Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby Access Denied » Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:00 am

murnut wrote:Where once was a wide eyed noobie to online ufology now stands a skeptic.

Congratulations, you earned it.

[good times]

However, you’re not out of the woods yet…

The Burden of Skepticism
Carl Sagan
Skeptical Inquirer, Volume 12.1, Fall 1987
http://www.csicop.org/si/show/burden_of_skepticism/

I want to say a little more about the burden of skepticism. You can get into a habit of thought in which you enjoy making fun of all those other people who don’t see things as clearly as you do. This is a potential social danger present in an organization like CSICOP. We have to guard carefully against it.

It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great openness to new ideas. Obviously those two modes of thought are in some tension. But if you are able to exercise only one of these modes, which ever one it is, you’re in deep trouble. If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you. You never learn anything new. You become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense is ruling the world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.) But every now and then, maybe once in a hundred cases, a new idea turns out to be on the mark, valid and wonderful. If you are too much in the habit of being skeptical about everything, you are going to miss or resent it, and either way you will be standing in the way of understanding and progress. On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish the useful ideas from the worthless ones. If all ideas have equal validity then you are lost, because then, it seems to me, no ideas have any validity at all.

Some ideas are better than others. The machinery for distinguishing them is an essential tool in dealing with the world and especially in dealing with the future. And it is precisely the mix of these two modes of thought that is central to the success of science.

Really good scientists do both. On their own, talking to themselves, they churn up huge numbers of new ideas, and criticize them ruthlessly. Most of the ideas never make it to the outside world. Only the ideas that pass through a rigorous self-filtration make it out and are criticized by the rest of the scientific community. It sometimes happens that ideas that are accepted by everybody turn out to be wrong, or at least partially wrong, or at least superseded by ideas of greater generality. And, while there are of course some personal losses—emotional bonds to the idea that you yourself played a role in inventing—nevertheless the collective ethic is that every time such an idea is overthrown and replaced by something better the enterprise of science has benefited. In science it often happens that scientists say, “You know that’s a really good argument; my position is mistaken,” and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn’t happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that has happened in politics or religion. It’s very rare that a senator, say, replies, “That’s a good argument. I will now change my political affiliation.”

8)

Also recommended for your more spiritual side...

Does Truth Matter? Science, Pseudoscience, and Civilization
Carl Sagan
Skeptical Inquirer, Volume 20.2, March / April 1996
http://www.csicop.org/si/show/does_trut ... ilization/

“Science has beauty, power, and majesty that can provide spiritual as well as practical fulfillment. But superstition and pseudoscience keep getting in the way providing easy answers, casually pressing our awe buttons, and cheapening the experience.”

The phenomena might just be beyond ufology's attempts to define it.

Of course it is, one size does not fill all.

[cases that is]

murnut wrote:I just landed a sweet new gig that is going to require attention.

Cool, hope it works out and somehow involves surfing… :)

Tom


ETA: What Jeddyhi said, except the part about golfing... :P
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]


Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby ryguy » Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:36 pm

Mur - the critical mind you've developed isn't just for Ufology, it's good in many aspects of life and other areas of research as well. I wish you luck with your new gig and hope that this new awareness serves you well.... I'm confident it will.

Just remember those two magic words that stun con artists and send scammers running for the exits - "Prove It."

-Ryan
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby astrophotographer » Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:40 pm

I find it interesting that as soon as the Rainey piece showed up in the UFO updates list, the list either went silent or there is a significant delay in posting all the responses in the Updates archive. Is there a conspiracy at UFO updates or is there a more logical answer (like EBK is on vacation or nobody is interested)? This is one of the reasons I unsubscribed long ago. It is an archaic style of a discussion forum. I guess we will have to wait to see what the UFO collective mind has to say.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby philliman » Sun Jan 23, 2011 12:02 am

@Mur and Jedd
I can very well see where you are coming from because I kinda go/went through the same process. It makes you tired seeing all the bs being posted day by day on several different places. But nonetheless ufology needs such guys like you to counter the crap released by other people.

@all
A while ago somebody suggested to me to write for sites like americancronicle or ufodigest. At that time I declined because I'm more the "board-junkie". Plus I didn't wanted to be identified with all that other nonsense which is being released there. But now I've got the feeling that this is the wrong way to go. I rather feel now that more people who are reasonable thinkers should post their articles there. We just can't leave ufology to the hoaxers, wannabe experts and nutcases!

