by glubglubglub » Thu Sep 15, 2005 1:47 am
There's no explicit discussion of it in that 'interview' -- if there is a legitimate answer to your question I'd guess that it's one of the following (assuming legitimacy of the whole shebang, of course):<br>i) the experiment -- complete degaussing of large, mostly ferrous rods (from afar that's a boat for you) and subsequent ongoing degaussing of the magnetism induced by their passage through the earth's magnetic field -- would have depended or proved to depend significantly on the size and mobility of the rod, and between that and securing power supplies it made sense just to test it on a boat...if you have a choice between testing a 40+foot iron rod of boatlike diameter or a boat, the boat's easier to find.<br>ii) some other explanation is available that's obvious to anyone who actually has familiarity with the field and is therefore omitted -- 'w' doesn't make much effort to make his commentary accessible to people unfamiliar with the major players in naval camouflage research, and omitting some obvious -- to him -- details wouldn't be out of character.<br><br>Some additional thoughts:<br>i) You'll note the article with the dismissing take on Charles Allen/Carlos Allende paints him as some kind of idiot savant prankster, but the example prank -- faking a heart attack after researching the condition pretty extensively -- isn't that of a fabulist...Allen's motivation escapes me, but at least his cited prank is grounded in fact. <br>ii) If we take as operating assumption that Allen based his pranks on fact, his annotations take on some interesting significane: with our operating assumption in place we'd have to assume he had some reason for believing some version of Einstein's UFT had succeeded and allowed people to blink in and out, LM's and SM's actually do duel in our skies at times and live under our seas, etc...I don't know how warranted the above operating assumption is -- or how closely his claimed sources in his annotations would dovetail with the sources that inspired him -- but such an assumption would at least cast him and his info in new light; even as disinfo it takes on a different character.<br>iii) The stuff in the interview about the extreme amounts of work put into stealth technology and the extreme care taken to keep the development of stealth tech top-secret matches Nick Cook's findings very nicely; given that, both the prospect of some ship-scale invisibility project and the creation of an incredibly elaborate ship-based disinfo scale seem very reasonable (and not mutually exclusive possibilities).<br><br>End of rambling...suffice to say this puts the Phil. Experiment out of the circular file bin and into 'reopened, but a real mess and of very low priority mode'. <p></p><i></i>
