Art Bell

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 16, 1997 - Art Bell

02:04:40

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Whitley Strieber - Courtney Brown in the Crossfire

Participants

Main voices

48:12

courtney brown

32:27

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
art bell ▲ ● ▼		From the high-deck in the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening, or good morning, as the case may be, across all these many, many time zones, from the Tahitian and Hawaiian Island chains, all the way eastward across wide over country, to the Caribbean and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
		Good morning in the islands, south into South America, north to the Pole, and worldwide on the internet.
		This is Coast to Coast, A.M., and I'm Art Bell.
		Well, good morning, everybody.
		We are going to have a rather different sort of show this morning.
		It has come to our attention that the photograph from the alleged top 10 university astronomer that we held on, Whitley and I held on to, as you know, for two months is a fraud.
		I repeat, is a fraud.
		And I will demonstrate that to you shortly with an interview.
		I have with me tonight Whitley Streeber and Professor Courtney Brown from Emory University.
		Whitley Streeber, you should be well familiar with, multi-million dollar-selling author on book tour right now, taking time out to do this, probably getting close to the point of hallucination without sleep.
		And Professor Courtney Brown at the Forsyth Institute, where it is very late, a little after two o'clock in the morning already on the East Coast.
		Now, recalling for my audience the chronology or rough chronology, and I may be corrected on some of this, but basically, on the evening of November 14th, Chuck Schramack in Houston, Texas took a photograph of an anomaly that appeared to be adjacent to Halebach.
		On that very same evening, we had Professor Courtney Brown and Prudence Calabreisi, a graduate student in physics.
		Now, Professor Brown, with only that information and some in the background, the Chuck Sharamic photograph, produced three, I think it was three or four, he can correct me on that, remote viewing sessions that declared the object to be basically an alien craft.
		Three, I believe, to four times, although that was a little bit in dispute, the size of Earth, traveling with Hailbob.
		He did the remote viewing sessions based on the photograph from Chuck Schramck.
		However, he told us in the background he had a major top 10 university astronomer who had given him several roles of film and had unambiguous radio signals coming from the object.
		As a matter of fact, now that I consider it, I think perhaps the proper chronology would be to play, I've got a little collage of some of the things that Prudence Calabri said, and so I'm changing this at the last minute.
		I think I'd rather deal with that first.
		I'm going to play that for you here in a few moments.
		And it's kind of a collage of things that the graduate physics student, Prudence Calabri, said.
		At any rate, within a short while, there were photographs, thank God.
		I say that because it was not just me.
		A photograph was delivered to Whitley Streeber, and a photograph was delivered to myself.
		As a matter of fact, two of them.
		The same one sent to Whitley and one other.
		And for some time, actually it was going to be about a week, it was promised, and the university astronomer was going to come out and have a news conference.
		And of course, the week came and went without the news conference.
		I was itchy to release the photograph because I felt my word to you was important.
		I felt it was very important, and I didn't want you all out there thinking I was sitting here with a photograph important to mankind, and surely if something of that size was out there, it would be very important to mankind to have that photograph in everybody's hands.
		I'm a very public kind of person, as you know.
		However, at the urging of Professor Brown, and as a matter of fact, with a show that we did with Whitley, we decided we would wait, and wait we did.
		Finally, releasing that photograph on January 15th, or at just plus the two-month point.
		In other words, we had waited two months for this university astronomer to come forward.
		Professor Brown kept telling us, he will, he will, he will, and if you out him too soon, why it's going to blow the whole thing up.
		I didn't want to do that.
		I didn't want to blow the whole thing up.
		So let us first go back to November 14th so we might properly recall some of the things said about this university astronomer and how sure everybody was at the time that this guy was for real.
		Now, bear in mind that myself and Whitley had only the word of Professor Brown and Prudence Calabre to go by.
		We did not know the name of this university professor, nor did we know the university.
		Later, we found out, or we were given the name, I should say, of a university.
		But at the time, we had only the word of Professor Brown in Prudence to go by, which was quite considerable when you consider Professor Brown as a tenured professor at Emory University and heads the Foresight Institute.
		That was quite considerable along with the credentials of Prudence Calabre.
		So here is a little reminder of what occurred on November 14th when everybody was together.
		You're going to be hearing of Prudence Calabresi.
		You have had many hours of discussion with this professor, haven't you?
unidentified		Yes, I have.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How convinced is he that this is not ambiguous?
unidentified		He is very convinced.
		He's completely convinced.
		When we first started talking with him, he thought that there was the possibility that this was some type of artificial object, but he wasn't committing himself at that point.
		And then apparently, he received some confirmation from other people in his field that have seen the same thing, and one particular colleague of his who has detected radio signals from this object.
		And this colleague has a radio telescope?
		That's correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This is not an amateur with a radio telescope.
unidentified		This is a professional.
unidentified		This is a professional, another PhD in astrophysics who does all sorts of radio astronomy.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Prudence Calabresi is the Director of Planetary Education at the Farsight Institute.
		Her responsibilities as director involve presenting information on the Farsight Institute website so others can see, examine, and discuss the remote viewing research that is conducted.
		She has a strong graduate background in physics with emphasis in magnetics, cyclotrons, and astrophysics.
		She is expected to receive her doctorate in physics in May of 1997.
		She will be talking this morning about the efforts of the Farsight Institute to obtain verifying and to some degree corroborating evidence of the remote viewing data that was obtained by the Farsight Institute using its professional remote viewing staff regarding the anomaly apparently accompanying the comet Hail Bopp.
		Prudence Calabreski is as well a remote viewer trained by the Farsight Institute.
		Here she is.
unidentified		Prudence, welcome to the program.
		Hi, Art.
		Thanks very much.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let me ask you, with all of your credentials, if we've got it right so far regarding the photographs from an astronomer at one of the top 10 universities here in America and the fact that there has been what appears to be an intelligent signal received from this object.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is that correct?
unidentified		Absolutely.
		Absolutely.
		What we did when we first heard about a possible anomaly with the Hailbop Comet because of Chuck Scheramick and his photograph, we targeted Hailbop and found out through the remote viewing sessions that there apparently was some large object as a companion to Hailbot.
		But we didn't stop there.
		We decided, as we always do with any professional session at the Farsight Institute, that we need to find collaborating evidence.
		And as far as a large companion to Hailbot, if it's there, someone somewhere must have seen it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, this is where it begins to get very serious.
		Because a lot of people in the audience will say, okay, remote viewing, yes, the government did it.
		Yes, it's very interesting, but it's still off into the land in the public's, from a lot of the public's point of view of psychic research.
		Now, when you begin to talk about corroborating evidence, then you're talking about a very, very serious revelation.
unidentified		Tell us, please, what you can about this professor.
		Okay.
		This astronomer, he's an astrophysicist, actually, and he is one of this impeccable credentials.
		He has taught at more than one of the top ten universities in the United States in the areas of physics, astrophysics, and astronomy.
		Now, his specialty is in planetary science, which is the formation and the life of planets and planet-like material, of which comets is included in that.
		So he has the ideal specialty for an expert involved in this kind of discovery.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So he's the right guy.
unidentified		Exactly.
		And he's been involved in successful efforts to discover planets around distant solar systems.
		He's a real pioneer in his field.
		He's a very brave and courageous person to have come forward, at least to us at this point, with this information.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How did that occur?
unidentified		Did you go to him?
unidentified		Did he come to you?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Can you tell us how the contact occurred?
unidentified		What we did, after we did the Hailbot remote viewing sessions, we started calling around all the astrophysicists and astronomers that we had some personal contact with.
		And we happened to run across this particular person.
		And he said, well, yes, there are some observed anomalies with Hailbop, although I'm not exactly sure what these anomalies mean.
		He said that, yes, there were some anomalies.
		And then later, that same week, he called us back and said, I have some photographs that show another object traveling with this comet.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You've got those photographs.
unidentified		That's right.
		Dr. Brown's got them, and I've got them in front of me.
		That's right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, the immediate audience reaction, we've got Some people who have joined since midnight.
unidentified		Right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And we're going to describe this object, but they're going to say right away, well, then why the hell don't you put these photographs up on the web so we can all see them?
		And I certainly wish I could.
		Please tell them why we can't.
unidentified		Now, just the nature of the telescope involved in this particular series of photographs that we have, anyone with any type of astronomical training would be able to narrow it down to a few different observatories in the country just because of the type of image.
		In other words, it's too good.
		It's too good, exactly.
		And it would then narrow down who this particular person is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why does this person not yet wish to be known?
unidentified		Well, he, as he conveyed to us, he is wanting to get as much data as possible, and he wants to have a completely irrefutable analysis before he comes forward to the public.
unidentified		He is concerned that if he comes forward at this point with these photographs and some other evidence that he has, that it won't be enough and that he'll just be besieged and his whole career will be in turmoil, as well as he kind of fears for the safety of his family and himself.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Of course.
unidentified		So he wants to take some time and make sure he has everything lined up before he comes forward.
		What are the moral imperatives?
		This is very serious information, Prudence.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And what are the moral imperatives?
		Is this man's reputation more important than getting this out right away?
		I've got the photographs, you've got them.
		Professor Brown has got them.
		Just about everybody's got them.
		And we're not releasing them.
		So we really need to address that.
unidentified		Where are the moral imperatives?
		Well, it's always a tough call to make.
		And it's something that journalists, for example, have to do all the time because they have all sorts of sources that are secret that they do not disclose because of what could potentially happen to the source.
		But sometimes a journalist will come up with a piece of information from a source that he or she doesn't want to disclose, and they feel that this information is so important that they need to put it out there right away.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No matter what, if within a reasonable time there is not a news conference, would you release these photos?
unidentified		We have given this astronomer our word that we would not release the photos at this time.
		We will be in contact with him after this show, and we'll check his reaction to all this and to see what kind of decisions he's come to.
		And then I guess we'll reevaluate.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is there any possibility that this astronomer at this major university has made a mistake and it is a start?
unidentified		It is just not possible.
		This object is too large.
		If you look at the photograph, there are several large stars in the immediate vicinity.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		And those are all accounted for.
		If you look at any star catalog, star chart, star chart program, computer program, those bright stars would show up.
		But where this large object is, there just is no star of any magnitude that would even approach showing such a large luminous object.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, and so the audience understands it is not a single photograph.
		This man has taken how many?
		Over many, many hours in this particular series?
unidentified		In this particular series, probably most, I don't know how many he's taken total.
		We have five clear shots, but I know that there were much more.
		Probably a couple hundred would be my guess.
		A couple of hundred.
		Right.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You have had many hours of discussion with this professor, haven't you?
unidentified		Yes, I have.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How convinced is he that this is not ambiguous?
unidentified		He is very convinced.
unidentified		He's completely convinced.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		There you have it.
		That was Prudence Calabre on November 14th.
		And I don't know about you, but to me, that did not seem at all ambiguous.
		Not at all ambiguous.
