[SteveH]

I think mostly ABOVE TOP SECRET was considered by those in the field as fairly solid for the time. It may have taken some hits in parts since then but I don't recall over what. I think other titles were considered less rigorously researched by Good and were considered less authoritative or believable or some such.

I think UNEARTHLY DISCLOSURE is back up there on research etc.

OK, thanks. However, I did get a sense from reading Good's earlier work that he has a tendency towards hyperbole, along lines reminiscent of Chariots of the Gods. LMH seemed to give somewhat more evenhanded treatment of similar material and reports (IMHO).

Personally, I would be cautious of supporting anything Good has to offer unless it's thoroughly vetted by others.

Footnote 19 . . : UFOCUS, vol 2, no. 1, 1997, pp.7-11, ed. Dr Leo Sprinkle, The Institute for UFO REsearch, 1304 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80524, originally published in CNI News, ed Michael Lindermann.

Thanks.

I don't know about the blood chem analysis on that score.

With all the carcasses available, it should prove amenable to something like a mass spectrograph analysis. (Hey, maybe they can call those CSI guys!)

[Quix]

Thanks.

You could be right about Good. I just consider him above average.

But even the best are BOUND to have a LOT of disinformation mixed in because of the nature of the phenomena and the government's relationship to it . . .

ON TOP OF the disinformation purposely put out to whomever by the ET's themselves. And their stories are more varied than KOMMIEKERRY'S!

Thanks.