Jump to content

Philadelphia Experiment a laugh to Eldridge crew


Recommended Posts

Sometimes, it seems, people who want to believe in things like the Philadelphia Experiment are so busy chasing down newspaper clips and other obscure documents, they forget to listen to those who were most directly involved.


In this case, the Eldridge crew themselves:




I've read decades of unsubstantiated drivel on this story. How come no one takes on board (no pun intended) what these dudes are saying?



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we will just have to wait till time travel technology is perfected so we can go back and observe first hand what happened. My favorite is James Corum. He is a respected scientist that did confirm radar invisibility is real. He and a group of scientists investigated to see if there was indeed any truth to the radar invisiblity mythology. Using Tesla's Egg of Columbus apparatus his group was able to duplicate radar invisibility.


James F Corum Analysis


I know the info is sparse on actual invisibility but I have come across articles on the net of inventors claiming to have succeeded in creating a machine that makes the occupant go invisible. These machines were popping up right around the turn of the 20th century. So if machines causing radar invisibility are real and the technology did exist at the time, then it isn't a far stretch to speculate on the existance of real invisibility machines. Afterall lightwaves are just higher frequencies of radar emmissions. It was wartime at the supposed occurance of the Philadelphia Experiment. Just put two and two together. Stealth technology existed at that time for that type of experiment.


And I have to pose this conclusion as well. If radar stealth can be achieved using this technology, why don't we use it today? Is it dangerous? How would we know it was dangerous unless we had tried it?



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. As I said...unsubstantiated drivel.


Corum's team by self-admission were looking into scientific ideas supposedly associated with


the Philadelphia Experiment story "for fun."


So what?


Even if what Corum says adds up it doesn't actually prove a single thing. It doesn't come close to backing up the supposed details of the story which doesn't just involve invisibity but teleportation as well. And your allusions to inventors on the net who can give substance to these things doesn't add anything either. I could point you in the direction of people who claim all sorts of weird and wonderful things but ultimately are in pocession of nothing except the usual smoke and mirrors claims.


So lets -as you put it- put two and two together:


A} This still in no way confirms the story itself.


B} You give absolutely no answer as to why the entire ship's company don't just deny all of this stuff as conspiracy sci-fi crap, but they think its actually hilarious. They are laughing at the adherants of this wives tale and their sad devotion to the notion that it was an actual historic event.


What is your explanation for this? Let me guess - have they all been mind wiped by their terrible invisibilty experiences? Have the government replaced them all with exact replicas? Have they been hypnotised by alien technology?


Explain the attitude of the Eldridge crew! These are not shadowy figures half-glanced through a third hand internet report. These are real guys, with real lives and they really did crew the ship in question during the time period in question and they are actively laughing at you.


Please explain this. Without changing the subject that is.



Link to comment
Share on other sites



I can see you are in denial. I just want the whole truth. I don't know why the members of the Eldrige crew speak as they do. It will definitely take some more detective work. Not all the pieces of the puzzle mesh. I like Corums investigation because he proved scientifically that radar invisibility is real. Those are cold hard facts. If this is a fabricated story, then how did the story teller know about radar invisibility? I think there is enough smoke in this one to keep things smoldering for quite some time to come. The fact that radar invisibility technology exists at all seems like a smoking gun to me. And then the fact that we don't use this type of radar invisibility technology today is also of interest. I would like to know why it isn't used.


So I do agree you have a bunch of people that say they were the crew of the Eldrige and the Philadelphia Experiment didn't take place. At least not with that crew aboard. So what.



Link to comment
Share on other sites



So it was 'another' crew.




And I'm the one in denial?


Presumably these guys were sneaked on and off board between the regular crew's shifts, eh?


Perhaps it was when they were having their cocoa this massively elaborate scientific experiment took place?


Or perhaps the original crew was quietly tucked up in bed before the powers-that-be teleported the Eldridge to Philadephia (as presumbaly it must have been first - as it's 'real' crew said they didn't visit that port at all) before all the sci-fi shenanigans took place.


Now its not just the Eldridge crew members that's laughing.


Its me too.


Whay you describes as cold hard fact (given the evidence of the loosy goosy nature of your critical faculties) I have a feeling I would see in much more cautious light. For crying out loud! There are people who have apparently impressive scientific qualifications all over the net that are full of hooey!


Speaking of which...just checked out the rest of that Mantauk site.


You know, it is posssible to be so open-minded, my friend, that your frickin' brain falls out. :)



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

No one ever claimed that 'the' crew of the Eldridge where part of the experiment.