		But I wanted to recall that for you to refresh your memories.
		In a moment, we will continue.
unidentified		There is quite a story ahead.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you ripple while you walk?
		Do you pinch not just an inch, but a bunch?
		Would you like to lose eight to ten pounds in the next month?
		Yes, of course you would.
		Fiber can do that.
		We know scientifically it sweeps fat out of the digestive tract like a broom.
		Reducing the amount of fat your body can store can store as excess weight.
		Well, there is now a revolutionary fiber called chytosan.
		Chytosan, actually.
		It comes from shellfish.
		Not only does it sweep fat, but absorbs 10 times more fat than any other fiber.
		You get this fiber in a new formula called chytoslim.
		And with chytoslim, you can lose weight without changing what you eat.
		No stimulants, general and effective.
		Here's the offer.
		And it's a guarantee.
		You order a 90-day supply of KytoSlim.
		With it, you get an antioxidant moisturizing cream free.
		And then you go to work.
		And if in 90 days you have not lost the advertised weight, you get your money back and you keep the face cream free.
		The number is 1-800-557-4627.
		Once again, that's 1-800-557-4627.
		Would you enjoy working at home?
		I do.
		It's fun.
		Some financial pundits have just about made commodities a dirty word.
		However, if you learn the ins and outs of how to do it, how to approach it with the right attitude commodities can pay off big time.
		Ken Roberts is a financial educator, educator is the word, and multi-millionaire investor and has taught tens of thousands of people how to invest in commodities and manage your own money without depending on a broker for advice and of course having to pay a commission.
		There is a step-by-step process.
		First, you learn how to invest with a no-risk approach by trading on paper.
		In other words, you learn and you trade on paper as though you were using money.
		When you're ready, you'll know it because you'll be making money or losing money, more properly said, because you're just on paper.
		So you will naturally graduate yourself and move off into the world of commodities.
		And I really have talked to a lot of graduates, and they're making money.
		Call 1-888-GOLD K-R-C.
		That's 888-465-3572.
		Ken will send you a free audio cassette titled Real People, Real Money, and a 44-page report that explains all.
		Call 888-GOLD K-R-C.
		If you will now go to my website, you will see the original image released, let's see, on the 14th, no, make that the 15th of January, the one given to us by Prudence and Professor Brown.
		You will see next to it the, well, when I said real, what now turns out to be fraudulent image, and then next to it, the real image, the image from which this photograph was obviously, obviously, and we intend to prove that, taken.
		The real one, the fraud, side by side on my webpage right now as the story unfolds.
		You're listening to the American CDC Radio Network.
unidentified		Music Tune in Tuesday night, Wednesday morning when Art Bell returns to the airwaves from his quickie Mexican vacation.
		Hear all about it tomorrow night on Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
		Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
		This is the CBC Radio Network.
		This is an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
		You're listening to Art's January 16th debate between Professor Courtney Brown and Whitley Streeber.
		And now, back to the best of Art Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, back now to our story.
		And a lot of you will not have heard the original program.
		So I think this may help you.
		That is what we've already done with Prudence Calabri.
		And now, before we really go to Professor Courtney Brown, I'm going to go to him for a moment.
		After two months and on January 14th, as a professional courtesy, I called Professor Brown and said, basically, that's it.
		That the prior week, Whitley Streeber and myself had set a date of January 15th, and if by then this astronomer had not come out with his news conference, we were going to release the photograph that we had.
		The only information that we had that backed up this story at all, that we had kept.
		Now, I had never really promised to hold on to this forever.
		All of you know that.
		I had said I would not do it forever, that there was a time limit.
		There was a time that would come when I would finally release this photograph.
		In fact, there was even a reference to it in that which you just heard from Prudence Calabre a few moments ago.
		Now, Professor Courtney Brown from Emory University is on the line.
		And Professor, before we get going with our session, I want to ask you permission to be able to play.
		On that day, as a courtesy, I called the professor and I said, look, on his answering machine, we're going to release this tomorrow.
		I wanted you to know that.
		And he then made a return call to me.
		Courtney, I want permission, if you would give it, for me to replay that return call that you made to me.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Ark, I don't remember exactly how I phrased that.
		I certainly didn't phrase it with the intention of it being broadcast.
		I don't remember anything back.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, I didn't say I was going to broadcast it unless you give me permission.
		I just think that the people have the right to hear what it is you said to me on the day before I released the photograph.
		If you don't want me to play it, if you will.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I'm not sure I remember it exactly.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I don't remember saying anything I wouldn't want people to hear.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is it all right then to go ahead?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		You might as well.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I can't remember anything that I wouldn't.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, this will refresh your memory.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Well, certainly it will.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Here we go then.
		You give permission then.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Sure, go ahead.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		All right.
		So here is a call that came to my answering machine the day before I was going to release these photographs.
unidentified		Hello, all right.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		This is Courtney Brown returning your call.
unidentified		All right, I got your message.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I know you're planning on doing that.
		I do think it's a mistake.
		I don't think you're going to get any payback from putting the picture up.
		And I think you'd actually get a lot more payback from standing on what you originally said was your word of not putting that up.
		I think actually your audience, a large portion of your audience, there'll be some rabble rousers, but other than that, the large portion of the audience will remember you as someone who stuck to his word.
		And if you put that picture up, they're going to say the opposite.
		And you're not going to come out smiling as nice as you should.
		And I just think that the picture, the picture, it's a blow-up anyway of the original one.
		So just by itself, it probably couldn't trace the astronomer.
		But your public image will probably be damaged by putting that up.
		And I just want to give you my own from the heart feeling that it really is not going to do you any good.
		And in the long run, in the short run, it may look like there'll be a little blip of interest, but it'll be very short-lived.
		And in the long run, it'll hurt you.
		The other thing is, I want to say, please, at least do not mention the university of the astronomer.
		As it is, we already have more information.
		But, you know, I mean, my mother was a journalist.
		I was raised in journalism.
		It is one thing people have to have confidence in.
		It's that when the story is developing, if something sensitive comes about, that the person they're giving their information to, you know, will, you know, keep some things confidential that have to be kept confidential, i.e.
		deep throat during the Watergate affair.
		No one still ever come out with who that person is.
		It will help you in the future for people to be able to come to you when big things start happening.
		To know that, you know, for you to have that persona out there of someone who's stuck to an original, stuck to your word, to your original thoughts.
		Anyway, so Art, I know you may differ from me on this, and it's okay.
		We can agree to disagree.
unidentified		But I just would like you to think about what I just said.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And I really think you could play this to your word business up even more and come out smelling like a rose and actually much stronger.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And I really think that's the better way to go, the more ethical way to go, and I think it's the, ultimately, the better ratings way to go.
unidentified		I think it's better all the way around.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		But anyway, just think about it, and I understand you'll make your own decision, whatever you feel needs to be made.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Anyway, God bless you both, and talk to you soon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, in his own words, that was Professor Courtney Brown on the day prior to the release of the photograph.
		Then we released the photograph on the internet.
		Whitley Streeber and myself did it simultaneously.
		Within 24 hours, we knew that photograph was a fraud.
		We knew that photograph within 24 hours had been taken by the University of Hawaii.
		And here is Dr. Oliver Hynot, who is himself an astronomer, not the one who took the photograph, but a colleague of the one who took the photograph that we are going to discuss tonight.
		Here he is from Hawaii.
		We are speaking with Oliver Hinaux.
		Oliver, do I have your last name correct?
		Is it Hinauts?
unidentified		Yeah, it's perfect.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Very good.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And you work at the...
unidentified		Okay, that's the Institute for Astronomy at the University of Hawaii.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And you work with an astronomer there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What is his name?
unidentified		Oh, Dave Tolen.
		He's a colleague of mine.
		I don't work especially with him.
		He's one of the many colleagues of the Institute for Astronomy.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Myself and Whitley Streeber released a photograph given to us by Prudence Calabre and Professor Brown from Emory University on the 15th of this month.
		I presume that you saw that photograph and recognized that photograph?
unidentified		Well, I did not recognize it.
		It took some time.
		What I did, I recognized that the comet looked like a late 1995 picture.
		And so I started digging in the late 1995 pictures that are on the World Wide Web and found on the website that I maintained that one of the pictures was exactly the same as the one you published.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That photograph was taken September 1st, 1995.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is that correct?
unidentified		Correct.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Let us go through the points.
		You begin by saying that a careful comparison of the central region of the original image shows the comet in the same position with respect to the background stars.
unidentified		Right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, does that mean that it could only have been taken on that day?
unidentified		Oh, it's much stronger than that.
		It means that it has been taken within, let's say, 15 minutes, half an hour from the picture taken by Dave Tollen.
		But the comet is moving.
		So the position of the comet with respect to the star background gives you really the time with a very good accuracy.
		So we know that it has been taken around 8 p.m.
		Hawaiian time on August 31st, 95.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		August 31st, 95.
unidentified		Yeah.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The photograph could not have been taken, you say, from Eastern Asia or Australia.
unidentified		At that time, it was still daytime.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The sun.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The sun was up.
unidentified		Excuse me?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The sun was up.
unidentified		Yeah.
unidentified		So the comet was not visible.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Nor could it have been taken from Western, North, or South America because the comet was very low in the sky.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is that correct?
unidentified		That's it.
		The comet was extremely low.
		That means that even if it had been visible, the image quality would have been very bad because of the turbulence.
		And the image that you published is excellent.
		So it means that it has been taken in good conditions.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		The images of stars on both show the same amount of sharpness.
		Is that correct?
unidentified		That's right, yes.
		So to finish on the location, it's not Western United States, it's not South America, it's not Japan, it's not Australia, that's something in between.
		So the most probable location is Hawaii, which was perfectly located at that time.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is there any way that you can know for sure that this photograph, the photograph given to us by Professor Brown and Prudence Calabri, was exactly the same photograph?
		What other ways do you have of knowing that?
		For example, the telescope used.
unidentified		Okay, as you see on that star, on that image, the stars are not trailed.
		The stars appear round.
		That means that the exposure must have been kept, the exposure time must have been kept quite short.
		Otherwise, the telescope would have followed the comet and the stars would have appeared as trails as on many pictures that have been released.
		So that means a short exposure time and as the comet is well visible that implies a big telescope.
		So we know for sure that the image was taken with a big telescope.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A large university size telescope.
unidentified		Yes, yes, not a small amount of telescope.
unidentified		What is a big telescope?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What size is your telescope?
unidentified		The one at University of Hawaii is 2.2 meters, so that's 88 inches.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Okay.
		And what about the filtering?
		You also mentioned something about the filtering.
unidentified		So another thing is that you see that the relative brightness of the stars in the image that you showed and in the images of Stolen are exactly the same.
		So some stars appear brighter than others, but they all do it in the same way in your image and in our image.
		So that means that the filters used were exactly the same.
		Otherwise, if another filter would have been used, a red star, for instance, would appear brighter in one image than in the other, or a blue star would appear fainter.