Indeed it seems that there are several people here who could be good writers and some of you already are and so I'd like to encourage anyone to think about it. I see it every day that people are growing tired of all the bs and so I am sure that many people who normally use to stay away from such sites because of the rather questionable content which is usually being released there would appreciate to read other more reasonable articles on those sites. The word has to be spread if you know what I mean. ;)
philliman
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby jjflash » Sun Jan 23, 2011 4:10 pm

Great discussion, all.

Below is another worthy read, in my opinion. It is a competent and qualified critique of the now infamous Roper Poll funded by Bigelow and authored by Hopkins, Jacobs, and Ron Westrum. It also includes a qualified general review of Jacobs' methodology.

Measuring The Prevalence of False Memories:
A New Interpretation of a "UFO Abduction Survey"


by Ted Goertzel, Rutgers University, Camden NJ 08102

Published in The Skeptical Inquirer18 (3): 266-272, 1994. (this is the original manuscript, prior to any editing done by the journal.)

http://crab.rutgers.edu/~goertzel/UFO.htm
jjflash
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 7:40 pm

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby Access Denied » Sun Jan 23, 2011 7:06 pm

Thanks for the link JJF, that is interesting. At first I was confused how Goertzel demonstrated millions of Americans are most likely (in the absence of any evidence to the contrary) not being abducted by aliens but then after reading the paper over again more carefully, I realized what he demonstrated is a different hypothesis fits the same data (responses to the poll questions).

Catching up…

ryguy wrote:Is that really what Farley is saying?

Good question, from the article I linked to, notice that after talking about a real proven conspiracy he learned about from the mainstream media, Farley suddenly goes off on a Gary Bekkum style tangent linking it to Roswell…

The link to the much publicized "Roswell UFO," widely described by government-linked "UFOlogists" as being a "crashed flying saucer," replete with recovered bodies of alleged "extra-terrestrial" occupants, arises from little-known rocket tests and other medical experiments associated with post-World War II research into the effects of radiation and high-altitude exposures to humans.

The tests were conducted by then-Army Air Corps and "our" captured Nazi scientists beginning in 1946, at the White Sands missile testing facility, and involved animals lofted into near-Earth space in the nose cones of captured V-2 rockets as well as alleged human subjects flown by high-altitude balloons.

Most contemporary advocates of the "Roswell UFO crash" scenario have involvements with government nuclear programs and other military or intelligence research in their resume's, but now publish "UFO conspiracy" books and are regularly featured as speakers at "UFO" conferences. Their vaunted "investigations" rarely if ever come up with prosaic explanations, especially those involving less well-known experiments using humans.

That sounds like it’s taken right out of Redfern’s BS in the Desert who got it from who he calls “The Colonel” who claims to be a former DIA agent. Sound familiar?

[follow the link for Nick’s latest take on this]

It gets better though, looks like Farley was for it before he was against it as evidenced by this 1995 email…

Dick Farley Discredits the False Memory Syndrome
http://www.astraeasweb.net/politics/farley.html

Here's the list forwarded to me the other day of the FMSF's advisory board, from their most recent online version of their False Memory Syndrome Foundation newsletter. I've simply been "watching" these folks for a while. Some of these names are VERY interesting given their research histories. Well known, many are.

And what is the only “interesting” name he has anything to say about?

The "Amazing" James Randi (of CSICOP and allegedly "CIA" consultant on magic and debunk/disinform fame). His presence sort of gives away who and what this FMSF scam is about.

Really?

He then goes on to talk about the usual Aviary suspects who have nothing to do with the FMSF and concludes it must be part of some kind of vast government conspiracy…

[just like he did in the first article I quoted]

But lingering out in the "aethers," there WAS that BBC news report back in April 1993, which was shot when we (Human Potential Foundation...the Pell/Jones thing fueled by Larry Rockeybucks) had a couple of visiting Russians over to demo their "Psychocorrection" software for a bunch of intell types. Included at that private but unclassified symposium we threw (in Tyson's Corners, at offices of Systems Integration Research, who were competing to get the Russians' "brokers" to set up a U.S. defense-intell deal to exploit this technology), were guys like Dr. Richard Nakamura (sp?), the head neuro-guy (there's another pun) from the NIH/NIMH. Also some CIA guys (Pandolfi & Green, who's ex-agency); some "Star Wars" office types; and of course your usual smattering of blue-suiters from USAF & DOD.