There was a small set number of people on the boat at the time, not an official crew. Also its true that the log books for the dates of the experiment and where the Eldridge were do not match up.


Some time after the experiment the Eldrige was sent abroad on loan. Since then for reasons unknown the US wanted the Eldridge back.


Some old official crew members that claim they have never been able to officially ascertain whether it happened or not, is not proof that it did or did not occur. I think you should realise that that is all they can actually claim. Yes? They are not chained to the boat 24/7


The philadelphia experiment goes back further then the film. Its only after the film did it go more mainstream. By your response it would suggest you werent aware of this, or the Crew were.


There is little to no proof that the PX experiment occured. However the Montauk programs certainly do have weight to the stories in the strange occurances of montauk town. There are many odd things that suggest Montauk was a real incident (even though its riddled with dis-information).


If this has weight behind it (seeing as it is an offshot from the PX experiment) its also gives weight to the PX case itself.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was in boot camp in 1975 my DI told us of the Philly experiment. He said he was on the other ship and the Eldridge did disappear and reappear again, then it disappeared again by itself. He said the men that survived the experiment would be sitting in a bar and suddenly they would disappear and reappear again. He said they didn't know where the ship went until 1963 when it appeared in the same place only 20 years later. This would be the first time for time travel and I'm sure it has been perfected since and even more in the future.So now that time travel is established, it can be said that time travel has been here forever. when you read the bible, the people were always getting news of the future, how else is this possible but through time travel.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you need to do a little more reading on Montauk and the area area around montauk base.


Forget the PX, we're not dense. We are all quite aware that there is technically little evidence to prove it happened. However there really are some strange goings on around montauk base that fit with peoples accounts of the montauk projects.


So really, before you suggest that we dont know what we're on about. You should go away and read the more recent related projects that were subsequent to the Philadelphia Experiment. Seeing as really they are the same story. The P.X. was just a small part.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I the more I look into your Montauk business the less I am impressed. For one thing many of the sites devoted to it seem intent on describing Von Neumann up front as the inventor of the modern computer. He patently was not. If the bozos that do the research into this sort of nonesense can't even get the verifiable facts straight how can they possibly convince me of the more wacky goings on they claim?


Now...unsubstantiated...it begins with a 'U' in case you need some help.


Please forgive my confrontational writing style. Its difficult to remain polite what with all the monkeys flying outta my butt...



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think you are quite getting what you are reading.


But thats fair enough.


Unbiased also begins with a 'U'. Incase you needed help. You should exercise this minset when you read about new things. Something tells me that with your original attitude you were never going to get very far with montauk anyway.


Kind regards,





Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether you think that I 'don't get' what I'm reading or not is of no concern to me.


One person's supposedly open mind is another's closed book. The whole Montauk saga does not stand up to any real scrutiny whatsoever. Bielek is discredited. Its just another bunch of baloney and time will prove it so.


Your belief in this (like the Titorites in their time travelling clown), in something that has no real credible evidence, will continue (possibly for many years) but it does not make it correct. Why is sci-fi shenaningans more credible than the idea that people have always made up wild and bizarre stories and have lied and deceived in doing so?


George Adamski presumably still has a few (sad) faithfull...unwilling to accept many, many years after his unconvincing flying saucers and Venusians fabrications that they were the subject of a hoax. I wonder would you still give credence to George and his Venusians on the basis that he claimed they were real? I'm sure they appeared much more credible at the time.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're forgetting one thing though,


I have admitted on here many a time that the reality of montauk or the PX may be another story.


What I am getting at though, Is that there certainly have been some strange occurances in Montauk town that fit in to Bielek/preston/duncan's (and the other people that have spoken out about it) story.


I have also stated on here that if any of it is true, then most likely they will also be disinforming as much as informing. This may and may not be on purpose.


George adamski was a totally different case, with just one witness, who at times led an almost cult following going on blind faith.


Most of the people interested in montauk have a general interest in some of the information said participants claim to have been privy to. nothing more.


But i expected you to miss this anyway. By your very name 'skeptisauaus', i never assumed you would give it the time of day, regardless if you did a bit of checking up or not.


kind regards,





Link to comment
Share on other sites

My self-moniker of 'Skeptisaurus' is perhaps misleading. For one thing the word 'sceptic' simply means 'someone who maintains doubt.' And in the field of paranormal subjects this can only be a healthy thing.


