Conspiracy I: The Philadelphia Experiments

Sorry for the forfeit, but I was busy around the time it was due. Also, I think that 5 rounds is a bit much. Now to negate my opponents argument. >>There are several reasons to not believe the testimony of Allende/Allen: 1) His testimony directly contradicts that of the captains of the Eldridge and the Furuseth. [1]<< This shows that there is an obvious cover up from the upper level participants. Also, I could flip the statement and say that the captains claim contradicts the testimony of Allende. >>2) His testimony is incompatible with what we know of the science that would be involved in making something invisible. [2]<< Just because the science behind invisibility isn't known to the general public, doesn't mean it isn't there. Einstein and Tesla were behind this; there obviously was some scientific basis. Not to mention, scientist Dr. James Corum, who later worked for the National Security Agency, examined the Philadelphia Experiment and came up with the following conclusion: "The analysis would appear to lend credence to the hypothesis that something more than mythology is involved, and it renders plausible the conclusion that sufficient motivation exists to actually conduct a "Philadelphia Experiment" to examine radar stealth on ships with electric drives. Independent of whether our assumed values are practical or not, the analysis, which uses no phenomenology that wasn't known subsequent to 1938, would probably have brought WWII Naval investigators to the point of radar stealth experimentation. In fact, it would have been derelict behavior for the Defense Science Research Board not to have conducted such experiments if it were aware of the Phenomenology (as it must have been) in 1943." - Dr. James Corum http://www.bielek.com... >>This page () provides evidence that Cameron never existed and was in fact made up (an alias) by Bielek. "Larry James" - a pseudonym - claims to want to transfer his soul to another body, just as he claims was done with Cameron's soul... which proves "Larry" is lying as well.<< Cameron existed. This is his picture: http://www.bielek.com... >>2) Bielek only developed a "passionate interest" in the Philadelphia Experiments in 1988 - after the movie came out [1]. 3) Bielek claims his involvement in the Philadelphia was "blanked out" before 1988 - when the movie came out [1]. 4) Bielek falsified information about "Dr. Kurtenauer" and probably did so about Nicholas Tesla [2].<< You are providing nothing but theories and assumptions based on various coincidences. >>6) Swerdlow claims to have been aboard the Eldridge as the SS officer Johannes Von Gruber - never happened [4].<< Who better to verify this than the man who actually witnessed himself being aboard the ship. If Swerdlow said he was on board, he was on board. >>7) Swerdlow's version of time travel and invisibility is incompatible with scientific knowledge<< Refer to the videos explaining the science behind time travel and invisibility. >>As you, the reader can see, there is ample evidence that this small collection of people is simply a group of liars seeking media attention.<< Baseless assumption. Also, these people obviously didn't gain much attention, let alone mainstream media attention, otherwise people would know who they are. These people are not benefiting financially, nor are they getting media exposure. There is absolutely no motive whatsoever to lie about being a victim in a scientific experiment. >>The documented history of reputable witnesses and the official Naval records of the Eldridge contradict these "witnesses." If my opponent is operating under the umbrella of direct evidence, he must accept that the testimony of these characters is not believable. The testimony of the captains of the vessels involved and the crew of the Eldridge, however, IS.<< Again, this only points to a cover up, especially considering the lack of exposure this project has received. >>Please also note that my opponent has not provided any sort of reconciliation between the following points from Round 1 and the version of the story espoused by his "witnesses" : 1) The logs from the Eldridge during this time period are available on microfilm NRS-1978-26 and do not confirm the above story [1]. 2) The ship was not in Philadelphia at the alleged time of the incident [1]. 3) The ship never made port in Philadelphia in 1943 [1]. 4) Lieutenant Junior Grade William S. Dodge, master of the Andrew Furuseth denies he or his crew saw anything unusual in Norfolk [1]. 5) The Eldridge and the Furuseth were never in Norfolk at the same time [1]. 6) "Bill Van Allen, 84, who was executive officer and then captain of the Eldridge in 1943 and 1944, said he never saw any sign of experiments aboard the ship" [2].<< The following quote from researcher David Wilcock negates this: "The most recent reports from Lt. Col. Philip Corso, reprinted on Dr. Steven Greer's CSETI website, indicate that almost everything in the description of the Philadelphia Experiment was true, except that in order to protect the story, a different ship was used than the one normally described to the public. The actual ship was a minesweeper, not a destroyer. Therefore, it makes sense that when aging crewmembers of the Destroyer Escort U.S.S. Eldridge were queried about this, they remembered nothing of the sort. Although the evidence now suggests that the Eldridge was not the ship, we are told that the experiment itself apparently did occur. What we are told is that this ship was made invisible and quickly transported by an extraordinarily powerful, pulsating magnetic field that it generated on board. This magnetic field was the product of several tons of specialized electronic equipment that had been installed within it." - David Wilcock If you believe that the ship had remained in the harbor according to the Navy and no such experiment took place; then consider the following: - Why were the families of several crewmembers being told that their relative sailors died that night? - Why did the entire rest of the crew involved receive discharges from the Navy for being medically unfit? http://www.divinecosmos.com... In conclusion, my opponent's main attempt to refute my position was to make the survivors look like lunatics seeking media attention. Of course though, there are multiple survivors and witnesses who have consistent and detailed accounts of the experiment, thus proving directly what had happened during the Philadelphia Experiment. Another premise my opponent put forth was that the Philadelphia Experiment contradicts known science, yet, the videos I provided demonstrate otherwise. We have successfully rendered objects invisible and teleported particles on a small scale. http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com...