Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 320
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The moderators here are a joke! Ad hominem intended. Refusing to delete all the frivolous postings which have derailed

the thread proved that they are a joke. Some may want to have a serious discussion, but certainly are repelled by such

juvenile hacking. These people are indeed juvenile jerks. Ad hominem intended.

Jak

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some may want to have a serious discussion, but certainly are repelled by such

juvenile hacking.

Jak

Not to worry, Jack ... we will get back on track soon. I do hope the moderators can make the last

few pages of totally off topic stuff invisible, or move it elsewhere.

Hope you had a very Merry Christmas, Jack!

Barb :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gary Loughran

One of the great by-products of threads is the dynamic, intelligent discussion that leads into other areas. It is common for threads develop and explore new areas and subjects following a divergence from their intended purpose; and this, I believe, is good.

However, when a thread becomes filled with IM style chat and irrelevant Youtube links - it is difficult to view this as positive development.

Therefore, can the thread be kept relevant to the topic. Any posts which obviously attempt to move off topic will be made invisible.

Thanks,

Gary

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some may want to have a serious discussion, but certainly are repelled by such

juvenile hacking.

Jak

Not to worry, Jack ... we will get back on track soon. I do hope the moderators can make the last

few pages of totally off topic stuff invisible, or move it elsewhere.

Hope you had a very Merry Christmas, Jack!

Barb :-)

Thanks! You seem to be the only researcher actively trying to validate or invalidate the Baker information. I support your

efforts to determine the veracity of her "stories". It is very annoying to have serious research such as yours disrupted

by jokesters, and the "moderators" take no action.

Unlike you, I have done no primary research on Baker. I read what she says and what is said by those doing primary

research. Based on what she says and what researchers say about it leads me to believe she is a fraud or victim of

some malady. I look forward to any additional research or comments from you and other primary researchers. It is

an unfortunate distraction to real research.

Jack

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any posts which obviously attempt to move off topic will be made invisible.

Gary

Happy New Year Gary, hope all is well in the Wee North.

Since the majority of forum members believe that the entire subject of Judith Baker is off-topic to the JFK assassination, can we therefore take it that this entire thread --and all other Judith threads -- will be made invisible?

[Edit: If not, I will henceforth call Gary Loughran THE GRINCH WHO STOLE CHRISTMAS, since he deleted all my lovely Christmas songs --Which JFK would have loved -- and left behind only stuff that has NO RELEVANCE to JFK or his assassination.]

Edited by J. Raymond Carroll
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks! You seem to be the only researcher actively trying to validate or invalidate the Baker information. I support your

efforts to determine the veracity of her "stories". It is very annoying to have serious research such as yours disrupted

by jokesters, and the "moderators" take no action.

Unlike you, I have done no primary research on Baker. I read what she says and what is said by those doing primary

research. Based on what she says and what researchers say about it leads me to believe she is a fraud or victim of

some malady. I look forward to any additional research or comments from you and other primary researchers. It is

an unfortunate distraction to real research.

Jack

Thank you, Jack. I appreciate your support. I am not the only one who has undertaken doing fact checking on Baker's claims,though. There are several people who have done,or are now doing, so. And others,like you,have provided some valuable insights and information by weighing in .... thank you for that as well.

I also really appreciate that you understand and support how important it is to document whether her claims are valid ...or not. While it is true that most CTs do not believe Baker's stories, her claims continue to be pushed by her and by her supporters,especially now that she has a new book out. Some old claims have changed...notably those previously found to be in conflict with documentation found or other evidence. And there are some new claims as well. Newbies to the case, who do not have a solid handle on the evidence in the case overall, or people never involved in assassination study previously, who run across her book or web sites or blogs,or reviews and interviews, are easily impressed by something that seems to answer so many questions and tie so many loose ends together.