Where have we heard about this overly hyped meeting before?

The BBC came and shot a separate segment of the Russians' "subliminal attitude adjuster" for their 12-minute segment on "Non-Lethal Weapons" and doctrine, (a la John Alexander, Janet & Chris Morris, etc.) which was all the rage during the earlier Clintonista period as "dueling defense budgets" evolved. Les Aspin died for our sins, so that debate is VERY black now, with Deutch of MIT and Sheila Widnall, also of MIT, carrying CIA and USAF. (Funny, that Bosnian-Serb party going on over at Wright- Patterson AFB, in Dayton. Maybe old "Hangar 18" is going to be the new Geneva, and the "Gray/EBEs" invited the Serbs in for some strawberry ice cream?)

Alrighty then, clearly they’re all in on it!

The Russians said "it works." And "our side" was quietly amazed that the Russky doctors had apparently "figured out the algorithm" we've spent gazillions working on. And these ex- Soviet scientists had it working on an IBM-386 platform (at least the version they showed us). The later stuff was "at home" on another board.

Of course, the Russians said THEY had refused KGB funding, and their work was aimed at helping bend the minds of alcoholics and drug addicts back to the sanity of service to the state. But OTHER scientists, former colleagues of these guys, had NOT been so "ethical," the Russkies said, and had indeed gone ahead and helped the KGB guys with their nefarious experiments. Right.

Counter-counter counterintelligence no doubt.

That's why Rockefeller was funding Cdr. C. B. Jones to showcase this little bit of what they called "subliminal negotiation" technology to the intell community. Just think...millions and millions of little school kids, watching "Channel One" and having their plastic mind "Newt-ralized."

Voila! No more pesky consumers with consciousness, let alone citizens with conscience. A marketer's (and corporate labor negotiator's) dream? Truth is what is believed, right? And people will fight and die...and even kill...for what they can be made to believe. Just ask the Rabins.

A marketer’s dream? Hmm…

Did you ever see that BBC segment? It ran all around the world but here in the US of A. That's a tad odd, isn't it? That the whole world was watching us think about "non-lethal" doctrine except ourselves? Ah, yes. The most effective kind of "mind control" is simply to control the flow of information. Then, while the people believe they are making "choices," it is the "gatekeepers" who are setting the agenda and presenting the alternatives, guided by their "enlightened self interest."

Not a US marketer’s dream?

More about the FMSF here for those who may not be familiar with it…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_Memo ... Foundation

[looks like they’re taking a beating on wiki too]

Better yet, from that same page as that 1995 “debunking” email, there’s this letter to a local public television station…

Date: October 24, 1995
To: Frontline (frontline@wgbh.org)
From: Dick Farley (cloudrider@aol.com)
Re: "In Search of Satan" / Satanic Ritualistic Abuse, etc.
Air Date: Tuesday, October 24, 1995, at 9 p.m. EDT.

As a journalist who has spent several years examining the various threads which make up the very bizarre tapestry of "SRA" and "alien abuctions," as well as alleged MPD and "induced multiples/alters-as-secret agents for _____", I was saddened that you folks apparently were so easily led astray. Unless, of course, Washington "intelligence personality" Dan Smith is correct and some of your contractual producers and on-board staffers are what he has called "company men," i.e., having CIA or other intelligence community connections. I'll leave all that for Dan and his Capitol Hill friends to sort out.

Apparently not…

[snip elaboration on his Human Potential Foundation background]

Basically, what tickled me about your program this evening was your reference to Ms. Gloria Steinem, whose magazine published an early and influential report about purported SRA, as your film revealed. What was fascinating is that you did not pursue this high-profile person's involvements further, back to her funding sources and political linkages, which lead to the same sources that have funded "alien abduction research, and the promotion of such scenarios by what "UFO" critic (and top space and reconnaissance technical writer) Philip Klass has repeatedly said is a "highly placed UFO cult."

I wouldn’t say “highly placed” but otherwise I would agree with Klass… :)

What you also missed, and what I do know from my personal contacts with some of your "consultants" like Mr. Gus Rousseau in the Washington area, and others, is that Frontline has a deep understanding and much primary information about the range of phenomena and cross-linkages often termed "UFOs," as well as "recalled memories," etc. Your recent repeat of your earlier "debunking" of recalled memories and MPD, in which you had featured a well-known CIA-related psychiatrist purporting to "plant" MPD identities in the Hillside Strangler, I believe, was fairly transparent, especially if one knows the actual history of that psychiatrist. One would almost be led to conclude that your intention was "creative deflection" of mainstream public scrutiny of these phenomena...not as "metaphysicalities," but rather as techniques and applications of technologies in human hands. Hopefully you have thought all of these choices through?