As a youth I had a huge, unbound interest and enthusiasm for the likes of UFOs and indeed in particular 'The Philadelphia Experiment'. My approach to these things was unquestionably that of a believer and there was no end to my fascination with the possibilities of their being a reality to them.


As an adult, however, being more experienced in the ways of human nature and the infinite motivations of human belief, I found myself questioning the very foundations of these type of phenomenon and now regard the wild theories connected with them with more level headed thinking. I take much more of a 'Fortean' viewpoint than before. Especially now my criteria for what is regarded as 'credible' evidence is so much more rigorous - as it should be.


As a result it always strikes me as odd how many people would rather leap to the acceptance of a fantastical explanation to any story than the more mundane but more plausible one to do with human deceit and lies no matter what the motivation for such deception might be.


As a person who was once the succesful perpetrator of a schoolboy UFO hoax myself, I know that the human desire to put one over on our fellow human beings is almost unlimited in the same way that the capacity to be an unblinking-believer of the apparently inexplicable is as well.


From my viewpoint, strange goings on of any kind are only as good as the veracity of the claims. And when it comes to actually exploring the actual evidence of the likes of a Montauk for example,


I've seen nothing that would lead me to conclude that the so-called evidence is above repproach.


Add to this the usual, myth-making cloud of chinese whispers the paranormal community lends such an event and it can always appear more plausible than it is in actuality.


Your argument is coherant, but to my mind, ultimately unmoving. :)


P.S. I was drawing comparisons to George Adamski more in connection with the John Titor case. Here, many choose to believe the word of the one. Though with regard to Montauk, does it really matter how many people add to the lie? It would still (at the end of the day) be a lie.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes you are correct, It certainly would still be a lie if more then one person claims it,


But unlike Titor and Adamski. There would be an almost absurd amount of effort put in for very little reward. Take beliek for example. His 'fame' from the story is as negative as it is positive. mostly negative. He, from what i have last heard, is far from rich from this story. And is in financial trouble. He has not made enough money for it to be financially practical, yet he continues to speak on it.


Preston, Al, and duncan....whether lying or not, are very well educated and have a genuine knowledge on physics, esoteric fields, radionics and electronics. They could all be earning more money and respect in regular jobs. Al, wasnt 'technically' educated in this area (of esoteric science). Yet is highly knowing on unconventional metaphysicas. Duncan is having mental problems with some of the darker areas of the projects he was involved in. They seem to have on/off relationships, yet still maintain each others stories.


Stewart swerdlow is also a very genuine character. He also has given much info on the story. Montauk also works in to its accounts, links to radionic history, modern technology and many other UFO incidents that are yet to be disproved. They also factor in radionic theory as per Wilhelm Reich techniques, and go into in-depth explanations on his theory. If you read their information regarding subtle energy fields/orgone/ radionics/ and mind control you'll see its more then just an exotic story people want to believe is real. Far from it. A lot of this theory (especially) whether it has been proved yet or not, is very real. Let me assure you.


You can still go to jail for openly practising Wilhelm Reich thoery in the US.


But still, I'm not saying that the whole thing is for real. Only, like 'Billy Meier' Its one of the very few, credible accounts of offworld projects and events. I'm far from saying everything that comes out of their mouths is true (especially in Prestons case).


It is not your average group of highly educated guys who sat around one night and said, "hey, why dont we spend years faking involvement in above 'black budget' projects that explain most of todays current ones and at the same time factor it in to almost all other credible UFO accounts, for little to no recognition and financial gain".


to do this would [if this is the case] border on mental insanity. As its obviously not fun for any of them any more. be sure to know that all of them, have spent a lot of money and resources on trying to find out the full story themselves.


But of course, granted, you can never know for sure. If it was fake - it would far succeed any other fabrication yet made. Compared to Adamski and titor. It would be on another. level.


Kind regards,





Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree fundamentally with the idea that it would 'border on mental insanity' for these characters to cook up these type of claims. (though insanity may well be an issue).


For one thing, why should it be necessary for people to claim extraordinary things purely for finacial gain? The huge majority of hoaxers to my mind do not have cash as a prime motivation. When you are dealing with psychological motivations, the ins and outs of people's minds are as complex and myriad as can be imagined. The bottom line is that many of them simply crave attention, the kind of positive reinforcement derived from feeling special or unique when they are seen as the keepers of a special experience, secret or knowledge: a degree of almost mystical importance in the eyes of the believers. An importance that would make the taunts of nay-sayers tolerable. How else can you explain David Icke and his claims of shape-shifting twelve-foot tall lizards running the earth disguised as the likes of Clinton and the British Royal family? He has no proof for these claims, but he knows its difficult ultimately to disprove them so if he argues his case well enough, enough people will believe.