		So that means that the filter combination used was the same.
		And the filter combination used by Tolen is extremely peculiar.
		It's very uncommon.
		It was a composite of three images to make something like a real color image, which is something that is not very commonly done in professional astronomy.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The photograph from the, quote, mysterious astronomer was in black and white.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The photograph on your website is in color.
unidentified		Yes, but it's very easy just to turn the color off and then you get the same brightness.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Would there be any reason for somebody who wanted to perpetrate a hoax to change a photograph from color to black and white?
unidentified		I guess that it was to make it harder to identify.
		I don't know.
		That picture of Comet Helbobb is one of the only ones that has been taken in color.
		Because again, it's quite difficult to take color pictures with a big telescope.
		And so to leave that image in color would have pointed immediately to Toland's picture.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is there any doubt in your mind or in the mind of David Toland, the astronomer, that the photograph that we have is the identically same photograph and therefore a hoax?
unidentified		Yeah, there is absolutely no doubt.
		We've been through some of the points, but there are some others.
		For instance, what we call the limiting magnitude, which is the faintest star visible on both images, are exactly the same.
		And that's really something that shows that it was the same picture.
		Another point is that the pixel size is the same, and the pixel size is kind of a fingerprint of the instruments.
		So in our mind, there is absolutely no doubt that the image that you showed is based on Dave Torrent's image.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How conclusive is the pixel size?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How is one to understand, if I might ask you, how do we understand what you mean by pixel size?
unidentified		Okay, the images are made on electronic cameras which are constituted by many little squares side by side.
		Each of these little squares will become one of the elements of the final image.
		And these pixels, these picture elements, have a physical size, it's a few micrometers.
		And the combination of physical size with the telescope is only one scale on the sky.
		So the the pixel will have a given scale on the sky and that scale is typical of the telescope.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So it is like a fingerprint?
unidentified		Yeah, well of course you can copy it and you could adjust an image so that it match any pixel size.
unidentified		But the fact that here we have a perfect match is one more element that proves that it was an image.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Doctor, I can't tell you how much I appreciate your work in doing this, and we have, I have, no interest other than to getting to the absolute truth, and that is what we are going to pursue, is the absolute truth.
unidentified		Well, I think at this point it's the only thing that has to be done in the sense that that whole hail bought story.
		I think now we have evidence is that at the beginning it it was just a mistake and then more and more there were some people trying to to give false information.
		So what we are trying here in Hawaii to do is to every time we have something that appears is to try to find what it is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well there is a big difference doctor between a mistake and an intentional fraud.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And this has to be if it is exactly the same photograph and you are assuring us it is then that makes this an intentional fraud.
unidentified		Definitely.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Doctor, I thank you for doing the interview and I know that you're about to embark on a trip and I wish you a good trip and I thank you.
unidentified		Thank you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Take care.
		Dr. Oliver Hinaut, an astronomer at the Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii, the photograph, original photograph taken, bear in mind now, this was on their website since September 1, the original image taken by Dr. David Tolan.
		When we come back, Widley Striber and Professor Courtney Brown and myself will discuss all of this.
		Microtech, they are developing SMR, specialized mobile radio, and they've been doing it for some time to the degree now that it's already built in New York, LA, Houston, Boston, Detroit, and many more cities.
		But listen, they are offering their last site now to investors.
		So if you think you might be interested, you should act fast because the door will be closing.
		There is some risk, and that's why it's called an investment.
		However, they say for a minimum $8,700 socked in now, you could get back $20,000, $30,000, $40,000 or more plus a yearly income for the rest of your life, and it can be part of your IRA or retirement plan.
		So write the number down, please.
		Better yet, call it right now.
		1-800-444-1049.
		That's 1-800-444-1049.
		If Newt Gingrich had had a digital cellular phone or a digital portable phone, he would not now owe somebody $300,000.
		The phone call he made would have been secure.
		Because with digital technology, one cannot listen on scanners nor other portable phones or televisions or whatever all else you can lose.
		It's horrible.
		Regular analog phones can be heard by neighbors, snoopers, whoever.
		And digital phones cannot.
		So privacy is the number one reason to own a digital phone.
		And you've got to be careful because a lot are advertised as digital and they're not fully digital and you don't know that and you're sitting there broadcasting.
		This one is truly digital.
		You've got to read the fine print.
		That's one.
		Two, it has great quality.
		In other words, it is as clear as a phone you plug into the wall.
		And three, you get great distance.
		I get about a mile from mine.
		Oh, it's great.
		Absolutely great.
		It is the VTech 900 NDL Digital Telephone.
		And the price is $129.95.
		You will love it.
		Call Bob Crane in the morning and get one on the way to you at 1-800-522-8863.
		That's 1-800-522-8863, the C-Crane Company.
		This is the American CBC Radio Network.
unidentified		The American CBC Radio Network.
		This is the CDC Radio Network.
		This is an encore presentation of Coast to Coast A.M. with Art Bell.
		You're listening to Art's January 16th debate between Professor Courtney Brown and Whitley Streeber.
		And now, back to the best of Art Bell.
		This is the CBC Radio Network.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's what it is.
		I'm Art Bell.
		My guest's coming up, Professor Courtney Brown from Emory University.
		And, of course, America's premier writer, investigator, I guess, of ETs, UFOs, things unusual, Whitley Streeper.
		You know Whitley.
		Coming up in a moment.
		All right, back to it now.
		And without being able to review really in detail, obviously, the entire last hour, we laid out a number of things.
		Original statements made by Prudence Calabresi, a phone call made by Professor Brown to me but one day prior to the release, finally, of this photograph that now, according to Oliver J. Hinatt and David Toland and anybody with eyes, is an obvious fraud.
		That photo we were urged to hang on to for so long.
		Now I'm going to bring on Professor Courtney Brown, and he can go at it in his own words, along with Whitley Streeber.
		Professor Brown, are you there?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I'm here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Whitley, are you there?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I am.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I take it you both were able to hear the information in the first hour.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I did as well.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		I think it might be appropriate to start with you, Professor Brown.
		Do you acknowledge that this photograph is a fraud?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Well, Art, based on the information that you sent to me by FACS this morning, which is the email that you were sent, apparently from Dr. David Stolen, looking at all the data and how he analyzed the pictures and so on, and I myself looking at the two pictures, and then also hearing Dr. Himat basically say the same thing.
		It does appear that the picture is fraudulent.
		It does appear that the picture is a piece of disinformation that was given to us.
		This is a very great puzzle to us.
		I have to admit, from the very beginning, when you talked to me about this, what was it, this morning or yesterday morning?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Both.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I'm losing time here.
		I've not slept since I talked to you about this.
		And it is a very, very great puzzle to us because everything that we have told you has been absolutely sincere and absolutely honest from the perspective of all the information that we have gotten.
		But the evidence does seem to suggest that the picture is a constructed picture.
		I mean, I can't walk away from something like that.
		It looks like this is a University of Hawaii picture.
		The things do match up awfully closely.
		And at the same time, we were indeed given this photograph as a photograph, not from the website, not from any website, but as a photograph.
		And in good faith, we just assumed it was what it was.
		Now, you must understand, Art, that this photograph has nothing to do with anything we've ever done with regard to targeting remote viewing.
		We have never used this photograph for anything other than, after the sessions were already in, they were basically sparked by the Chuck Schramck photograph, after everything was done, later on, the astronomer got back to us within about a week, it seems to me, if I'm memory recalled, and said, and offered us these pictures.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, let's stop there for one second, Doctor.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		On that same program, the 14th, you made reference to the fact that you also had a top 10 university astronomer.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Now, are we talking about the first one?
		We talked about the Halebach remote viewing sessions.
		And Prudence was on.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We're talking about the first one.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You made reference to the first one.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Okay, that's where I was on by myself.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, and you made reference to the top ten university astronomer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, the photograph was not described until the second program.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		We didn't have the photograph then.
		In fact, the only thing we had had at that time during that first show, remember, the Schrammex photo had just come out a few hours earlier.
		So we had immediately assigned some remote viewers under blind conditions to go look at the anomalous object following Helbop.
		We got three sessions.
		One literally was coming in as the show, your show, that I was on, began.
		And we went through those sessions.
		Those sessions were completely independent of this photograph we're talking about.
		But later, right after the show, we did what we always try to do.
		We tried to find out if we were right.
		We tried to get some feedback.
		It was an unverifiable target unless we could get some feedback.
		So we called around.
		And we did, in fact, find one astronomer.
		Actually, initially, he had just said that he had heard that there were some strange things with that comet and that there did seem to be an object nearby.
		That's what he said initially.
		But then afterwards, he called us back.
		This is after your show.
		And he said he's gotten more information being sent to him from colleagues.
		Now, we were under the impression that he actually was responsible for these photographs.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, indeed, in that program, there is no question, if you listen to Prudence.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, well, I understand.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Prudence is my employee.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		She's done what I asked.
		She's our webmaster.
		And she described that photograph very well.
		And even when I heard it the second time through, when you played it in the beginning of this program, I was very proud of her.
		She simply described the photograph that I requested her to do for your show as it was given.
		She does not have the abilities to determine if it was a fraud.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, but the astronomer certainly would.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		That's what it seems to us, and that's what's so puzzling about it.
		Now, Art, I want to tell you from the get-go, right from now, I don't have all the answers.
		All the evidence is pointing in the direction of our astronomer.
		But he is an extremely well-respected person.
		And, you know, I tell you, today, all today, since this morning when I first heard about this thing, we have been racking our brains going through absolutely everything that ever happened, comparing everything, looking at everything, looking for some type of reasoning about it.
		We even asked whether the guy is a member of PSICOP, you know, the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of the Claims of the Paranormal, to see if he was setting us up, because maybe he said he just wanted to debunk remote viewing.
		Fortunately, none of our remote viewing was based on that photograph, but the very fact that we gave you the photograph ties us to that photograph.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, you gave it not just to me, but you gave another version of it to Whitley Streeberg.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		No, not another version, the exact same one.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Whitley?
unidentified		Yes.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Whitley, which one did you get?
		There was only one picture.
		Well, actually, there was two.
		One with a circle around the object and the other one.
unidentified		That's the one I got.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		He got the one with a circle.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I got the one with the circle and one without the circle, which I have since given to Whitley.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		No, they're both up on the website, though, Nathan.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
unidentified		Yes, that's correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, I'll tell you something, Professor.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In the phone call that you made to me, you appealed to me as though I were protecting deep throat.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		That is exactly how I felt about it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		With reference to journalistic things.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		That's exactly how I felt about it.
		And by the way, I want to say that I gave permission without remembering very well what I said, but after you had played it, I was fine with it.
		I was glad to put it on.
		It was okay.
		I didn't say anything I was ashamed of.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, well, let me say this.
		In journalism, Doctor, if a reporter sits down and writes a false story, a fraudulent story, they lose their careers, and rightly so.