Some background on MPD in general and the Hillside Strangler case in particular…

http://www.skepdic.com/mpd.html

Another defender of the standard model of MPD, Dr. Ralph Allison, has posted his diagnosis of Kenneth Bianchi, the so-called Hillside Strangler, in which the therapist admits he has changed his mind several times. Bianchi, now a convicted serial killer serving a life sentence, was diagnosed as having MPD by defense psychiatrist Jack G. Watkins. Dr. Watkins used hypnosis on Bianchi and "Steve" emerged to an explicit suggestion from the therapist. "Steve" was allegedly Bianchi's alter who did the murders. Prosecution psychiatrist Martin T. Orne, an expert on hypnosis, argued successfully before the court that the hypnosis and the MPD symptoms were a sham.

So then what is his “evidence” of a connection? It appears to be contained solely in a scare quoted “friendship”…

Gloria Steinem's "friendship" with the afore-mentioned Cdr. C.B. Jones, who demonstrably is and has been one of the higher placed "connections" among so-called paranormal researchers and "street-level" uses of what is termed in tradecraft as "applied anomalous phenomena," would have borne examination, especially given the reported "timing" of the appearance of SRA on the psychiatric scene. Whether "agents" or "assets," all of these folks are very closely connected and "inter-locking."

Is that a fact? Sounds like free advertising for Scammers Inc. to me…

[snip vast government mind control conspiracy rant]

That you seemed to paint the alleged SRA excesses reported on tonight's program as motivated by financial greed was also a most clever disinformational strategy. To those of us who have seen the primary documentation, and interviewed many of these victims of some of these alleged mind-influencing experimental programs...and who also have documentation that links prominent people and their minions to such abuses, your reluctance to probe more deeply remains sadly frustrating.

Compare that to this from the email Steve posted…

Dick Farley wrote:"For whom has Budd Hopkins really been working, all of this time?"

I could be wrong but it would appear what he's saying is what Scammers Inc. is selling is legit.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby ryguy » Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:48 pm

Wow - great post.

Dick Farley wrote:"For whom has Budd Hopkins really been working, all of this time?"

I could be wrong but it would appear what he's saying is what Scammers Inc. is selling is legit.


That's definitely been one issue of Farley's. I wouldn't say he's saying the Scammer's Inc product is 100% legit, but unfortunately his argument does lend support to the idea (an idea that they try to encourage and the same one that I believe Jack Sarfatti has fallen for) that they have government black-op insider connections/access, when they don't.

-Ryan
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby Zep Tepi » Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:10 pm

The only reason Scammers Inc have been so successful for the past four decades (!) is precisely because they have managed to convince enough apparently smart people that they were on the "inside". Convince them and they will then do a great job in convincing others, even when that is not the intention.

Like you say however, the reality is very, very different.
.
Image
User avatar
Zep Tepi
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby philliman » Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:20 pm

Am really looking forward to read that article which you are about to prepare about Scammers Inc.

You know one thing which bothers me and which hasn't been mentioned by anyone anywhere is how many of these alleged abductees' memories and perceptions have been screwed up because of Hopkins' and Jacobs' flawed research and methods? That's something none of his supporters is willing to address. Which is of course not really surprising because for most it's just business. The reactions of some of his former patients also rather reminds me of the Helsinki-syndrome. And the statement that ex-wife's testimonies wouldn't be reliable is poor and I'd say rather untrue.

For me personally it seems that another one who possibly has just muddied the water of ufology has been exposed.

