Perhaps even some gray skinned analyst, is muttering, telepathically, "Damn it, some human is going to spoil this yet---it's supposed to be a surprise, for a maximum growth maturity result ".

Hello, Vince,

Thank you for your email.

It was badly needed to balance the negativism of the majority of comments of "know-it-all" and "I-don't-believe-if-I didn't-find-it" UFO experts who have posted their comments on UFO Updates and other sites.

I can tell you now that I have been privy to these developments for many months now, having met Shawn and Clay Pickering in NYC on June 24th, 2007, the 60th Anniversary of Ken Arnold's sighting.

Since that time, I have had the privilege of addressing their NYC Disclosure Group twice and have come to know these two gentlemen very well as friends and confidants. They are honest, intelligent and sincere UFO investigators and have shared much important information with me.

The skepticism and, in some cases, the rancor with which their information has been received is typical of debunkers and the wariness of many UFO researchers who have been burned by hoaxes in the past. There have been many caustic comments (none of substance) from certain UFOlogists who jealousy guard their niches, purviews and "spheres of influence" in UFOlogy. Their reactions, in many cases, have been identical to the mass media's typical reflex arcs for the past 6 decades, which include condemnation, sarcasm, derision and ridicule.

Many critics have objected to Clay and Shawn's "non-disclosure" of the identity of their source, which is the same criticism that was leveled many years ago at Leonard Stringfield. Yet, as the decades have passed, many of Mr. Stringfield's revelations have been shown to be correct and the reliability of his "unnamed sources" has been validated. Mr. Stringfield's need to protect his sources has also been acknowledged.

Click on the 'NEXT' arrow for page 5