		And the way I see this absolute fraudulent photograph Is no different.
		In other words, whoever did this deserves to lose their career.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		You know, I'm in agreement with you.
		The only problem is proving this thing.
		Now, for example, let's take a look.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we have not yet said anybody specifically did this.
		We simply know this to be a fraud.
		We haven't said anybody perpetrated the fraud.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Well, look, if it is a fraud, someone perpetrated it.
unidentified		Yes.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		The question is, why did they want to slip it through to us?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, Doctor.
unidentified		That's not the question.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The question is, who perpetrated the fraud?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Whitley, that's the bottom line as far as you're concerned as well.
unidentified		At the moment.
unidentified		Later, the motive might be very important, but I think that the public has a sort of an absolute right to know everything you know about the origin of this photograph.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		So do I. Well, but you're, you know, I've told you everything that we do know.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, Professor.
		Yes.
		And that's what we want.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Now, wait a second.
		Now, Whitley, also listen to this.
		You both may disagree with me, and that's fine.
		But there's two things.
		What if the person actually did perpetrate this thing and actually did was organizing it and the whole thing?
		First of all, we sent this.
		Whoever did it went through a lot of trouble because the person left the paper trail.
		They used FedEx.
		They sent film that was developed.
		I mean, there's a bigger...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But now that they've done it, let Whitley say something.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Whitley, you take this one.
unidentified		All right.
		There's nothing innocent about this.
		It's a fraud, an intentionally constructed fraud.
		And I think you have a rather strong obligation to say where the photograph came from.
		That doesn't necessarily mean that this individual is the one who created the fraud.
		He may also have been duped.
		But it was essential that we know who that is.
		I don't think there's any way of getting around that.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Let me speak.
		There were two possibilities I was saying.
		The first is, what if the person did perpetrate it and actually went through all of this trouble to make this thing the way it is?
		All right?
		What if they actually did try to create this fraud for whatever reason?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You're referring now to the professor.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		To the professor.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, sorry.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So what if he did?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
		Okay, what if he did?
		Well, if we put his name out there, then the very, if he's actually done it with an evil intent, then the very first thing he would do is simply deny it, and we'd be slapped with a libel suit.
unidentified		You said you had a paper trail, including FedEx receipts.
unidentified		Yeah.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		It's a situation that would ultimately end up in court.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Look, libel, Courtney, is only when you have told a lie, a libelous lie about somebody, and you've just told us that you've got an absolute trail to this person.
		Now, by naming him...
		No, Courtney, you are not by naming this person saying that he perpetrated the fraud.
		You're simply saying, I received the material from the following person.
		That's all you're saying.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Now, listen, are you going to listen to me or are you going to argue?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, no, I'm listening.
unidentified		Okay.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		In my opinion, what we have is the fact that it was sent to us by FedEx and that we have a roll of film that was developed.
		That is not, that person could nonetheless say that he said something else and it wasn't that roll of film.
		The point is we would get into a big legal hassle and I don't want to deal with that.
		But there's one more thing as well.
		What if the person actually, what if we misunderstood when he was talking about the various data that was being sent to him from his other colleagues?
		And what if we misunderstood?
unidentified		Let me say it first.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But Courtney.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		No, let me finish a sentence.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, finish.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		What if, in fact, it was our mistake in thinking that these were actually taken by him, and in fact, these were among the other things that were sent by his other colleagues, and that he just literally sent them to us because it was an interesting photograph and didn't check it out in the beginning.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		But in fact, was perhaps sloppy and sending it to us or whatever.
unidentified		Courtney, then there will be real photographs, and they should be released.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Not only.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Not only does that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Courtney, may I say, Courtney, let me finish.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		May I say one word?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I did let you finish the sentence, Mr. No, I didn't, because the point is that would ruin his career if, in fact, it was sent innocently and he was been caught with this.
		It's bad enough that I actually had the photograph.
		It was slipped to us.
		We gave it to you.
		That was a bad enough mistake.
		It doesn't make it any better to go back to the other person because of the other two possibilities.
unidentified		Listen, there's one person in this conversation who's silent.
		The public.
		And the public matters more than anyone who can speak on this radio right now.
		The public has an absolute right to know as much as it's possible for us to tell them about this fraud.
		Now, if the man made a mistake, didn't make a mistake, it really doesn't matter.
		You need to tell us where this came from.
		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, I want to say something.
		Give me a sentence, and then you can go ahead, Professor Brown.
		What you just said, I think, is refuted by what Prudence said.
		She said, nearly quoting, I spent hours and hours talking to this astronomer.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		She spent a long time on the phone with the man.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		So misunderstanding on your part?
		I don't think it was.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		From the beginning, it really did look totally genuine.
		It really did look, from our perspective, we did not, you know, I guess it's not very hard to fool with with regards to slipping up the photograph.
		But the point is, I'm sort of glad the way it turned out.
		We kept our word to the very end and didn't want it released and urged it against it.
		But on the other hand, it was released against our desires, and we found out, in fact, it was a fraud.
		And so now we actually, we both kept our words, and now we know what we're dealing with.
		We found out that, in fact, we were being slipped information that, in fact, was not true.
		Fortunately, that photograph has no bearing on any of our remote doing sessions.
unidentified		But I hope you do get to the idea of motive, because the real question is...
unidentified		Yeah, we seem to be losing, kind of losing the photograph.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm not going to give you the astronomer's name for the two reasons.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		How many times do you want me to say it?
unidentified		What are inadequate reasons?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What reasons?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's tough, Whitley.
		If you don't agree with me, that's fine.
		We have to agree to disagree.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What are the reasons?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I just told you.
		You hardly gave me a chance to say them before.
		Do you want me to?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Repeat them?
		Yeah, I'll do it.
		Repeat them.
		You're worried about legal action.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Look, if the guy actually did, if the astronomer actually, for some reason, was convinced that we had to have this fraud done against us so that we would actually be in possession of a fraudulent photograph.
		Lots of people are in possession of fraudulent photographs.
		And in our particular case, it wasn't a very good thing for us to actually have it and to give it to you and so on like that.
		But for some reason, if this person was actually responsible for it, then I would assume that he would be mean-spirited and want to cause us further trouble if we ever linked his name to it.
		And I'm sure something like that would happen.
		Secondly, if the person really was innocent and gave it to us too fast, an astronomer should have known that that photograph was not legitimate.
		That's the point you haven't raised.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I did raise it.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And that's what I'm really troubled with, that the astronomer should have known just by looking at it that this photograph, something was wrong with it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You qualified the guy as a top 10 astronomer for one of the top 10 universities.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If he wouldn't know that's a fraud, who would?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's the difficult.
		That's what's been so concerning us because we've had such a difficult time accepting the fact that it might have been done intentionally.
		I tell you, to this moment, I'm having trouble with that, but the evidence is pointing in that direction.
		It's overwhelming.
unidentified		It's not pointing in that direction.
unidentified		It's overwhelming.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, it's overwhelming.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Well, you're a big time, even though Bel Prize winners have made mistakes, but I admit the evidence is pointing in that direction.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		But the only way you're ever going to find out for sure is if this person actually comes out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The hell with him coming out.
		This is a fraud.
		It's time to out him, not as the one who committed the fraud, but simply as the one who sent you the photograph.
		There is no legal liability in that.
		If you've got records of that coming to you, then you can give his name and people, the press, myself, others, Whitley, everybody can go to him and say, excuse me, professor, where'd you get that?
unidentified		I mean, the impression was obviously...
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		This is apparently beat up Courtney Knight, and that's okay.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Let me speak, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Get into the truth night.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Let me speak.
		I have given you my opinion.
		As soon as I mention that person's name, and I'm still having difficulty accepting the idea that someone with that type of a reputation would actually do this purposefully.
		I just still having trouble with that.
		And so because I know that as soon as I mention his name, for whatever reason, his career is seriously damaged, I am not willing to do that, especially at this time.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, let me tell you something, Courtney.
		In my opinion, if you don't give his name, then your career is damaged.
		Then your reputation is damaged.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		If you're my choice.
		In other words, Art and Whitley, listen to this.
		This has had an effect on me.
		It's not only lost my sleep, and it has also affected my whole day.
		This is not a good day, as far as I'm concerned.
		But the point is, that is my choice.
		I am taking responsibility for the fact that some information was flipped to me.
		The reality is, since it was not something that Farsight actually did, since it was not remote viewing, since it was not something that we actually did, we had no business actually talking about it.
		We had no business actually even accepting it or mentioning it.
		It wasn't ours.
		We made that mistake.
		I should never, I made the mistake of pressuring prudence to go on the show and actually talk about it.
		I made the mistake of actually.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Courtney.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I accept that responsibility.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		You supplied that.
unidentified		My career?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You supplied that.
		You supplied that to us as cooperating evidence.
		Stand by, both of you.
		We'll be back with the bottom of the hour.
		We have to adhere to the clocks.
		You're listening to the American CBC Radio Network.
unidentified		American CBC Radio Network.
		Stay tuned for more with Professor Courtney Brown and Whitley Strieber on this encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
		Music Hi, this is Art Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, if I knew what was coming next, I don't think it would be nearly so much fun.
		I do a program called Coast to Coast AM, and it's right here throughout the nighttime, the late night hours.
		if you can't sleep or you don't want to sleep or you just would like to join us for sort of an all-night party, be here.
unidentified		Thank you.
unidentified		CBC, Chancellor Broadcasting Company, for the strange and unusual, it's Greenland with Art Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What do we discuss on Greenland?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Two fascinating areas.
unidentified		Is there life after death and are we alone in the universe?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Two ultimate questions mankind's been trying to answer for thousands of years.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We'll be talking about it this week right here on Dreamland.
unidentified		This is an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
		You're listening to Art's January 16th debate between Professor Courtney Brown and Whitley Striber.
		And now, back to the best of Art Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, back now to Courtney Brown and Whitley Streeber.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor Brown, so the answer is: you will not release the name of this astronomer.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Correct?
		And I gave my reasons for it.
		You know, in Art, this is not the first time that a fraudulent picture has come up.
		And you have to emphasize here that this fraudulent picture is not associated with any targeting that we've done as remote viewing.
		Who cares?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It was given as cooperating evidence for the ceramic photograph, which backed the remote viewing that you were doing.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, Professor List.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		That's exactly right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let's try this direction.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You said, no, Prudence Calabrese said in the piece that I played that she had, what, five rolls of film and 200 pictures.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		There were three rolls of film.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Three rolls of film and...
unidentified		Six of them.
unidentified		Released them all.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, released them all.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		No, they're apparently fraudulent pictures.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		We're not going to do anything.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All of them fraudulent.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I don't know.
unidentified		You found out this one is.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		If we release the other ones, I'm assuming you'd find out the other ones were released.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, Whitley, go ahead, say something.
unidentified		You're not going to release any of the other pictures, and you're not going to say the name of the astronomer.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Why should we?
		Why should we release pictures that are obviously fraud?
