Re: Ray Stanford, Time Travel, and Dinosaur Footprints (Part 1 of 2) (LONG)

["C. Laibly" <laibly@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu>]

I am appalled at this "message". 
Having corresponded with Ray (and finding him to be a very pleasant
person)...this made me sick. Shame on Sue. 

On Fri, 5 Feb 1999 SueSharPei@aol.com wrote:

> Ray Stanford, Time Travel, and Dinosaur Footprints (Part 1 of 2) (LONG)
> 
> [This posting is in two parts, both being sent to the list server at the same
> time.  Please read this part before reading Part Two, which is titled, "Ray
> Stanford, Claimed Alien Contacts, and Credentialing Issues."]
> 
> INTRODUCTION:  Over the past year, several list members have in postings
> mildly raised questions about certain opinions or associations of Maryland
> dino footprint collector Ray Stanford.  Stanford has generally responded with
> sarcastic comments and demands that certain subjects immediately be
> dropped.  I believe that the information below is pertinent to evaluating some
> of the statements that Mr. Stanford has made in certain postings over the past
> year.  Specific documents referred to below can be requested by e-mailing me
> off list.
> 
> "ASTONISHING" COLLECTION:  Stanford's remarkable success in
> locating dinosaur footprints in Maryland was the subject of a feature story in
> the BALTIMORE SUN on June 4, 1998 [also printed in the DETROIT
> NEWS (www.detnews.com:80/1998/nation/9806/19/06190116.htm)]. 
> BALTIMORE SUN science writer Frank D. Roylance wrote that Stanford
> "has amassed an astonishing collection of early Cretaceous footprints of
> dinosaurs and flying reptiles."  In just four years, Stanford, described as an
> "admitted 'total amateur' paleontologist" has "found more than 150 prints of
> up to a dozen species -- several new -- in a region where teeth and bones had
> hinted at barely four," the Sun reported.
> 
> TIME TRAVEL?  No doubt many students of dinosaurs have fantasied about
> how wonderful it would be to travel back in time and actually see those 
> magnificent creatures in their native environments.  But in years past, Ray
> Stanford proposed to take time travel outside the realm of science fiction. 
> For years, Stanford promoted the construction of a machine he called "the
> Hilarion Accelerator" that would, he suggested, allow a living human body to
> be physically transported back in time.
> 
> If that really were possible, paleontologists would be standing in line to
> make
> the trip, right?  Don't you want to know more?
> 
> PREVIOUS CAREER:  The SUN article did not mention Stanford's previous
> career, primarily in the 1970s, as the leader of the Association for the
> Understanding of Man (AUM).  AUM was an organization with a national
> membership, headquartered in Austin, Texas.  I have access to a sizeable
> private collection of literature dealing with what might be called
> "unconventional" religious (or quasi-religious) groups.   This collection
> includes a substantial body of printed and taped material by Stanford, much
> of it published by AUM.
> 
> The central focus of AUM was the content of Stanford's so-called "psychic
> readings."  It is necessary to briefly explain this "psychic reading" line of
> work.  After entering a purported "unconscious" or trance state, Stanford
> would give long discourses on diverse subjects, with tape recorders running. 
> Some of these discourses were attributed to "the Source," identified as "the
> unconscious and superconscious mind and spiritual being of Stanford," an
> intelligence credited by Stanford's followers with wide-ranging clairvoyant
> and precognitive powers.
> 
> However, on many other occasions, "voices other than that of the Source
> speak through the unconscious Stanford . . . speaking in various accents and
> inflections," as a 1977 AUM membership solicitation explained.  These
> voices were identified as exalted spiritual beings, members of an ethereal
> association called the "White Brotherhood," archangels, and even Jesus
> Christ himself -- all speaking courtesy of Stanford's "borrowed" vocal cords,
> of course.  Some of these "Brothers" identified themselves as members of a
> UFO-operating alien race called "The Watchers."  
> 
> Examination of the AUM material leaves no doubt that the "Stanford
> readings" were the major "drawing card" for the group's dues-paying
> members and its contributors -- indeed, the organization's raison d'etre. 
> These "readings" guided the activities of the entire organization.
> Transcripts
> and tape cassettes of the "readings" made up the great bulk of the AUM
> publications catalog.  
> 
> [Considering the above background, it seemed rather audacious for Stanford to
> tell
> Australian paleontologist Dr. Paul M.A.Willis, "You sound more like a
> soothsayer than a scientist!", when Dr. Willis challenged Stanford's
> speculation about the identity of a dino trackmaker (see Stanford posting of 4
> Feb. 1998).]
> 
> A TIME MACHINE?  Well, how does all this relate to time travel? 
> Prominently featured in the AUM publications, tapes, and promotional
> materials were plans to build an large machine known as "the Hilarion
> Accelerator," and a building to house it.  The design for this "Accelerator"
> had been dictated by "the Brothers" speaking "through" the entranced
> Stanford.  The device was described as a metallic egg-shaped chamber that
> would house a human subject.  When the exterior of the egg was charged to
> "around three million volts electro-static charge," it could produce a great
> enhancement of many paranormal powers for the occupant, Stanford claimed.
> 
> In a tape-recorded lecture to the annual AUM membership conference on
> August 24, 1974, Stanford told his followers that "the Accelerator" would
> allow spiritually competent subjects to teleport physically from one place to
> another, but also to PHYSICALLY transport their bodies BACK IN TIME. 
> Stanford described vividly how this would occur:  A human subject would be
> sealed within the Accelerator, which would then be charged up.  Then,
> Stanford explained, "He [the subject] would begin to glow.  His body would
> disappear instantly or fade out," being transported back "to walk the sands of
> ancient Egypt 5,000 years ago. . . . he will materialize a physical body in
> ancient Egypt."  The only danger, Stanford explained, was that a subject
> might allow himself to be cut off from the Accelerator-induced state,
> get stuck in the ancient past, and die there.
> 
> Stanford also explained that a friend had volunteered to use the planned
> device to become "the first Alley Oop."  This was a reference to a comic strip
> cave man who co-existed with dinosaurs.  
> 
> It appears that AUM more or less petered out around 1980, although a book
> of Stanford's "psychic readings" (FATIMA PROPHECY) was reissued by
> Ballantine Books as recently as 1990, and apparently is still in print.  
> 
> Although Stanford announced in 1974 that construction of the "Accelerator"
> laboratory would begin that year, I found no evidence that the actual device
> was ever constructed.  Perhaps AUM's members and financial backers did not
> provide sufficient financial support for what would apparently have been an
> expensive construction project.
> 
> Now the same man who promoted that fantastic concept is attracting
> attention because he is credited with finding many types of dinosaur tracks
> where nobody else ever found them.   The June 4 Baltimore Sun story quotes
> Robert Bakker of the Tate Museum (Casper, Wy.), as stating of Stanford's
> footprint collection, "It is priceless . . . a time machine."
> 
> Did he say "a time machine"?  Come clean now,  Ray Stanford . . . did you
> finally build that time machine after all, maybe in your basement?  Late at
> night, do you shut yourself inside the Accelerator, hurl yourself back into
> the
> Cretaceous, locate the best dino watering holes and trails, and then return to
> contemporary Maryland to mine those sites for tracks?  
> 
> And if so -- don't you think it's your duty to begin to share your toy with
> your
> fellow paleontologists?
>      
> CONCLUSION OF PART ONE:  Kidding aside, some serious issues are
> raised here, which will be further addressed in Part Two.  [Anyone desiring
> further documentation on any specific statement in this posting can send an
> inquiry to me off list.]
>