Admittedly, Icke does now make a living of sorts from his claims. He tours the lecture circuits, talking on radio and peddling his videos and books on the net. Which, again, only proves the Barnum addage that 'there's one born every minute.'


I have no doubt whatsoever though that money was not Caros Allende's motivation for his original, teasing contact with Jessup. His goal was simply to place himself at the centre of something. And he was clever with it, too. Telling the good doctor just enough to make him believe there was something to Allende's claims of inside knowledge, mixed with just enough truth and half-truth to make it all seem just possible. A really good hoax, set in motion in this manner can very soon reach a sort of critical mass of interest which then allows it to be almost self-perpetuating. I refer you again to the Titor case. On other boards that has developed an almost religous zeal amongst its defenders.


So I don't believe Montauk would represent vast amount of effort for very little reward. Whose to say what someone else's personal psychological agenda is? What needs or desires they might seek to satisfy? Preston in particular looks like a guy that could benefit from the limited celebrity this sort of thing generates.


The nature of human beliefs and how they are developed is at least as mysterious as anything claimed by the likes of Preston and co. Very often these things develop organically, without any need for discussion amongst the protaginists. More often than not, I imagine, once there claims are made public it becomes necessary that they really do believe what they are saying.


In 1950's britain there was a tabloid story concerning a pregnant woman who claimed that her child was not her husband's but that of a 'space person with long flowing golden hair' who had appeared one day in her living room. She had been selected - as so many people were back in the 50s - by an interplanetary parliament based on Venus that boasted the likes of Jesus on its council. Her husband seemed happy to back up the idea and all the neighbours vouched for her good character. She made no money from her claims but was briefly the centre of newspaper interest.


Recently a magazine attempted to track her down to see how her space baby was getting on but it seems neither she nor the space kid were keen to talk about it.


So what would you rather believe? That lacking any truly conclusive evidence there is a fifty year old member of the Venusian Space Parliament working in the accountancy business in Surrey, unhappy that their elected position has not been recognised? Or that the lady in question had various psychological reasons to make it all up and her now middle-aged son is just plain embarrassed about it? Well, I don't hink its lacking in an open-minded viewpoint to conclude with common sense that the answer is most definitely the latter...


I don't care how much weight you care to put in Tesla technology or anything to do with Reich's research. There is no real evidence whatsoever for any of Montauk except for the accounts of a few key people whose veracity and claims for themselves I doubt would really stand up to any real scrutiny.


I have gone from someone who wanted absolutely to believe in the reality of the Philadelphia Experiment to someone who concludes that it simply did not occur. And if it didn't occur the whole Montauk thing is phooey too.


You say that you're far from saying that everything that comes out of these people's mouths is true. Well, if that's the case you may have reason to believe that some untruths have been told. So why stop at one lie? Adamski, let us remember, used to serve burgers near the observatory where he had his encounters. Before you knew it, he'd elevated himself to a full professorship working in the observatory itself. Many of those taken in by him never really looked into his qualifications I'm sure.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree with most of what you say, therefore it just comes down to weighing up the bits you personally find valid.


For me - being interested in radionic application for a couple of years now, i find most if not all their information on this subject more then interesting, and very valid. As far as i know they do have proper qualifications.


Regardless, they do know radionic theory, and that is for sure. Jessup in my mind is a dropped factor. I don't buy his personality. However just because he craved to be the center of something, it certainly doesn't mean it 100% is made up.


neither projects have 'real' evidence. You just have to read people experinces around montauk town, the base layout, the fact that even electricians are at a lost to explain the power used at the base and so forth etc etc....and make up your own mind as to the extent of it.


Opinion will always be spilt.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're quite right. Neither projects have any, as you put it, 'real' evidence.


This is an awfully big admission.


Because it means that any conclusion can only only be based on the frail and historically unreliable testimony of individuals. Judgement must rely on somebody's opinion of those supposedly involved, the claims of peripheral characters and lots of (in my opinion) unsubstantiated hearsay.


For example, you say there are electricians who have been baffled by the power set-up at Montauk. Easy for you to say this. But is that a 'real' fact ot just something you read and accepted on some paranormal website? How do you convince me? These electricians...where are they? Who are they? What exactly are they claiming and who has set about confirming both their qualifications and what they are basing their statements on?