		It just makes the matter worse.
		It's obvious that you have a situation here where apparently a photograph isn't right, isn't fraud.
		What value is it?
		There's lots of fake photographs out there.
		What value is it to multiply it times five?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, you're claiming you've got these on photographic film, though.
unidentified		On film.
unidentified		Yeah.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		You've said that since the beginning.
unidentified		Send us some prints.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, send us some prints.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In other words, we've got a photograph that has been obviously retouched precisely from one that has been up on the Hawaiian website since September 1st.
unidentified		And I was talking about this.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I was talking.
unidentified		Hello?
unidentified		It was retouched in a computer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
unidentified		Therefore, send us the prints.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I was talking about this earlier.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		You should sort of circulate these photos around again.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you won't send the prints?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's just going to start this whole round over again and start and distract from what we are really doing.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		We're in a remote viewing shop.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, no, it's not.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What it's going to do is clear any possibility that anybody would accuse you or prudence, Professor.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Of what?
		Of making the photographs ourselves?
		If they're going to do that, they're going to do that anyway.
unidentified		Look.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I would think that you would have great interest in seeing to it that the buck doesn't stop with you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And I just, for the life of me, can you Whitley understand why he will not at this point, knowing he was given a fraudulent picture, give us the name of this professor.
unidentified		Or at least the other evidence.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		At this point, look, first of all, you guys are not...
		I've talked to you for a long time.
		We've had long conversations.
		But the point is, you're not an official investigative body that has subpoenaed these things.
		The point is, we have evidence now that strongly suggests that these photographs are not real.
		Now, at this point, I don't know.
		And we are assuming that the rest, at least myself, I am assuming that that makes the other photographs suspect as well.
		They're very similar to that one.
		But the point is, that makes them very suspect as well.
		Similarly, it also brings into question, if this thing was passed to us quickly without looking at it, just assume that it was done innocently in the beginning and the astronomer found it.
		It's very difficult to assume.
		You can criticize me afterwards, but let's say you can see it.
unidentified		Well, yeah, but how can you wait for it?
unidentified		It's just that the assumption that it was done innocently is talking about a ball-faced fraud.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I am not an astronomer.
		I am saying that Nobel Prize winners have been known to make mistakes.
		There was a case just the other day, you both know about it, where there was a Nobel Prize winner and his research companion.
		And there had been some fraud in the research or some accusation of fraud in the research.
		And this Nobel Prize winner had made a mistake and actually signed his name onto something.
		Well, I don't know the details with regard to this.
		And we may have actually misunderstood him with regard to whether he actually was claiming that those pictures were from him or part of the group of stuff that was being collected.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Either way, there's a thousand miles of difference between a mistake and fraud.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Well, I agree with that.
unidentified		We apparently have a balance structure to figure out.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Now, look, we have gone through this.
		We have a picture that's apparently fraud.
		You might as well assume that the other ones are in.
		We have not done anything with the other ones.
unidentified		I think that the public has a right to see the other ones.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So do I. I think the public has a right to know the name of this astronomer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We are not accusing him of perpetrating fraud.
unidentified		We're not accusing anyone of anything.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We're just saying we want to follow the trail.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And if you won't let us follow the trail, Courtney.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Finish the sentence.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		You're then going to say then the buck stops here and you're going to accuse me of doing fraud.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, I'm not.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm not.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Or you're going to find, or somebody else will accuse me of doing the fraud.
		No.
		Let it be.
		The point is that I have been truthful from the very beginning, but I'm not willing to go to the extra steps that you were.
		I'm not going to start this into a chase.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right up until the very day that I released that photograph, and we proved that with that phone call you made.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You were telling me.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I didn't see anything.
		You were very open to the very end.
		You didn't want it released.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, that's right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's my word.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And I'm still glad to the very end.
		And I'm proud of the fact to the very end, I upheld my side.
		I upheld my side, whether it was fraudulent or not.
		Somebody was interested in flipping up some fraudulent information that would cause literally the stir that's going on right now.
		And I am very proud that to the very end, for whatever reasons, I upheld my word to the very end.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The best way to stop a stir is with the truth.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And you're not helping us get to that truth.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I don't like the way you're going about getting to the truth.
		You're demanding.
		Let me speak.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How else would I do it?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		First of all, This was just discovered today.
		Now I have an understanding that the rest of the photographs may not be correct either.
		I also have an understanding that the other data that the astronomer said he was collecting from other people may not be correct either.
		It may be that there's partially good data and partially incorrect data.
		But the whole thing is that that whole body of data that the astronomer has been talking about in my mind now is totally suspect.
		It may have been fed to him or it may have been contrived by him.
		I don't know the difference and I can't tell the difference.
		I am not going to go into a situation where I'm going to name him and accuse him and actually state what's going on.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Don't accuse him.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Well, the point is, just by naming him, by implication, it's going to be accusing him.
		He's going to get 10,000 phone calls tomorrow morning.
		Well, that's my choice to decide whether I'm the one who's going to be doing this.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, you're right about that.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And I have chosen not to have that done to him because I could be wrong.
		There could be something more complicated in this.
		I heard about this just this morning, Art.
		There could be something more involved in this.
		You want me to jump the gun, and I think that's an immature response.
		I think that's the response of a journalist who wants to get the story out.
		That's not the way science works.
		It does appear that there's a fraud here.
		As far as I'm concerned, this particular thing was not used to get a National Science Foundation grant.
		It was not used to claim the discovery of AIDS.
		There's no criminal activity.
		As far as I'm concerned, it's a great embarrassment to me.
		It's an embarrassment to everything that I've been doing here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I accept.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I would like to know why the person actually, or whoever did it, why they wanted to get it to me.
		And especially with regards to the hail pop stuff.
		I don't know that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's ask this then, Professor.
		Have you gone back?
		I mean, this is a very simple question.
		Have you personally gone back to the astronomer since you found out about this and said, hey, bud, we've got to talk here.
		Where'd you get the picture?
		What's the deal?
		Have you done that?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Draw your own conclusions for this.
		I don't know what the conclusion really should be.
		The answer is yes.
		I have personally made phone calls to his lab, to his office phone, and emailed him.
		I've gotten no response.
		Moreover, we have gotten no response from him since about two weeks after this whole thing started.
		So over these last couple months, he's not been returning our phone calls.
		Now, draw your own response.
		It looks terrible.
		I admit, it looks terrible, but that's the honest truth.
		He's not returned our phone calls.
		He doesn't return our email.
		And we have assumed that he simply got frightened by all of this stuff and is actually trying to just, either he's running away from it, but doesn't want to do it, or he actually, we thought that maybe he was actually trying to build the case stronger and waiting for Hailbob to come out the other side or whatever.
unidentified		In which case, it wasn't careful.
		Courtney, you've said yourself that you don't know whether the other evidence you possess is fraudulent or real.
		I feel it's incumbent upon you to let the astronomical community decide that for you because they do know and they will know.
		All you need to do is to release the rest of the photographs and let them decide and let them tell us.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Sometimes there's so much problems with one photograph, you just don't want to do the rest.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I give you Chuck Schramack as an example.
unidentified		I don't.
unidentified		I don't.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no.
		Listen, you ask me a question, let me answer it.
		I give you Chuck Schramack as an example.
		He released one photograph, had to leave Houston.
		Has he released the other 60 photographs that he has of that anomalous object?
unidentified		No.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		He said one was enough.
		That was enough trouble for me to get into.
		So he stopped.
		I feel very similarly.
		I know you disagree.
unidentified		It's all right, Whitley, for you to disagree with me.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		But I don't want to take this thing any further.
		It's an embarrassment to me.
		It's an embarrassment to what I've been doing.
		It doesn't have anything to do with my remote viewing other than the fact that I got a source that I thought was corroborating the stuff that we were doing, and it turned out to be a fraudulent picture that was sent to us, and it has done the job it was supposed to do, which is to embarrass me.
		As far as I'm concerned, I'm closing the book on the situation and the astronomer.
		And if he ever comes out, he'll eventually, either now or in the next life, he'll eventually explain what happened.
unidentified		Either now or in the next life, because I'm not going to go back to this guy.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If this man embarrassed you, as you suggest, then it was an obvious disinformation attempt, something to either slam remote viewing.
		Somebody spawned Brittany Brown.
		So why in the hell would you want to protect his name?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Because I don't do what was done to me.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, my.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I'm sorry, Art.
		You just disagree with me, and you're making it so cynical.
		But the point is, do that if you want.
		Let your listeners make their own judge.
		They can hear my voice.
		They can know my art.
		I am not that way.
		If I get slapped or they don't slap me.
unidentified		There is nothing cynical about what Art and I are doing at all.
unidentified		Nothing cynical.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And what you're not accepting is the fact that a disagreement is possible on this subject.
		It is possible on this subject.
		It's been done by many people.
		Look at the situation on your own website, Whitley.
		You have a picture of some being that looks like a grave, and it looks very close to what you've seen yourself.
		But rather than say it was authentic, as I recall what you said, and correct me now if I'm wrong, you said, you believe it's a fraudulent picture, but it looks authentic.
unidentified		That's what I said.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's what he said, yeah.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Now, in this particular case, because of the source, in that picture, you didn't know the source of this thing.
unidentified		No.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		But in this case, we did know the source.
		And so we said, we didn't say, we think it's a fraudulent picture, but it looks awfully good.
		We said, well, we think it's the real thing.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And we made a mistake in believing the source.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor, if some lab technician or some university computer technician did this and gave it to this professor, surely this professor is not going to want to protect this little fraudulent person who is going to do more damage in the future.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And by not giving the name or not releasing the rest of the photographs, you are protecting that person.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Now, listen, Peter Mark.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		What you've just said is true.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And that person, that lab Technician that could have been his own graduate student or whatever, whoever, whatever, that slipped that photograph in, whatever happened, does deserve some punishment.
		But the point is, it's not me that's going to go chasing that person because I fundamentally can do nothing unless that person, the actual professor, enforces this himself.
		And he has to decide whether he is actually going to do this.
		He has to decide his moral imperative.
		He has to decide whether it's something that he is going to be courageous enough to face and talk about.
		And the only damage that's been done right now has been to me.
		And I'm willing to accept that.
		The damage is to me.
		And look, I know there are listeners out there that are going to be saying, Courtney Brown did this himself.
		There's some listeners that want to say the whole remote viewing thing is a fraud.
		They want to say that the whole thing I've ever done about the ETs is a fraud.
		Some people want to hear that.
		I am not going to say that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm not saying that either.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		No, remote.
unidentified		This photograph has that impact.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		It has that impression on people.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And people are going to have to sort it out for themselves.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		By not allowing us to follow the truth, you are going to make that true, Courtney.
unidentified		Yeah, you're hurting yourself by doing that.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I am making it a lot because I view the future of releasing the rest of those photographs as just a nightmare.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I don't see it as anything productive other than a witch hunt and a thing that's going to be ultimately futile.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Look, there is a witch.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Somebody sat down at a computer and perpetrated an intentional fraud.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And that person already knows who he or she is.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And in addition, I must say that Professor now is almost certainly listening to this broadcast.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, and he hasn't called you back.
unidentified		I hope he helps you by coming forward because Courtney...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But he's killing you now.
unidentified		I mean, this is not good.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		But Whitney, if he's done this on purpose, he's not going to help me by coming forward.
