TZUTC: -0400   
   MSGID: 146.fnbb-ufo@1:3634/12 2c8c575d   
   PID: Synchronet 3.18a-Linux  May 23 2020 GCC 7.5.0   
   TID: SBBSecho 3.11-Linux r3.173 May 23 2020 GCC 7.5.0   
   COLS: 80   
   CHRS: ASCII 1   
   NOTE: Synchronet msgeditor $Revision: 1.174 $   
   SUBJECT: THE BILLY MEIER STORY                               FILE: UFO1010   
      
      
      
   Part 4    
        
     Wendelle Stevens and Genesis III -- who it seems fair to call   
   both investigators and publicists of the Meier case -- have their   
   own answers to some of these questions.  In an interview with   
   ufologist Timothy Green Beckley, Wendelle Stevens rather   
   disarmingly remarked:   
      
     "First of all, photographs are poor evidence because there are   
   so many things that we can do technically to produce images.   
   However, there are also so many ways we can detect a hoax.  We can   
   tell if we are dealing with superimposed overlays, reflected   
   images, double exposures.  We can tell by looking through special   
   microscopes and searching for grain density and grain patterns.   
   We can pretty much tell if an object has been thrown into the air   
   or suspended by something in the air."   
      
     And in keeping with that skepticism, the book published by   
   Genesis III, "UFO...contact from the Pleiades", shows   
   computer-processed versions of the photographs that appear to   
   validate their authenticity. It is when Wendelle Stevens starts to   
   explain some of the computer enhancements that credulity is   
   stretched.  Says the colonel:   
      
     "We can [analyse photographs] with a computer by studying the   
   edges around any given object. In high magnification an edge is   
   seen as a series of shock waves.  There is a special formula for   
   the spacing of these shock waves that make up the edge.  How   
   strong they are, how apart they are, will tell you how far apart   
   that edge of the object is from the camera.  If the body is in   
   motion, the shock waves are compressed on the leading edge, and   
   expand on the trailing edge."   
      
     In fact, nothing of the kind happens. What this particular   
   computer process does is enhance the picture contrast in areas   
   where the image brightness varies -- especially at the edges of   
   features, making it possible to make judgements about how far the   
   object photographed is from the camera. In some cases, it is   
   possible to intensify otherwise hard-to-detect strings or supports   
   attached to the object.  This has nothing whatever to do with   
   shock waves, though Stevens has repeated the idea more than once.   
      
     In Genesis III's book, the 12 or so pictures purporting to show   
   analytic enhancements of Meier's pictures are accompanied by   
   details of the various tests to which the photographs were   
   subjected. It is claimed that the computer enhancements showed   
   how the light values of the land-scape are consistent with those   
   on the bottom of the craft. Supposedly, the test eliminates   
   double exposures or 'paste-ups', splicing images from two   
   different transparencies together.  So far, perhaps, so good.  The   
   name of a reputable computer company, De Anza Systems, appears on   
   the edge of one frame.   
      
     Kal Korff took the simple step of asking Mr Wayne Heppler,   
   manager of De Anza Systems if an analysis had been performed for   
   Genesis III. Replied Mr Heppler:   
      
     "What these guys did was to come down to De Anza Systems   
   claiming that they wanted to  BUY a computer from us. So we took   
   one of their pictures, one showing the UFO, and enhanced it to   
   make certain parts of the picture stand out. Then they took   
   pictures of it, left, and stated they would get back in touch with   
   us.  And we haven't heard from them since."   
      
     Korff then asked if De Anza had the technical capability to   
   analyse the pictures.  The answer: "No.  We are in no position to   
   do an analysis."   
      
     At a lecture at the UFO '80 Symposium held in Oakland,   
   California, in August 1980, Jim Diletosso of Genesis III said that   
   'Z-Scale contouring' and 'edge identification' tests were run on   
   the pictures.  The only drawback to this is that these are simply   
   color contouring techniques (and can be used to analyse the   
   'density' at each point of an image -- its lightness or darkness).   
   They are NOT light distortion tests, such as edge enhancement,   
   which might reveal the information Genesis III claim to have   
   gained by the techniques.   
      
     Diletosso also (perhaps rather rashly) took exception to a   
   Ground Saucer Watch (GSW) color contouring of one of the Meier   
   pictures.  This shows a similar level of light reflectivity on   
   both the ground and the Pleiadean spacecraft -- indicating that   
   SOMETHING is wrong with the photograph, since the materials, at   
   the claimed distance, should reflect (and so color contour)   
   differently.  Diletosso's objection was unfortunate, since even   
   Genesis III's computer-generated picture shows both the craft and   
   its background in the same color contour.   
   End of part 4   
      
                
     **********************************************   
     * THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *   
     **********************************************   
   Rixter   
   telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23   
   http://ricksbbs.synchro.net:8080   
   --- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux   
    * Origin: SouthEast Star Mail HUB - SESTAR (1:3634/12)   
   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: 229/114 317 426 428 470 664 700 705 240/1120 5832 250/1 263/1   
   SEEN-BY: 266/512 280/464 5003 5006 291/111 292/854 8125 301/1 320/219   
   SEEN-BY: 322/757 341/66 234 396/45 423/120 460/58 256 1124 5858 633/280   
   SEEN-BY: 712/848 1321 770/1 902/26 2320/105 3634/0 12 56 57 60 5020/400   
   SEEN-BY: 5020/8912 5054/30 5075/35   
   PATH: 3634/12 222/2 263/1 280/464 460/58 229/426