Direct me to the reputable and indisputable source of this information.


Extraordinary claims require, as they say, extraordinary proof. But these things NEVER seem to provide any. Not even for the verifiable stuff. In fact, do you not ask yourself, why do these things never seem to have anything truly verifiable about them at all? It is the work of moments to claim something on a website somewhere...but considerably more work for someone to chase it to ground and find how much 'real' substance the claim has.


Where are all these people supposedly harassed by armed government agents just for being around Montauk? And - a bit of common sense here please - if this is the lengths the powers-that-be will go to, how come Preston's been allowed to publish not one but THREE books detailing the goings-on there?


This is one of the big problems of the internet. Forget Preston's books, independant sources that seem to back up this sort of thing are lapped up almost unquestioned by the paranormal community and before you know it, its been absorbed by a self-perpetuating, growing myth that becomes increasingly difficult to disentangle.


Human beings are just plain unreliable as witnesses. Even if no deceit is actually intended they still get it wrong. I mean, Jeez, half the survivors of the Titanic couldn't agree whether it went down in one piece or two... (and the ship was only the length of a football field!).


So...if the entire thing hangs EXCLUSIVELY on the testimony and claims of people as you admit - and I don't care how many people - then Occam's Razor stipulates that the simpler explanation has to be the correct one...


There are plenty of people who claim its all b/s...why not believe then then?


As you said, just because Carlos Allende (not Jessup mind - Jessup was the scientist he wrote to and who had, at least a reasonable grasp of 'the scientific method' unlike a lot of the so-called researchers who looked into the case) was a fantasist and wanted to be the centre of something doesn't mean it was 100% made up. But then, after exhasutive decades and decades of research and there is still 100% lack of 'real' evidence what's more likely, eh?


The fact is these bozos just made up a hoax that was helped along by the myth-making power of the net.


The key individual's responsible have already been discredited in a number of ways...why waste your time trying to think of ways it might still be true? You might as well be an Adamski apologist or believe in the Venusian accountant. (Hang on, maybe he is from Venus but he's just 'forgotten' because of the way cosmic rays are filtered differantly through the Earth's atmosphere!)


P.S. Radionic theory may, or may not have some validity. But even if it does I reckon all that adds is sheen of woolly techno-babble possibility to this mad, sci-fi, self-agrandizing b/s.


You're probably right in that opinion will always be split.


But when it comes down to those who have read the relevant facts to do with Montauk, it will be split between those who wisely dismiss it for the reasons I've stated and those who will always be looking to go the extra mile to believe it - at least in part - because they want or need to so very badly.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

The electricians thing, That was from the report of a guy that spent a long time researching the the case.


Unlike a lot of other people that just read and believe or not, he went and actually explored the area.


He had some very strange experiences. Its by far the best information on the subject. I believe at one point some-one asked someone who was reading the meters for the Electricity about the place. And he replied that the few buildings of the based could not possibly be using the large amounts of power thats fed to the place.


then theres the 'Park rangers', who petrol like police. They get very uptight with adults that wonder on to the base. But dont say anything when they see children playing on the grounds.


If you PM me. I'll look for the link and give it to you.


You could just say the guys lying. but he put a lot of effort in where most people dont and found some suprising things.


PM me.


Kind regards,





Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've PM'd you for that link. Many thanks. I will be very interested to read what you describe as the best information on the subject.


Once again, what's important here is what people can back up with cold hard facts. Not just what people claim or say. That is the scientific method. Not the loosy-goosy approach so many in the field of paranormal adopt and pass off as the scientific method.


If you look up the Montauk project on Wikipedia:




...you'll see that some versions of the story involve the Yeti. The Yeti for crying out loud! And much of it is clearly derived from the 1980's sci-fi film 'The Philadelphia Experiment".


Well, that's all very entertaining, but where is a single iota of verifiable proof for this or any of the other claims for Montauk other than someone's hearsay evidence?


I will read your electricians testimony with interest. Be in no doubt I will do so with an open mind, but I'm not expecting to be impressed.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I read your PM Olly and what a disappointment it was.


In fact I find it hard to believe you've read a word I've written here.


Where is that link?


Instead of supplying me with the link you said you would - the one where you heard this electrician corroborating weird goings-on at Montauk - you insetad cut and paste some interview between someone called George Pantalous and alleged (but unidentified) crewmembers of the Leon, formerly known as the U.S.S. Eldridge, claiming other strange goings-on.