		And he may not come forward simply because he may be frightened.
		If he was duped, do you realize the problem that would be with his career?
unidentified		I mean, a professional astronomer, it didn't take the people at Hawaii too long to figure out what was going on.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		24 hours.
unidentified		Well, exactly.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Of course, it was one of their own photographs.
unidentified		So it's hard to see how a mistake like that could have been made.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Plus, Gordon, you can see.
		Plus, Courtney, the story changed.
		I mean, clearly the impression from listening to Prudence was that the astronomer had taken this photograph.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And then you were making that point that we had earlier stated that the astronomer actually seemed to say, you know, that he made the photograph.
		And I was arguing with you earlier in the morning, saying that we may have misspoke.
		It didn't seem to be that I remembered it that way.
		But after that, he had a collection of information, and this was one of that collection, and it could have been given to him from a senior colleague.
		And then I went back and I talked to Krudence about it.
		And to the best of our recollection, it does appear that what you originally said is what we really, is what we believe actually was originally told to us.
unidentified		Thank you.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		That it does appear, and I think that is literally how we were feeling, and that the sense was that he had ownership or control somehow of these pictures.
		Now, nobody does things in an astronomical laboratory like that just by themselves.
		There's always assistants, so it's always a group picture because there's a lot of, you know, there's not one person behind the lens snapping a shot.
		It's a group thing.
		But nonetheless, we had the sense that it was something different from some of the other information that was being sent to him elsewhere, that it was somehow his ownership of it.
		That's clearly what we got.
		And clearly, we were either grossly mistaken in getting that information, or he lied to us.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Either way, I cannot, I cannot understand why you want to now protect him.
unidentified		No, it doesn't make any sense, Courtney.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Okay, I'm sorry you guys disagree.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I think I've explained myself well, and I don't know if it's good to explain myself, but I'm not.
unidentified		The thing that's so distressing and upsetting to me is that what you have done is to create the impression that there isn't anything else, that this picture and you and Prudence are all that's there.
		Now, that may or may not be a true impression, but if it isn't a true impression, please, for the sake, for your own sake, help us to believe you've got to release the other pictures.
		And to go on and say, oh, it's a big can of worms and so forth is just ridiculous.
		It's not.
		If you don't want to release them, then give them to the University of Hawaii astronomers confidentially and let them give the public a verbal report on it.
		Why not do that?
		You can't lose that way.
		Hello?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Let me think about that.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Let me think about that.
unidentified		There's no reason not to do it.
		None whatsoever.
		I'm no given not to release the photographs by doing it that way.
		Right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What is to think about?
unidentified		I mean, it's a no-brainer, Courtney.
unidentified		It saves you.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Look, first of all, nothing's going to take away from the damage that is done with regard to this.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yes, there is.
		If you were to give us the name of the professor, I would open up a...
		Not accusing him.
		Not accusing him, Courtney.
		Not accusing him.
		Simply giving us his name so we can go to him and find out where he got the photograph so we can get to the little worm that perpetrated this hoax.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Look, if he's not returning our phone calls or answering anything, he's not going to return your phone calls or answer anything.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And if worse comes to worst, he'd simply deny the whole thing, and that would throw the whole thing back on our court.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, you mean he would deny your FedEx receipts?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The ones you claimed you have?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I don't know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The ones you claimed you have?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I don't know what would happen.
		He could possibly deny the content of the FedEx package.
		He could say he was sending something else.
		Regardless, it's authentically a can of worms that has opened up, that is very, very truly a heartbreak on my side because we did, in fact, trust this person.
		And, you know, there's so much evidence that, in fact, it was authentic.
		You know why?
		That, in fact, we were true to our word.
		That we were authentic.
		Because if you remember the show that I was on with Whitley and Prudence.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Listen, we're at the top of the hour.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you feel you have more to say, Courtney?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Just one more minute for it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we don't have a minute.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We're at the top of the hour, so it'll have to be after the top of the hour, and then we'll finish up.
unidentified		All right.
		All right, both of you stand by.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We're going to begin to do a repeat, I think, at about 2 a.m. Pacific time of what we've already done, so those joining late can hear it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This is CBC.
unidentified		This is CBC.
		Tune in Tuesday night, Wednesday morning when Art Bell returns to the airwaves from his quickie Mexican vacation.
		Hear all about it tomorrow night on Coast to Coast AM with Ars Bell.
		Coast to Coast AM with Ars Bell.
		Tonight, Chancellor Broadcasting Company presents one more installment of the best of art bells.
		We take you to that infamous night from January 16th, where the world of Professor Courtney Brown collides with that of Whitley Streeber.
		To debate, the Hailbob Companionship Controversy.
		Look for its hand-rested and ready art bell tomorrow night, Tuesday night, Wednesday morning.
		And now, the best art bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, this is simply typical of the...
		Professor Brown, I want to have something very clear with the audience.
		At no time, at the beginning of all this or up until this very moment, have you given the name of that professor to either myself or to Whitley?
		Is that correct?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		That's absolutely correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And we have asked many times, haven't we?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Many times you've asked.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, this is typical of the faxes coming in.
		Art, obviously, Courtney Brown, in not giving the name of this professor at this point or giving up to at least somebody these photographs, many of them, has no awareness that he stands in the eyes of the public as contributing to the perpetration of a fraud.
		He doesn't seem to understand that his personal integrity and that of the work of the Farsight Institute is at stake.
		He could lose everything, his reputation, by a misguided sense of loyalty and to what?
		And I think that's the critical question.
		Your loyalty to what?
		Somebody who has handed you a photograph that has been proven to be a hoax.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Art, we've talked about this, but you gave one of your faxes.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		You want to hear one of mine?
unidentified		Yes.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Came over just now.
unidentified		Go ahead.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Courtney, stick to your guns.
		There is no paper trail.
		A FedEx receipt is not a tie to a specific role of film.
		That does not something.
		It could be any role of film.
		Now look, Art, let me just say one thing.
		You only gave me one minute, so let me just Go ahead right here.
		Let me just remind you of how sincere we were, evidence of how sincere we were with regard to this from the beginning.
		When we went on your show, I made this stupid assumption that it was my fault to actually think that it was even remotely okay to go on somebody's show and talk about somebody else's data.
		We should never have actually talked about the astronomer's data because it wasn't our data.
		But when we did it, remember, we said there would be that the astronomer had given us a very strong sense, I can't emphasize this enough, that he was going to try to put a press conference together within a week.
		Do you remember that?
unidentified		Yes, very well.
unidentified		Yes.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		If we were not sincere in that information that was given to us, put two and two together, we never would have said a week.
		It would have been seven days made us look like a fool.
		It was obvious that we got this information or we would have come up with some other type of story such as at some point in time in the future he's going to, we said a week.
unidentified		We were very, very much convinced that he was going to come through in a week.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I accept that.
unidentified		Yes.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		We have mud on our face now, but you know what?
		And you haven't said this in the whole show, but please, your listeners, understand this.
		Whoever did this was going after our remote viewing data on the Hailbop, and there's a reason.
		I can't stand by this photograph.
		I don't know why someone did.
		I don't know why.
		Someone sent us some picture that the frauds and someone tried to give us disinformation and associate us with it.
		But the reason was they tied it to the Hailbop remote viewing data.
		That data I will stand by.
		That's ours.
		That came out of our shop.
		That's good data.
unidentified		That was the shipout.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		That's the data.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That has nothing to do with this, Courtney.
unidentified		It does.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		It's the motivation.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		It's the motive for why this is a data.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, fine.
		Then it ought to be the motive, Courtney, for you to straighten this out and let the public realize that it was not you or it was not prudence or it was not somebody else that created this photograph.
		You saved again and again and again.
		This was sent to you by the astronomer.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		The most evidence that I can give you right now is for you to judge our behavior.
unidentified		No, that isn't right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's not right.
unidentified		In my opinion, you can go to the University of Hawaii.
unidentified		There is no reason not to do it.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I'm going to think about that, Whitley.
		I don't make any judgment, Snap.
		I'm going to think about that.
		But the point that I want to make right now is when we said that the astronomer had told us he's going to try to come out within a week, did I just tell you right then and there how absolutely thoroughly convinced we were that this was an authentic piece of information that was going to be.
unidentified		That's words.
unidentified		The fraudulent picture is real.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		We know that the picture is fraudulent.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That is the price of tea in China.
unidentified		Yes.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Look, someone slept us some bad information, and we were stupid enough to go under the Art Bell Show and talk about it.
		That's the bottom line.
		We made a mistake that we're doing that again.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But, Courtney, by the way.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		You talk about remote viewing data, but not about somebody else.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What you're doing, Courtney, by refusing to give any information is you're leaving some little fraudulent person who will do it again and again in place.
unidentified		No, no, no.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Yes, yes, yes.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		The astronomer either is responsible for this himself or he knows that he's been duped himself and he's in an embarrassing situation and it's his responsibility.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So either you're leaving.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I'm not the only person.
		I was the one who was the target for this thing.
		But I'm not the only person in the chain of command here.
		Other people know that this thing happened.
		And as far as this is concerned, I am not the only person that's been given a fraudulent picture.
		You don't need to start a whole inquisition because a fraudulent picture was sent this way.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This is not an inquisition.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It's a simple attempt to try to get to the truth.
unidentified		And since you never gave us the name of this astronomer, Yeah, but Courtney, you're doing nothing to defend yourself and everything, to defend somebody who defrauded you.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		It's not made of a mistake.
		There is a chance.
		There is a chance.
		He may have simply made a mistake in the early on.
		And it has happened to the best of minds.
		And besides that, even if he didn't make a mistake, and if he purposely tried to do this, I still have to consider the legal ramifications to the idea.
unidentified		There aren't any because of the fact that the fraud is real.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		You know, quickly, I'm sorry, but the advice, the legal advice of you and Art Bell does not really something I'm taking too seriously now.
unidentified		We're not necessarily talking about the release of the man's name at this point.
		If you're concerned about that, that's your privilege.
		Although, from a personal standpoint, I can't see what there is to conceal.
		The only thing that you need to consider is giving the negatives, in other words, the roles of film and the prints to the University of Hawaii for evaluation in conference.
		I mean, I know I don't make that judgment.
		You've already said that, but that seems to me like the minimum you must do to defend yourself and your reputation, a reputation which I value at least as much as you do, believe me.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I understand that.
unidentified		Because I know the value and the truth of remote viewing, and I don't want to see that harmed.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I have to make some decisions myself with the investment.
unidentified		But I agree, but I listen to the fact that you should think about doing this and doing this quite soon.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Listen to the facts, and listen to the facts I just got in.