The tentacles of Baker's claims are everywhere, in nearly every facet of New Orleans that one tries to research, and into some things in Dallas as well.Name almost anyone in New Orleans who has ever been mentioned as possibly having something to do with the assassination and Baker knew them,knew their secrets,knew their activities...or worked with them on certain things herself. She was everywhere ... Marcello's hangouts,Bannister's office,the Trade Mart leafleting,assorted notorious clubs,Clinton,Jackson,etc. Haslam's books and claims are another area ... Judyth references Haslam for some things and refers to him as a witness as well as an author.She uses him to shore up parts of her story,but what really supports Haslam's story in the first place .... especially as regards Sherman's work,death .... and a "secret" linear accelerator?

Thanks again, Jack. Let's get back to discussion on these things now,and I encourage you and others to do whatever fact checking you can,and share whatever ideas,information and insights you might have. Let's get this thing vetted as best we can and done with...for good!

Hope 2011 is being good to you so far!

Barb :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Barb sums up the absurdity of it well:

The tentacles of Baker's claims are everywhere, in nearly every facet of New Orleans that one tries to research, and into some things in Dallas as well.Name almost anyone in New Orleans who has ever been mentioned as possibly having something to do with the assassination and Baker knew them,knew their secrets,knew their activities...or worked with them on certain things herself. She was everywhere ... Marcello's hangouts,Bannister's office,the Trade Mart leafleting,assorted notorious clubs,Clinton,Jackson,etc. Haslam's books and claims are another area ... Judyth references Haslam for some things and refers to him as a witness as well as an author.She uses him to shore up parts of her story,but what really supports Haslam's story in the first place .... especially as regards Sherman's work,death .... and a "secret" linear accelerator?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The tentacles of Baker's claims are everywhere, in nearly every facet of New Orleans that one tries to research, and into some things in Dallas as well.Name almost anyone in New Orleans who has ever been mentioned as possibly having something to do with the assassination and Baker knew them,knew their secrets,knew their activities...or worked with them on certain things herself. She was everywhere ... Marcello's hangouts,Bannister's office,the Trade Mart leafleting,assorted notorious clubs,Clinton,Jackson,etc. Haslam's books and claims are another area ... Judyth references Haslam for some things and refers to him as a witness as well as an author.She uses him to shore up parts of her story,but what really supports Haslam's story in the first place .... especially as regards Sherman's work,death .... and a "secret" linear accelerator?

In Dr. Mary's Monkey, Ed Haslam devotes an entire chapter (#11 - The Machine) to speculation about the existence of a linear particle

accelerator located at the Infectious Disease Laboratory of the U. S. Public Health Service Hospital. The accelerator is one of the linchpins

of Haslam's book; he believes it was the instrument responsible for events leading to Dr. Mary Sherman's death.

On page 245 of Dr. Mary's Monkey, Haslam writes:

Of course, linear particle accelerators themselves were not secret. As early as July 27, 1959, the cover article in Time magazine

bragged about the one at M.D. Anderson Hospital in Texas. (Haslam provides a small illustration of the Time cover.)

Haslam is wrong. The Time article refers to a C-137 unit at the Anderson Hospital:

Almost daily, ways are found to give bigger radiation doses more safely to hard-to-reach parts of the body. Examples: cobalt-60 "bombs,"
a new cesium-137 unit at M. D. Anderson Hospital
, higher-powered X-ray machines and linear particle accelerators, ingeniously refined ways of implanting radioisotopes such as iridium 192 and yttrium 90 in tumors.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,864777-5,00.html#ixzz0oicGHdSc

A careless error by Haslam, particularly about a topic that is central to the thesis of his book.

Jim Fetzer has called Dr. Mary's Monkey one of the best referenced and most scholarly works written for the general public that he has read.

Edited by Michael Hogan
Link to post
Share on other sites

In Dr. Mary's Monkey, Ed Haslam devotes an entire chapter (#11 - The Machine) to speculation about the existence of a linear particle

accelerator located at the Infectious Disease Laboratory of the U. S. Public Health Service Hospital. The accelerator is one of the linchpins

of Haslam's book; he believes it was the instrument responsible for events leading to Dr. Mary Sherman's death.

