   ravings from its originator(s), including ramblings about Red   
   China taking over the world and how the Brotherhood will protect   
   the Holy Grail and save us from the aliens.  Theaccompanying   
   photos are mostly blurry, though one shows a guy in a bad   
   alien mask.  Sad, sad.  We have been able to show that the   
   packages are mailed from Ottawa/Hull, so the suspicion falls on   
   UFO buffs in that area.   
      
   =================================================================   
      
        A special note to Canadian readers: it's time once again for   
   the annual Canadian UFO Survey!  Send just your report data to   
   the address below for inclusion in the yearly case roundup.  And   
   while you're at it, some of you (Americans included here!) have   
   not provided details of UGMs and crop circles for the annual   
   NAICCR report.  Tsk.  They're waiting for you!   
      
        Thanks to all who provide data or otherwise contribute to   
   the information exchange in ufology, cerealogy or forteana.  You   
   are the reason progress continues to be made in these fields!   
      
   =================================================================   
      
   The SWAMP GAS JOURNAL is an irregular ufozine published by:   
      
   Ufology Research of Manitoba   
   P.O. Box 1918   
   Winnipeg, Manitoba   
   Canada   R3C 3R2   
      
   Copyright 1991 by Chris A. Rutkowski   
      
   ================================================================   
      
                    
     **********************************************   
     * THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *   
     **********************************************   
      
   Beth,   
   http://ricksbbs.synchro.net:8080   
   --- SBBSecho 3.14-Win32   
    * Origin: Rick's BBS - telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23 (1:3634/60)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/120 18/0 50/22 105/81 106/201 123/0 126 180 525 755 3001   
   SEEN-BY: 123/3002 124/5016 128/187 129/14 305 153/757 7715 154/30   
   SEEN-BY: 154/110 203/0 218/700 220/6 221/0 222/2 226/30 227/114 229/110   
   SEEN-BY: 229/112 134 317 426 428 470 664 700 705 240/1120 5832 250/1   
   SEEN-BY: 263/1 266/512 280/464 5003 5006 291/111 292/854 8125 301/1   
   SEEN-BY: 320/219 322/757 341/66 234 396/45 423/120 460/58 256 1124   
   SEEN-BY: 460/5858 633/280 712/848 1321 770/1 902/26 2320/105 3634/0   
   SEEN-BY: 3634/12 56 57 60 5020/400 8912 5054/30 5075/35   
   PATH: 3634/60 12 222/2 263/1 280/464 460/58 229/426