		I am listening real time to the Art Bell show.
		Call me immediately, he says.
		I am an attorney specializing in liability law.
		He is correct.
unidentified		Litigation would be inevitable.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I'm sorry, folks.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I'm not going to get into this can of worms.
unidentified		I was duped.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Let everyone know I was duped.
		It had nothing to do with the remote viewing data.
		That's what I do well.
		As far as I'm concerned, let everyone know.
		Someone passed the Nikki to me and I swallowed it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You are not in legal jeopardy by naming the professor unless you say this professor perpetrated the hoax.
		Unless you say he did it, you're not in any legal jeopardy by simply saying he's the one who gave it to me and allowing the press to go to the professor and say, yo, professor, where did you get this photograph?
		And getting to the person who did perpetrate the hoax, you're not putting yourself in any legal jeopardy.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Ark, if I ever hire you as my lawyer, I'll let you know first.
		But you're not my lawyer, and I take legal counsel from someone else.
		And as far as I'm concerned, I don't want to get into this.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, okay.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		It is a legal problem.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What is it?
unidentified		I told you.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		What do you want me to do?
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		Repeat it for the fifth time?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, and if you feel that we've covered as much as we can cover, It's time to replay the show.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		And let all the audience know, I take responsibility for being stupid enough to come on the show and talk about somebody else's data.
		I was duped.
		I shouldn't have done that.
		But let everyone know I am not backing away from the remote viewing data.
		The remote viewing data is a separate issue.
		And whoever wanted to get me tried to get me because of that remote viewing data.
		And your listeners should put two and two together and look at those sessions again.
		All right, by the way, I want you to know that I respect it dearly.
		And Whitley, I know we disagree, but my love for both of you is constant.
unidentified		Well, I know we need to hear that, Courtney.
unidentified		It's very mutual.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		I know we disagree, but believe me, my respect for both of you is absolutely up to the stars.
unidentified		I hope that this comes out in your guys' favor.
		really very much do.
		I think, incidentally, that something that's sort of getting lost in the...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Courtney Brown, thank you for coming on tonight.
courtney brown ▲ ● ▼		God bless both of you, Art and Whitley, and thank you for giving me a chance to speak my piece.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Take care, and we'll be back in a moment with Whitley Streeber.
		All right, back now to Whitley Streeber, and we're going to begin taking your calls for the balance of the hour.
		Then we are going to go into a repeat of the first two hours, the first two critical hours for those that have joined late so that you get the whole story.
		Now, to Whitley Streeber.
		Whitley, are you there?
unidentified		Yes, I am.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good, good.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you have any comments you want to make, Whitley, before we proceed and begin to take some calls?
unidentified		Well, yeah, I would like to be sure that we don't get lost in the something that shouldn't get lost in the shuffle is that there remains interesting evidence that the hail object is or was there.
		Indeed.
		Indeed.
		The one piece of evidence that I think we can safely remove is the claim that there may have been that there were radio signals coming from it, because that claim I don't think has been supported anywhere.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's associated with the same information path that produced a fraudulent photograph.
unidentified		Yeah, that Brown and Prudence were victims of.
		It would be great if there were more pictures forthcoming from the amateur community, from Chuck Tramack in particular.
		Hopefully that will happen.
		In any case, over the course of the spring, the comet is going to become more and more visible.
		And if there's still anything unusual about it, I think everyone will be able to see for themselves, which is going to be very exciting.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I want to say something, too.
		Whatever else we've talked about tonight, whatever judgments the public will make, and they will, you know, make their own based on what they've heard or will hear, I am still as angry as I was at the beginning at the response to Chuck Scheramek's photograph, poor Chuck, who simply rendered up a photograph and said, hey, what's this?
		And we put it up on the webpage.
		And the rest of the amateur community, including Mr. Hale of Hale Bop and Mr. Sypes and others, just came down on him like a ton of bricks.
unidentified		Like a ton of bricks, yeah.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I don't change my feelings about that reaction.
unidentified		Well, there's a wonderful webpage, the Defense of Chuck Shrannock webpage, which can be linked to through my webpage, through the Hale Bop article on my webpage, that it makes a fascinating case for the object.
		I must say that the University of Hawaii, to its credit, makes a very good case for the debunking of the object.
		But nevertheless, it's still a very live and very valid issue.
		This particular photograph was never part of the controversy.
		It simply became identified as a fraud and went.
		At no time did any of the astronomers involved claim this photograph as evidence of anything, and I think that should be made very clear.
		Any of the named astronomers involved.
		Let me put it that way.
		I refer to Chuck Shrek.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I absolutely agree.
		All right, let us take a few phone calls here.
		Wildcard Line, you're on the air with Art Bell and Whitley Streeber.
unidentified		Hey, Whitley, how's it going?
		Okay.
		Yeah, about Professor Brown here.
		I knew it.
		I said on your Malachi Martin show, I said he's got his neck out so far he's done had it snipped off and handed over.
		But I knew it.
		I knew it, too.
		But see, now I knew he wasn't going to commit to anything either.
		As far as the pictures go, who says it even there?
		He's lost, to me, he's lost all his credibility.
		And I'm a remote sensor in a way, but I wouldn't stick my neck out as far as he did.
		I'd go as far as saying the Trojan swarm will hit us sometime this year, and we will have one heck of a big meteor storm.
		But nothing as outlandish as what he said about the object behind hailbombs.
		Well, I was treated to a lot of private conversation from Courtney and Prudence, and I have to say that it sounded extremely sincere to me.
		And I've been in this for so long and seeing the way that the bunking and the disinformation work, it's always possible that they are victims of this thing.
		It must not be forgotten.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Of course it is, but it is for me impossible to understand why at this point he will not release these roles of film or seems hesitant to, and I don't know.
unidentified		They should go to the University of Hawaii.
unidentified		If the roles of film and the photo prints don't go to the University of Hawaii for further evaluation, I think there's a, well, there's a problem.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Or why you would protect ultimately, I know I'm not accusing this unnamed professor of perpetrating a hoax or anybody else for that matter.
		All I want to do, and I'm sure all you want to do, is follow the trail to who did this.
		And then when we do, we can probably find out why they did it.
unidentified		Well, it's an enormous struggle to get to the truth with things like this always.
		And it seems to be made much harder in this case.
		And it's sad that that's true.
		But I want to just to remind this particular listener that remote viewing, as I said earlier, is absolutely real.
		And we do not want the remote viewing process to be given a bad name because these other questions have arisen.
		Any more than we want to toss out the baby with the bath or something.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's absolutely correct, but that's liable to be the net effectiveness.
unidentified		That's what's worrying me.
		That it will, and after all, the Farsight Institute, as far as I know, is the only really large-scale organization teaching this.
		There are other people teaching it, but they do it on a much smaller scale, and I think it's unfortunate.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, it is unfortunate.
unidentified		It really is.
unidentified		It does seem.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We're at the bottom of the hour.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hold on a moment.
unidentified		Stay tuned for more of the absolute best of our child, right after a word from your local sponsors.
unidentified		Music by Ben Thede This is CBC.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This is Art Bell for Dreamland.
		Coming up this week, Robert G. Keats, author of West Virginia UFOs.
		You ever wonder what's going on in the Mountain States East?
		We'll find out Close Encounters in the Mountain States, coming up this week right here on Dreamland.
unidentified		We'll be right back.
		You are listening to the best of Art Bell.
		From the Kingdom of Knowledge, Coast to Ghost AM continues with Art Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Back now to Whitley Streeber.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Whitley, are you there?
unidentified		Yes, I am.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, good.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We've got a good half hour to finish up here, and a lot of people who would like to speak to you.
unidentified		Great, well, let's go to the phone.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, first time caller line, you're on the air with Art Bell and Whitley Streeber.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Hi, my name is Brad.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, Brad.
unidentified		And I'm an amateur astronomer, and I've worked with scopes, and I have a 10-inch Newtonian reflector of my own.
		I've also used a scope at the University of Washington here in Washington State.
		And I happen to know that in order to use the scope, you have to log time.
		And it's no big deal, but there is quite a waiting list.
		As I am sure there is at the University of Hawaii.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		All this log time is kept on everyone who uses the scope, whether they are a student or a professor.
		Yes.
		And if you guys are serious and you'd like to determine who it was that was using the equipment, we know that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We know that, sir.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Whitley.
unidentified		Yeah, the man who made the astronomer who made the legitimate photograph, which is the one without the apparent object near the Hale-Baugh Comet, has freely stated the fact that he made this completely legitimate photograph.
unidentified		What we don't know is who added the false object to that picture, and unfortunately there's nobody to log that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		And the only path we have to follow the truth, if the truth even matters, and I think it does, to me it does, is to either get the name of the astronomer or to get the roles of film, the alleged roles of film, and take a look at those even on a more private basis.
		And I talked to Courtney earlier in the day about that, about doing all of this investigation even more privately, and he's not willing to do that.
		And I just, I'm lost at that point.
		I can't imagine that Courtney is going to allow this person who handed him a fraudulent photograph, whoever did the fraud, for it to stop there and hurt him and not get to the truth.
		It hurts everybody.
		It makes no sense.
		I've thought it over a million ways, Whitley, and it makes no sense.
unidentified		Well, let's hope that he delivers those roles of film and the prints to the University of Hawaii as soon as he decides that it's clearly the course of action he should take.
unidentified		Right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wildcard Line, you're on the air with Whitley Striber and Art Bell.
unidentified		Hi.
		Hi, this is Vicki in Honolulu.
		Hi.
		Hi.
		Hi, Vicki.
		My question went back to what the lost collar just said, but I wonder, in order to make the fraud, in order to add that article to that print, wouldn't he have to have some kind of an original print?
		And how would he have accessed that?
		Would that have been a problem?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, the answer is easy, Vicki.
		The photograph in question, the only photograph, has been on the Hawaii University's webpage since September 1st.
		So all they had to do was take that photograph and modify that photograph.
		And if you look on my webpage, you will see an example of the photograph given to us by Prudence and Professor Brown.
		And right next to it, you will see the original photograph on the Hawaiian website since September 1.
unidentified		Okay, and I have one other comment.
		Yes.
		It might help us understand Courtney Brown's position.
		Yes.
		You know, he sounds like he's coming from a moral point of view because he said, you know, if he's flaps, he doesn't slap back.
		And if he is a Christian and he is a remote viewer, he may have some thoughts going around in his head that we aren't aware of, you know, about the future coming.
		And he may be trying to behave in a crisis-like manner by turning the cheek.
		Well, perhaps that's true, but at the same time, the perpetration of fraud is, in that sense, also a sin.
		And I think it's very important that all of the principles and who did what is made clear in this situation because it places the rest of us in such a helpless position.
		We can't know, if we don't know where that picture came from, or the additional evidence isn't given to someone who can evaluate it for us, then we're left blind.