None of this, of course, NONE of it has any verifiable factual basis at all though.






lets try again shall we?


Where did you get this source of information? Who is George Panatalous? Why does he not identify any of the people he's supposedly interviewing? When did they take place? Why would the Leon, now a Greek ship, still be using an American ship's log from years before? Why would the captain or the engineer allow mysterious cables to mess up their ship? Why are none of the witnesses to strange goings-on identified? Why did you fail so completely in providing the indisputable information you claimed?


You said it was 'the best information on the subject' Olly. Well, where is it?


You see, its easy to post things on the net and say they are fact...


"A scientist today said that there was a large tea-pot shaped object spotted hovering over the Pentagon yesterday. Many eye-witnesses (including a four-star general) confirmed the sighting and some experts believed there has been a blanket ban imposed on the media to prevent them from discussing it."




But backing it up with hard, verifiable facts is something else entirely.


This whole thing is so much hot air.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sent you a PM yesterday. Totally unrelated. As i thought that you would be merely interested in it, I found it and gave it to you when i read it. I did this as you said - despite your view on the subject - that you were actually interested in it at one time. This was yesterday.


I have just sent you the link that i spoke of. I had to search to re-find the site. However had i read this PM i wouldnt have put the effort in. I find you to be very infantile and quick to grab the wrong end of the stick without looking for any context.


Like i said in the PM, i have no desire to prove anything to you. I'm merely offering you some info that you might not have read - which in my mind is actually quite well researched and written - and which should probably be read by most people who are interested in the story. Its less fantastical but more backed up then the other stuff you'll read. It proves nothing but some of the strange activities that go on around the base, still today. Or at least the late 90's


The guy has an email address and i believe his address is on the report(s). So theres something more solid for you.


People always assume when someone thinks something holds water, that they should prove it so to everyone who doesn't. Yet i would also ask you to remember; i could easily ask you to 100% disprove the whole saga. And not just on unsubstantiated opinion. Which you keep rambling on about, When in fact thats all you, yourself, is giving. please remember this.


There is also a good piece via that link, that talks about the self claimed 'beliek debunkers' and their 'evidence', which in fact is just opinion - often much of which is based on information they had misread.


P.S. you do know that they are not talking about 'the Yeti' don't you? You should read something thoroughly before you make assumptions. Which i'm seeing is a re-occuring pattern here. If i told you something was football shaped, It doesnt mean i'm talking about a football.


There is only one version of the story, told in many parts. all of them factor in 'JR'.


kind regards,





Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Educate yourself' the site is called.


This is a little difficult to swallow in the light of someone who doesn't know the difference between Allende and Jessup.


And when it comes to the notion that I need to provide 100% proof for my point of view, I have to disagree. When it comes to wild and laughable tall tales, I'd say the burden of proof lies entirely on the shoulders of those that originate them.


None of this stuff convinces. So I simply repeat what I wrote at the top of this thread: Unsubstantiated drivel. And to believe otherwise, in my opinion, is the very definition of infantile.


Al Bielek is a sad if not contemptable con-man and I very much hope for your sake you haven't wasted your money buying any of his junk or ( as he asks ) made "an extra donation" to him.


Kind regards



Link to comment
Share on other sites

What in gods name are you on about :confused:


Yeah the sites called educateyourself.org


Some of your comments really are beyond me. Considering you thought the 'yeti' was involved in montauk. All you know about is some of the philadelphia experiment and non of the sebsequent projects after that. Which are only about the other 90% of the whole thing. you read a scrap - then come back with some badly opinionated comment on how correct you are to believe the whole thing is a hoax.


It honestly reads like a kid whos trying to get one over.


Yes i know the difference between allende and jessup, granted i made an error, when reffering to Allende.


The link was to two a very large reports (which i named specifically) which obviously you couldn't have had the time to read before posting....and i doubt you will. Again i find your mentality a total waste of time. Whats the point in stamping your feet because i gave you a link a day late, then when i give it to you, make snide remarks about the name of the site and dont bother to read the parts i gave you the link for.


Like i said if you don't believe the story at all, and find it so laughable - then dont bother posting about it and wasting your own time. It really is that simple.


personally, i find this to be highly boring now....like i said, i have no interest in converting people. If you want to have an argument about it, then i suggest you ring up Al, Preston or one of the others, and do it with them. Though if you do, i suggest you read a lot more before doing so.


Kind regards,





Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Create New...