"The future ain't what it used to be."

Al Bielek finally debunked ?

Zxavier

Timekeeper
http://www.bielek-debunked.com/index2.html

16 December 2003: A new section was added today. This section is titled 'Statement of Al Bielek's Producer'. A few days ago, Michael Houtzager, owner of the web site 'www.bielek.com', published his statement of happened between him and Al Bielek and he shares his thoughts on what we presented here on this web site.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Al Bielek finally debunked

Dear fellow "Philadelphia Experiment" fans,

you will find enclosed in these pages verifiable facts published for the first time that will conclude a long term investigation into the so called "PX" experiment but more specifically into the claims made by one Alfred Bielek.
Mr. Bielek gained a degree of public recognition for the first time with his well-know testimony at the MUFON conference in 1990. At that time he stated that he was a true eyewitness and participant to the Philadelphia Experiment. The facts published here will clearly demonstrate that Mr. Bielek, as well as his companions Preston Nichols and Duncan Cameron, willfully crafted one of the biggest hoaxes to spread from the internet.
According to his own records, Bielek has been on over 50 radio talk shows and a featured speaker at over 40 conferences. We will outline in the body of our presentation the following re-evaluation of Al Bielek.

· He never participated in the PX
· He never witnessed the PX
· He was no where near the PX test when it occurred
· He has changed the nature of his story many times over the years with additions, embellishments, deletions and wholesale fabrication of events
· He has stated historical events that can be completely verified to be totally false

These points are a sampling of what we will present in our report.

What remains amazing is that Bielek's story was widely accepted by the media and his 'fan community' without criticism. People of all backgrounds were quick to repeat his quotes, often just borrowing them from someone else's web page, without checking the claims or presenting any critical analysis of whether they 'could' be true. The most astute observer and researcher of the PX is Marshall Barnes. He has been doing a thorough investigation of the Philadelphia Experiment since the early '90's. Barnes asked basic questions that no one else thought pertinent and with time he began to find great discrepancies with Bielek's claims. Starting from a basic dissatisfaction with Bielek's so called "facts", observing that not one claim was supported by a "hard evidence" [which means that it can be verified] Marshall began a large-scale investigation. Eventually a small number of people joined Marshall in his endeavors and the result of this long-term research is this report.
Among this group of researchers were Marshall Barnes (USA), Fred Houpt (CAN) and Gerold Schelm (GER), making this investigation a real international event. Our group effort can demonstrate that the claims of Al Bielek and his companions is nothing short of very impressive media manipulation, dis-information, partially correct data mixed into fabrications and completely false statements. Where there will always be those of the opinion that Bielek's media circus is the creation of a government-guided operation, what we can say with certainty is that to some degree it has been a profitable venture for Bielek and friends. Whether they were selling hokum and malarkey never seemed to stop the curious and naïve from buying tapes and videos and attending conferences.

The fact is that the one factor missing for over a decade, is a step by step de-construction of the PX-Bielek saga. We have accomplished that and we are confident that his version, his story, does not hold up to severe scrutiny. The references used for this presentation are the common transcripts of some speeches and interviews given by Al Bielek, which are still accessible on the internet. Additionally, we make reference to the content of Al Bielek's own web site, www.bielek.com, which has presented the photo material referred to in this report. Often, we use Al Bielek's own data to point out where he has either lied, mixed and matched bits and pieces of the real story or else just made up a great deal of nonsense. When we say that someone has 'lied', we are required to show evidence for the accusation. We have documentary evidence showing Bielek lying on several of the main subjects and the source is emails and official documents, which we have provided as part of the report.


The facts presented on these pages were collected by Marshall Barnes, Fred Houpt and Gerold Schelm.
Personal statements of the investigators can be found in the final chapter of this web site.

The left hand menu will bring you to the results of this investigations.

NOTE: I am only presenting some one else's material. I am voicing no personal bias in this issue at this time. Zx

/ttiforum/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

/ttiforum/images/graemlins/devil.gif
 
Glad some people finally ran this hoaxster to ground.

What remains amazing is that Bielek's story was widely accepted by the media and his 'fan community' without criticism.
Indeed, this is one of the dangers of the wild and wooly internet, where checking of facts takes a backseat to sensationalism and conspiracy claims. Say what you wish about mainstream new media, at least their integrity is verifiably higher than most "independent" internet "news" sources.

Whether they were selling hokum and malarkey never seemed to stop the curious and naïve from buying tapes and videos and attending conferences.
And just think... if all these gullible people had invested this money, or better yet donated it to a worthy cause to help a starving person, how much better off the world would be. It is one thing to acquire wealth by offering your customers products that work, or services that better their lives. It is something else to enrich yourself on the gullibility of others!

Next on the debunk list is Bob Lazar and his wild claims!
RMT
 
Next on the debunk list is Bob Lazar and his wild claims!

Are you sure you can debunk him? He did work at Area 51 (from what I understand there is proof of this) and he named elements on the periodic table that aren't there yet which do appear to fill in the gaps in the table almost perfectly. Even suggesting what we now believe that the most heaviest elements are stable and not fast decaying as we had assumed. I hear 115 and/or 118 are very stable which is surprising givin their large number of protons/neutrons/electrons.
 
Also if you debunked Al,

you'd have to debunk Phil schieder. Theres alot of support for Phil schnieders material.

Theres also a lot of evidence of montauk, many small holes that were left and things that fit into place with peoples reports of some of the montauk events.