		And this is not a situation in which we need to be left blind.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And worse yet, Whitley, it leaves somebody who perpetrated an intentional fraud out there to do it again.
unidentified		To do it again to some other victim.
unidentified		And, you know, I'm well aware of the fact that other remote viewing groups have been victims of complicated and devastating debunking efforts and in one case, some amazingly destructive website hacking.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		And so he really needs to come to his own defense in this case.
unidentified		I think very, very much that he does.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		By the way, Whitley, I know you're really dragging tired.
		You're in the middle of a gigantic book tour.
		You're right now in California.
		Where are you going to be on your book tour?
unidentified		Well, tomorrow I'm going to be in Los Angeles.
unidentified		And then I believe I go from there to Las Vegas.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, but where are you going to be in L.A.?
unidentified		I'm going to be at a bookstore in Torrance.
unidentified		And the way people can, I must tell you that I'm not sure exactly which one it is, people can find out by going to my website, www.streever.com, and go to Whitley's Corner and to my schedule, and you can find out everywhere that I'm going to be.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, then the following day, Las Vegas.
unidentified		Yes, and from there to New York.
		And I must, incidentally, thank everybody who has come pouring out to see me at the bookstores.
		It has been awesome.
		And I really am so glad that they're receiving my book the way they are.
		I'm very grateful.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, onward we go.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Whitley, Streeber, and Art Bell.
unidentified		Hi.
		Good morning, Art and Whitley.
		This is Gary calling from Alma, Arkansas, KWHN Country.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, sir.
unidentified		The two of you have very succinctly put your arguments to Professor Brown, and I tend to agree with the two of you.
		However, there's something else that's been troubling me with this regarding some other guests that you've had both on this show and on Dreamland also.
		I recall a statement made by Father Malachi Martin that remote viewing was nitroglycerin for the soul, and evidently, perhaps this time it may also be nitroglycerin to the reputation.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It may be, and it may be that being a good Christian and remote viewing are mutually exclusive.
		I really don't know.
		I do know Ed Dames came on the air with Malachi, as you may recall.
unidentified		Yes, I did.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And they did seem to come to a meeting of the minds.
unidentified		Yes, they did.
		I have very little doubt of the fact that remote viewing does, in fact, happen.
		After listening to Father Martin, now I have questions as to the function of it and how it actually does, in fact, work.
		We're hearing Father Martin's story, and then we're hearing the reality of scientific remote viewing, and I'm not really certain as to which is which.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I want to say, I too believe that remote viewing is a valid, real discipline, and I'm scared to death that what you heard discussed tonight, if it doesn't move, is going to result in damage.
		There's no question about it.
		And that damage could be stopped right now if Professor Brown decided to do that.
unidentified		Well, absolutely.
		I feel like that you and Mr. Streeber have put your point very, very plainly, you know, that it would be so simple to stop this.
		I'm not going to make a judgment.
		I'm really not qualified to make a judgment.
		However, you know, I can't myself see any reason why he couldn't at least submit the rolls of photographs to someone that's expert at examining them and perhaps getting a judgment from them on the authenticity or where they aren't authentic.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You agree, Whitney?
unidentified		I agree completely.
		Incidentally, Art, I have now gotten into my notes, and I'm going to be at Borders, 3700 Torrance Boulevard from 4 to 6 in the afternoon.
		On Saturday, the 18th in Los Angeles.
		that's going to be my opinion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Borders is, I'm sorry, where?
		All right.
		You don't know about Las Vegas, do you?
unidentified		Yes, I do.
		I can, my Las Vegas will be also at Borders, 1445 West Sunset Road in Henderson, Nevada.
		That is 7 p.m. on Monday, January the 20th.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, that'll be an evening.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Excellent.
		All right.
		Very good.
unidentified		I'm glad you got that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I wanted to get that on.
		West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Whitley Streeber and Art Bell.
		Hi.
unidentified		Hi, Art.
unidentified		This is Dave in Northern California.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Dave.
unidentified		Hi, Dave.
		And I'd just like to say that I've been waiting with great anticipation following this story.
		And I'm really kind of let down, and I could hear in your voices when you're talking to Professor Brown that you were, too.
		I'm afraid that listening to him and the account, and it kind of sounded to me like he was tap dancing around a lot, actually, around the issue and different things.
		And I'm just wondering, really to me, it almost sounds like it could have came from him in order to boost his work he had already done on the subject.
		And I don't know, I don't know the person personally as you do, but I just had a real hard time with his reasoning and not bringing forth any more information.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, I would like to tell you, I've never met Professor Brown in person.
		I have talked to him privately on the telephone, aside from doing the public shows.
		Most of my communication with Professor Brown, 90% of it, has been here on the air.
		So on a true personal basis, I can't say that I know Professor Brown.
		Only my dealings with him here on the air.
		And again, the public will make its own mind up based on what was said.
unidentified		Well, I do know both Courtney Brown and Prudence Calabrizi and have met them personally.
		And it's terribly difficult for me to believe that they are anything except themselves in some way the victims of a hoax.
		And I certainly hope that that's true.
		They are, to all accounts, lovely and very competent people.
		And if they were somehow involved in this, it's unfortunate because it's such a waste.
		I really can't believe that that's true.
		I think that they probably have been somehow, in some unlikely way, duped, and I hope that they find their way out of it in such a manner that they can let the rest of us know convincingly what happened to them.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, a lot of the audience, Whitley, thinks, or thought, I guess I should say that you and I were privy to all the information, the name of the professor, the university, all the rest of it.
		And in fact, for the both of us, not only were we not told, but we had something at nothing more than the rumor stage.
		And I don't think I'm, I'm certainly not clear.
		I don't know the guy's name, and I don't even know the university.
		Well, I mean, I've heard a rumor of what university it might be, but I don't know that's true.
unidentified		It came here, and I followed that rumor up, and I actually did narrow it down to a single individual.
		But given what has happened here, I'm...
		I am truly in no position to mention his name because my guess is that this is not the right person.
		I mean, I would be surprised if it was at this point, and there's nothing I can do about it.
		I think that it's, I mean, I don't know whether the university name that was said is not the real one, and so on and so forth.
		There are just too many questions for me because I'm different from Prudence and Courtney.
		I've never had any direct contact with this individual, and my identification of him is essentially guesswork.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, east of the Rockies, you're on the air with Woodley, Street Her, and Art Bell.
unidentified		Hello.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hello there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Turn your radio off, please.
unidentified		It's off.
unidentified		Okay.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Where are you calling from?
unidentified		I'm calling from Janesville, Wisconsin.
		All right.
		I've been listening for about an hour and a half to your show, and I kind of got the impression that the guys, Professor Brown, told that the remaining roles of film were probably junk and weren't worth wasting his time on.
		And then the other thing is if they find this astronomer with his ass kicked, they won't know that he's done it because he hasn't given up his name publicly.
		Well, yeah, but he has said that he had six good prints off of that roll of film.
		And that means there are at least six negatives and six prints that could go to Hawaii.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And be examined.
unidentified		And be examined.
		And that's certainly enough.
		It's a start.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		That's right.
		Because to all appearances, and you're welcome to look at my website, and I believe it may be on yours as well.
unidentified		It's on mine too, I believe now, yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We have, as a matter of fact, I did it.
		I took the Hawaiian photo.
		All I did was crop it to the same size as the one that Prudence and the professor sent, turned it to the right 90 degrees, and that's it.
		And we put them side by side.
		They're obviously the exact same photograph.
		That means the photograph came from the website.
		That's where it came from.
		Or had to have come from.
		And the photographs are a way of saying, oh no, it didn't come from the website.
		It came from inside, for example, an observatory.
unidentified		Yes, exactly.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And so those photographs are indeed very important in terms of trying to follow the path.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Whitley Striber and Art Bell.
unidentified		Hello, gentlemen.
unidentified		This is Ken in San Diego.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		Hi.
		I listened to the show since midnight Pacific time.
		And there's a possibility you guys really haven't talked about.
		And it sounded like when Professor Brown was talking, he almost sounds like he was set up on purpose, and not just as a prank, but...
		No, I agree.
		Yeah, we've tried to talk about that because it certainly is possible.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But if he was set up, then he should have every interest in getting to the people that set him up.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And even more importantly, stopping somebody who's out there perpetrating hoaxes.
unidentified		Well, the thing is, if he was set up with serious malice, and it sounded like he had more information than he was letting out, and he might believe that that's exactly part of the setup, is if he goes forward with trying to pursue it, it sounded like he was afraid that it would get even worse for him.
unidentified		And that's exactly what the person who set him up wants him to do, is to pursue it so he can be damaged further.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But he indicated he had a record of who sent those photographs.
		It surely, you cannot get in legal trouble for pursuing the truth.
		The truth is a legal defense.
unidentified		Well, yeah, I know.
unidentified		I was a student of journalism, so you're correct in that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And what happens, if you were a student of journalism, you tell me, if a reporter writes a fabricated story, what happens to that reporter usually?
unidentified		Well, we saw what happened, I forget her name, but the reporter that wrote the story about the supposed street person and got a two with her prize, and then it turned out to be a hoax later.
unidentified		Yeah, I think her career was pretty much in the toilet accident.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I rest my case.
		Well, Whidley, we're just about out of time.
		It has not been an easy night.
unidentified		No, it's been a tough night.
		Yeah.
		Well, all I can say in conclusion is that I surely hope that Prudence and Courtney can see their way to making it very clear that this other evidence, the photographs and the roll of film, the six prints, is entirely real by sending it to a neutral party for further examination.
		That's, I think, the next step that has to be done.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I hope that happens as well.
		I must say that my feeling is that it's not going to.
		But, you know, that's conjecture.
		We'll have to wait and see.
		He said he would think about that.
unidentified		Well, hopefully he'll think about it and do it because it's got to be done.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Uh-huh.
		I quite agree with you.
		This has been a long and very difficult odyssey.
		And again, it's worth saying to the people that although this photograph is obviously a hoax, that does not necessarily end the controversy with regard to sheramics and other photographs.
		That's very true.
		So I'm going to pray, Whitley, and as I'm sure you are, that we're going to get some clarity on this and that as a result of this, remote viewing is not going to be severely damaged.
unidentified		No, absolutely not.
unidentified		I'm going to pray for them and on behalf of the right of the public to know the truth.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In the meantime, Whitley, get some sleep.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You've got books to sign and places to go.
unidentified		Places to go.
unidentified		Thanks a lot, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Thank you, Whitley, and good night.
		All right, coming up next, if you missed it, the first two absolutely critical hours.
		And I mean absolutely critical hours.
		So listen to what's coming next.
		I'm Art Bell, and this is the American CBC Radio Network.
unidentified		If you've missed any part of tonight's debate between Professor Courtney Brown and Whitley Straeber and you'd like to have a copy on TIP, dial toll-free at 1-800-917-4278 and ask for tape number 97-0210C.

▲