On page 245 of Dr. Mary's Monkey, Haslam writes:

Of course, linear particle accelerators themselves were not secret. As early as July 27, 1959, the cover article in Time magazine

bragged about the one at M.D. Anderson Hospital in Texas. (Haslam provides a small illustration of the Time cover.)

Haslam is wrong. The Time article refers to a C-137 unit at the Anderson Hospital:

Almost daily, ways are found to give bigger radiation doses more safely to hard-to-reach parts of the body. Examples: cobalt-60 "bombs,"
a new cesium-137 unit at M. D. Anderson Hospital
, higher-powered X-ray machines and linear particle accelerators, ingeniously refined ways of implanting radioisotopes such as iridium 192 and yttrium 90 in tumors.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,864777-5,00.html#ixzz0oicGHdSc

A careless error by Haslam, particularly about a topic that is central to the thesis of his book.

Jim Fetzer has called Dr. Mary's Monkey one of the best referenced and most scholarly works written for the general public that he has read.

Mike,

Thanks for this ... and good catch. From this alone, it would seem that Haslam is not all that familiar with the machine that is at the very core of his thesis.

Several months ago, as part of research into some of Judyth's claims, I became interested in Haslam ... and his now embracing Judyth as a witness to the underground medical shenanigans he posits in New Orleans in 1963. I had questions about linear particle accelerators myself. Could an LPA even do what Haslam alleges ... and how could such a thing be secret in a public hospital?

So, I asked a physicist friend who works on/with/at the quite large and renowned LPA at Stanford University. I contacted Dr. Arthur Snyder. He is known by many for his work on NAA, the Z-film and other things in the JFK arena. But, first and foremost, he is a scientist ... a PhD in physics, whose work has been in research at SLAC for over 15 years.

SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory is home to a two-mile linear accelerator—the longest in the world. Originally a particle physics research center, SLAC is now a multipurpose laboratory for astrophysics, photon science, accelerator and particle physics research.

~ SLAC website; SLAC web site

Above, you quote Haslam from Dr. Mary's Monkey as stating that "of course" linear particle accelerators were not secret. That, in fact, was one of the first things Dr. Arthur Snyder said to me about linear particle accelerators. Arthur is familiar with Haslam's thesis and books.

However, linear accelerators can be small and large (like ours). You could kill somebody

with one if they're stupid enough to stand in the beam, but a gun would be a simpler approach.

They are not secret! Some are used in medical applications and you likely would find a few at research hospitals and

university in New Orleans or any other big city.

~Email, Snyder to me,5-11-10

It also seems like an over complicated scheme to give Monkey's or Monkey tissue equal doses; it would be simpler to put them near a conventional source for a fixed length of time and to check up with some radiation monitors. I'm also not clear why equal dose would matter if the idea is to mutate a virus, ...

...The machines however are and were not secret [a] and it would have been I think quite simple to quietly irradiate your samples under some excuse at an existing device rather than build a secret machine. Haslam's chapter on this seems quite thin; he piles speculation on speculation and then draws firm conclusions -- kind of like bundling subprime mortgages to make a AAA security ...

~Email from Snyder to me, 5-14-10

While Haslam does not state that the accelerator at the U.S. Public Service Hospital *was* a Van de Graaff accelerator, he certainly implies it and includes an illustration of a Van de Graaff accelerator at Oxford in his book.

On 5-15-10, Arthur emailed me with this information about the Van de Graaff:

Van de Graf based machines would also not be suitable for irradiating Monkeys. Nuclei with 5-10 MeV don't travel very far. They would likely not even get through the air around the monkey and certainly not past the skin [a]. It would be impossible to kill somebody with such a beam though you might make a skin burn by holding them close to the beam. The experiments with these beams have to be done in vacuum.

