From: Jerry Black <blackhole60@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 16:48:25 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Sep 1999 10:00:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Roger Evans' Open Letter To Jerry Black


 >From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
 >Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 20:44:21 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roger Evans' open letter to Jerry Black


 >Re: Roger Evans' open letter to Jerry Black

 >>From: Jerry Black <blackhole60@hotmail.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 07:05:23 PDT
 >>Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:19:47 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Jerry Black's Open Letter to Friedman

 >Previously, Jerry Black proclaimed:

 ><snip>

 >>We have
 >>proven conclusively through the work of Mr. William G. Hyzer
 >>[and his son James] that photograph #19, the famous road-shot,
 >>is without question, a double exposure.

 >Jerry,

 >For the record, I'd like you to provide specific technical
 >details of just how Mr. Hyzer and son proved conclusively that
 >photograph #19 (or any photo, for that matter) is a double
 >exposure.

 >You'll excuse my somewhat terse tone, but I have very little
 >room for people that pontificate about something that they know
 >little or nothing about. Since you have recently made quite the
 >stink about the same thing in the world of ufology, then you'll
 >understand my disdain that you consider yourself a "self
 >appointed expert" on the subject of photographic techniques or,
 >at the very least, on the subject of photograph #19 and its
 >validity.

 >Make no mistake; this posting is neither in support of nor
 >against the validity of photograph #19. It is a fundamental
 >examination of whether or not you practice what you preach. How
 >can you, Jerry Black, prove that photograph #19 is a double
 >exposure?

 >I know the answer. Do you?


Mr. Evans, let me first state the comments I made in my letter
to Stanton Friedman concerning photograph #19.  We have proven
conclusively, through the work of William G. Hyzer [and his son
James], that photograph #19, the famous roadshot, is a double
exposure - without question.

I am tired of people taking literally everything I say. When I
said 'we have,' I meant myself, Rex Salisberry, Barbara Becker
and Zan Overall, the re-investigating team that worked on the Ed
Walters/Gulf Breeze case, have proven conclusively [through Mr.
William G. Hyzer] that photograph #19 was a hoax.

I did not mean to imply that we are photographic analysis
experts. The experts are William G. Hyzer and his son James.

Even Jerome Clark has said in his letter that I could not match
photographic analysis ability with Bruce Maccabee. I challenge
anyone to produce information from my website where I have
claimed to be a photographic analysis expert.

To the contrary, I am the one who has surrounded himself with
experts in all types of fields to help me in my UFO
investigative work. I have a soil-sample expert here in
Cincinnati that I use whenever anyone claims that a UFO has
landed or a circle of depressed grass is found on their
property. I have a lab in Dayton, Ohio that will analyze any
piece of material that I bring them - if a person claims to have
a piece of a UFO or an implant, this lab will analyze that
material for me. I have a psychologist who works out of one of
the major hospitals here in Cincinnati that I have met on three
occasions, who has agreed to work with anyone I bring to him
claiming a UFO experience. I also have a photographic analysis
lab on the East Coast that will analyze any photo or video that
I present to them. I am still hopeful that William G. Hyzer, if
the case were to ever arise, would do further photo analysis if
necessary. I also have a private investigator that will work
with me on verifying identification of persons various
claimants. I also have two polygraph experts at my disposal:
Hugh Jones from the Gulf Breeze area, and Cy Gilson from
Arizona. I have tried to surround myself with these
professionals so I can utilize their services when needed. I
have never, at any time, claimed to be an expert in any of these
fields. That is why I have retained the services of these
professionals.

Mr. Evans, if you would like specific technical details of how
William G. Hyzer had proved conclusively that Photograph #19 was
a hoax, then I would suggest that you contact the Mutual UFO
Network, and have them supply you with their journal which
contains Mr. Hyzer's final report on the issue.  You will find
all the technical information needed.

However, Bruce Maccabee and Jeff Sainio, claiming to be
photoanalysts, claimed that Mr. Hyzer's analysis is in error.
They claim that because Ed Walter's pickup truck was loaded with
building bricks, that the hood of the truck was titled in such a
position that there would be no reflection of the UFO from the
hood of the truck like Hyzer had claimed. They also contend that
there is luminosity coming down the road towards the truck from
the light shining on the pavement. Mr. Hyzer has claimed that
there is no luminosity in his analysis of the first-generation
photograph coming down the road toward the truck, from the light
shining off the pavement. This means that the UFO was not on the
roadway when that shot of the roadway was taken.

Here is what you need to decide: Hyzer had stated to me on the
telephone that no matter how many bricks were on the back of the
truck, or however dirty or dented the hood was, there SHOULD
have been a reflection of the UFO seen on the hood of the truck.
Mr. Hyzer also claims, from review of his first- generation
copy, that there is no luminosity coming down the road from the
light shining on the pavement. Jeff Sainio has told me on the
telephone, using the same first-generation copy which Hyzer was
given, that he can see -with the naked eye- the luminosity going
down the road.

So you, Mr. Evans, will have to judge: why would Hyzer, with all
his professional equipment, see no luminosity while Sainio would
claim that with the naked eye and same picture, see luminosity
coming down the road?

I invite you to refer to my website, and address the page which
relates to the experience and background of William G. Hyzer. If
you choose, after that, to believe Jeff Sainio and Bruce
Maccabee over William G. Hyzer and his son James, that is your
option. I, however, believe William G. and James Hyzer's
reputations are impeccable, and when you take a close look at
all the other evidence in the Gulf Breeze case, you will find no
evidence whatsoever that supports the contention that Ed Walters
had taken photographs of an alien spacecraft.

As I have done with many other people -and continue to do- I
invite you, Mr. Evans, to call me. I will hang up and call you
back at my expense, and will be happy to discuss any and all
portions of the Gulf Breeze case with you. I am one of the few
people, I am told, who has their name, address and phone number
posted on the internet, so that I can be contacted at anytime
they wish to discuss anything I comment upon.
I am hoping you will do so.

Sincerely,
Jerry Black
6276 Taylor Pike
Blanchester, Ohio 45107
(513)625-2613

blackhole60@hotmail.com

Website: http://members.xoom.com/blackshole/