Talk:Pont-Saint-Esprit

message: Whoa this is some crazy shit right here! was it ergotism or just mercury poisoning? you have to remember that during 1951 the CIA was absolutely obsessed about LSD and every staff member was unwittingly dosed by another staff member like it was some sort of practical joke. But what this has to do with france is beyond my comprehension. Jivesucka (talk) 15:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It is interesting to note that this psychidelic french incident or something very similar is described in great detail in the book "Hayfever", an 1974 techno crime-story by Stanislaw Lem, the noted polish sci-fi author. One must wonder if he was aware of the rumors?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.82.32.15 (talk) 13:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summa Technologiae 

message: This guy has zero credibility. Voltaire Network is the exact opposite of a reliable source. TrineDay is the exact opposite of a serious publisher of investigative work. Albarelli's work has been ridiculed by experts although, yes, he managed to run a pretty slick promotion campaign for his book. No serious researcher agrees with Albarelli and in fact Kaplan had a hard time discussing these theories without giggling. Albarelli claims that "according to US media" Mangoux created a fuss over this. Oh yeah? What US media was that? He claims that John G. Fuller reached similar conclusions. Oh yeah? No he did not. This is typical conspiracy bullcrap and has no place here. Pichpich (talk) 02:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You are mistaken about John G. Fuller.  After the 1968 publication of his book, his views continued to evolve.  He first concluded that the poisonings had been intentional, then that LSD was involved. Apostle12 (talk) 03:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Says Albarelli of course... For a complete destruction of Albarelli, see . Pichpich (talk) 03:25, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I read the article you linked to and it doesn't in the least discredit Albarelli.  You saying that it amounts to "complete destruction of Albarelli" doesn't make it so.Apostle12 (talk) 03:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There's not a single credible expert backing up Albarelli. This is exactly what due weight is about. Albarelli's claims are contradicted by basic clinical observations, his story about Mangoux is undocumented, his contention that uncontrolled experiments were the norm is supported by a) the circular argument that this is what happened in Pont St-Esprit incident and b) his ludicrous and unsupported NYC subway claim. As for the SPAN = bridge = Pont = Voilà!, it's the prototypical conspiracy theory "evidence".  Pichpich (talk) 14:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the support for the "ludicrous" subway claim.  It was later conducted with simulants in the NYC subway and National airport.  The test was repeated in Boston Subway in 2012.  The cited Hersh book, written 1967 supports uncontrolled tests on page 141.Johnvr4 (talk) 14:01, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enough with the Albarelli crap 

message: I don't mind a balance but most of Kaplan's opinions in the article are expressed as they relate to Albarelli's opinion rather that the incident itself and these opinions need citations if they need to be included at all.
Johnvr4 (talk) 13:46, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much weight given to Steven Kaplan 

message: The grid with the population is unnecessary. The current population and notes on any unusual spikes or drops in population are all that really matter. It looks as if someone found the information and thought they'd dump it here.PacificBoy 22:13, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I quite agree. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:49, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Population