You might manage to irradiate tissue samples, but they'd have to be thin and to be covered with nothing even as thick as paper. It'd be easier to use good old Cobalt 60 if you want to fry a Monkey and see what it does to its viruses.

A drawing of the early era Van de Graaff accelerator at Oxford, commissioned in 1964, can be seen on the first page at this Oxford link.

http://www.physics.ox.ac.uk/dwb/csVdG1.pdf

Haslam includes this same illustration in Dr. Mary's Monkey, pg 242, Chapter 11.

The history of this Oxford Van de Graaff is interesting. It took 3 years to complete (1961 - 1964) .... requiring the building to accommodate the huge machine to be built in tandem with the machine.

The vertical Oxford machine was designed by a team of engineers from Oxford University and the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, led by W. D. Allen. It was contained in a 40-ft high vacuum vessel housed in the tower. The beam accelerated by this machine could be passed through the second accelerator in the basement to reach a final energy of 22 MeV, sufficient to penetrate heavy nuclei and thus study their structure.

In 1961 work began on the first phase of the building, which included a tower designed by Philip Dowson to house the vertical accelerator, with the second accelerator and laboratories in its base. This tower is a prominent landmark on Banbury Road, its elegant shape tapering from the minimum required by the accelerator at is base and fanning out towards the top to provide space for handling of the accelerator components by a 15-ton crane. The side walls, constructed from individual 55-60 ft concrete beams, are convex at the base and concave at the very top, supporting a straight horizontal beam near the top on each side for the crane. The large size of the accelerators required that the construction of the building and accelerator proceed in parallel. The accelerators and this first phase of the building were completed in 1964.

Link to entire story: http://www.physics.ox.ac.uk/pp/dwb/press-release.htm

This doesn't sound like much of a a candidate to have been secretly squirreled away anywhere ... particularly on the grounds of an active U.S. Public Health Service Hospital.

I have additional information on the Van De Graaff linear particle accelerator and its capabilities that Arthur was kind enough to send me ... it can be explored and considered along with Haslam's claims in further posts. Given even just this info, I think the question remains ... and is a good one .... just what does Haslam base his claim of a secret accelerator, and its part in the death of Dr. Mary Sherman *on*?

Bests,

Barb :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This leaped right out at me:

"Haslam...piles speculation on speculation and then draws firm conclusions..."

This is exactly my problem with Haslam's methodology, with the reasoning he uses in his books. One searches in vain for verifiable evidence to support his conclusions.

Certainly as regards my area of expertise (Ferrie), his books cannot be taken as presenting any verifiable evidence that Ferrie had a secret lab in his apartment or even worked with Dr. Mary Sherman.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Jesse Ventura:

"It was stunning to learn that Lee Harvey Oswald had a mistress. Her book shows beyond any doubt that he was clearly a

government agent — because when Oswald was away on a mission in early 1963, Baker punched his time card at work every day!"

Jesse Ventura's 6 favorite books about conspiracies: http://theweek.com/article/index/214197/jesse-venturas-6-favorite-books-about-conspiracies

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesse Ventura:

"It was stunning to learn that Lee Harvey Oswald had a mistress. Her book shows beyond any doubt that he was clearly a

government agent — because when Oswald was away on a mission in early 1963, Baker punched his time card at work every day!"

Jesse Ventura's 6 favorite books about conspiracies: http://theweek.com/article/index/214197/jesse-venturas-6-favorite-books-about-conspiracies

Jesse is strongly influenced by Jim...good on most things except JVB.

Jack

Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly as regards my area of expertise (Ferrie), his books cannot be taken as presenting any verifiable evidence that Ferrie had a secret lab in his apartment or even worked with Dr. Mary Sherman.

And yet, with all due respect, your view is that of a '3 Monkey Ferrie' is it not? He neither sees, hears, nor speaks anything connected to conspiracy. So how are we to evaluate your statements that Ferrie had no connection to Dr. Sherman?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...