It's unfortunate that this expose has been released at a time where Hopkins allegedly is so seriously ill that he won't be able to respond which is sad to hear. But I fear that his work and that of David Jacobs will be used in the future by many without questioning. It's also unfortunate that there are no qualified psychiatrists who would go down that road to examine those people's experiences to see who really has had some incredible experiences or who's just deluded.
philliman
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby DoomsdayRex » Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:28 pm

Hopkins has responded to Ms. Rainey's Paracast article about him.

http://www.alienjigsaw.com/Articles/Dec ... nkers.html

After reading it, I wonder if Hopkins read the same article I did. He seems to focus more on Bulverism, Rainey-as-debunker so you can dismiss her, then telling us why she is wrong.
If anyone can show me and prove to me that I am wrong in thought or deed I will gladly change. I seek the truth which never yet hurt anybody. It is only persistence in self-delusion and ignorance which does harm. -- Marcus Aurelias
User avatar
DoomsdayRex
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:23 pm
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby jjflash » Fri Feb 18, 2011 6:17 pm

I continue to be very strongly convinced that anything less than direct evidence of an alien presence - that can be verified through public review - is, at this point, unacceptable from Jacobs, Hopkins or any of the rest of the witch-hunt gang. I am adamantly convinced that anything less is nothing more than an attempt to deflect attention from the fact they are providing no such evidence.

To continue to promote regressive hypnosis as an 'investigative tool,' without making people fully aware of its shortcomings, in the face of all available data of its inherent challenges, is nothing less than grossly negligent and a disgrace to professional research practices. I look forward to the day that the UFO community tires of being sold hope, refuses to support witch hunts and embraces the difference between verifiable facts and hot air.
jjflash
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 7:40 pm

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby jjflash » Thu Mar 03, 2011 4:01 am

Gary Haden made a blog post on February 25 titled, They’re On to Me: The MPD Game from Hello to Goodbye, and may be viewed at:

http://speculativerealms.blogspot.com/2 ... lo-to.html

An excerpt:

The issue of consent strikes at the heart of the Emma Woods Case. There are aspects to consent that rarely, if ever, enter into a conversation between believers in alien abduction hypnosis. Issues such as “capacity," “competence," “informed consent," and “impairment” [...] never seep into such conversations because faith in extraterrestrials is a mystical tradition that can, if it rots to the level of fundamentalism, destroy a person’s ability to think.

I have listened to the entire unedited recording of the 29th Hypnosis Session. This post covers all material related to the Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD) Game Mr. Jacobs allegedly played with Miss Woods to evade pursuit of his person by alien beings. Material related to Miss Woods’ experiences is not dealt with. That task should be the occupation of individuals who have faith in the existence of the extraterrestrials in question and I do not possess faith in nor will I aide in advertising the existence of said beings. Such work is irresponsible.

Faith in extraterrestrials directly contributed to Miss Woods’ violation.


Haden goes on to provide observations and comments related to Jacobs' rationalizations about encouraging Woods to believe she suffered from MPD. As Jacobs' account goes and can be viewed on his ICAR site...

http://www.ufoabduction.com/defamationcampaign.htm

...Jacobs claims that he only suggested to Woods to lead the tormenting aliens to believe she had MPD in order to deceive them. He sprang this bright idea on her during a hypnosis session, no less, and would like us to think it was done to throw the dastardly aliens off the trail of Jacobs. His reasoning, he would have us believe, was that if the aliens thought he was researching MPD and not alien abduction, they would spare his life, naively allowing his important research to continue. Trouble is, that is not, in fact, what happened (even if we were foolish enough to not notice a problem or three with this supposed line of reasoning). Haden continues:

What follows is an unedited version of the posthypnotic suggestion. It contains no specific triggering information that the suggestion is part of a game. Its one specific trigger—when people ask Emma Woods about her contact with him—is so general a suggestion as to constitute blanket applicability. The suggestion does not say, for instance: “When aliens ask you about our work together tell them you have multiple personality disorder.”

The suggestion states that when PEOPLE ask you about our work together tell them you have multiple personality disorder.
jjflash
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 7:40 pm

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby nablator » Sat Mar 05, 2011 11:32 pm

Excerpt #1 from a documentary by Carol Rainey, entitled "Priests of High Strangeness."

User avatar
nablator
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 9:44 am

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby jjflash » Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:35 pm

Good work on your articles and forum lately, RU3. I have a personal appreciation for your efforts.

I submit the following Rainey video for further evidence of the CRAPOLA that has been spewing from Hopkins' lips for decades now. What an insult to intelligence...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgjcmTDhqnE
jjflash
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 7:40 pm

Re: Rainey, Hopkins, and Jacobs

Postby astrophotographer » Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:17 pm

UFO updates put a gag order on anything related to Rainey or Emma Woods. It appears, you aren't allowed to discuss their arguments or research any more and they are banned from posting. So much for wanting to "Study UFO-related phenomena". To me it appears as if those in charge are under the influence of the abductee cult.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

PreviousNext

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests

cron