I'd have to say personally, I think the PX is a bit of a lost cause. Its too old, there is no evidence for it, nothing to imply it happened, The only thing there is - is montauk to back it up. And even then, you can say 100%.

Its not very hard to Debunk the PX. mainly because there is nothing to debunk.
 
I do feel sorry for these people who claim to have travelled through time, become invisible, met aliens and so on. They never have any proof. The only thing that happens intellectually to them is that they lie so much they can just about believe it themselves. We will always be closer to the real meaning of life than these liars, we will always be far happier.

Good Scientist
 
The only thing that happens intellectually to them is that they lie so much they can just about believe it themselves. We will always be closer to the real meaning of life than these liars, we will always be far happier.

I do not fully agree with this statement. There is no direct correlation between being Closer to the Real meaning of life and being "far happier".

However you are right, they lie so much they believe the lies they are telling. My only wish is that those individuals who feel the need to do this, that they should understand, even if it were a real story it wouldn't be a big deal to anyone here. Its not going to raise their self esteem or confidence levels.
 
I dont know about this.

I mean, just because a few people 'claim' to have exposed holes, It doesn't mean that they've revealed a lie. I've always maintained that montauk (and more so the PX) had shakey evidence. But it is certainly true in that area of montauk and the military base have witnessed many strange events and occurances.

Then a few hobbist investigators claim to have revealed the whole thing is a lie.

It should also be remembered before people make their minds up, that 'debunkers' often claim that stories are told out of ego. But often people forget that debunkers often (more often) operate out of greater ego.

people have tried to debunk montauk before, and it didnt go well.

the PX, like i said is easy, as there really NO evidence it happened what so ever.

Kind regards,
Olly
 
Oh,

you know when i just said people had tried before. It was these guys. I only just started to read it - its been there since 2003. Theres a piece on another site called the 'Debunkers debunked'. Its a good read and shows that marshall and his gang really don't debunk anything and often mis-interpret the material they try to dismiss. There are text examples of this. I forget the site it was on now.

It picks holes in all of their arguements. I'd never actually read the full text from the Marshall Barnes crew.

Their attempt to debunk the WingMakers material is almost laughable. The seem to assume they prove this. However is amounts to nothing more then their personal opinion. Much of their bielek dismissals evolve around his 'vague descriptions' and things they think sound odd....Rather then proper proof. I wonder if the actually have any knowlege on esoteric science themselves. I'm guessing not.

I'm all for people trying to get to the bottom of montauk, but these guys are ameteurs at best. the Ironic thing is, what they claim Al bielek is doing (regardless if he is or not), is exactly their motives in trying to debunk.

Kind regards,
Olly
 
Are you sure you can debunk him?
No, but there sure seems like a larger LACK of credible information surrounding him than there is a dearth of verifiable information. We have to remember that the scientific method is not about proving what MAY have happened. It is all too easy to come up with "reasons" why parts of his story might not add up....doing that would never lead to even a reasonable conclusion. This is the problem I have with the people that can't let Titor go: They always come back against a point about how Titor's story does not hold water with "well, what he MAY have meant" or "what MAY have happened in his timeline is." That is ridiculous bull dookie!

The biggest problems with Lazar that disqualify him and his stories are his outright lies. He said he got degrees from MIT, yet there are no records of him getting a degree or even attending there. So this is where conspiracy knuckleheads chime in with "yeah, but he said the government erased all his records". OK, but I still have my degree. Why can't he produce the degree(s) that he says he earned? Occam's Razor would say it is because he never earned it/them. But let's go beyond that: If he DID attend and graduate from MIT, he did not do it alone. So why is there no one who DOES have a degree from MIT, who also attended at the same time as Lazar, come forward and corroborate his story? Yeah, yeah....I know what people would say "Oh, they are afraid for their lives, because the government would wipe them out."

What is much more likely is that Lazar was given JUST ENOUGH information for him to act as a government decoy without his even knowing it. A person I know through the internet whose father told of working in Los Alamos, and of a video store owner by the name of Bob Lazar, who liked to talk (a lot) about his "connections" with LANL. If the government found such a guy who would like to make people believe he was "all that", and could be counted on to "tell his story", it might be very easy to set-up a guy with this size of an ego matched-up with a small amount of critical thinking.

The burden of proof lies on Lazar to provide SUFFICIENT, CREDIBLE, and SELF-CONSISTENT evidence such that we can believe him. In my opinion, and that of many other scholars (Stanton Friedman, for one) he has not done so. REPEAT: IT IS NOT THE JOB OF OTHERS TO PROVE LAZAR WRONG. That could go on forever!

Beyond all of this, let me tell you about government security clearances, since I possess one. When you take a job that requires such a clearance, you swear (UNDER PENALTY OF PROSECUTION AND INCARCERATION) to not divulge these secrets, talk about them, or even acknowledge anything about them. If the claptrap Lazar is spewing really were true, he would have been arrested, tried, and thrown in jail....just as I would be if I were to ever divulge classified information! The fact he is still running around makes it all the more likely that he does so at the government's convenience... as a means to keep people off the trail of the REAL work going on at Groome Lake.

RMT
 
RMT

Just wanted to let you know that I am a Bob Lazar fan. I also have amassed quite a bit of info on the reported properties of ufo's. And of course you know I have an experimental gravity field generator on my desktop that I have been doing experiments with. So you could surmise that at sometime in the near future I just might be able to say the information that Bob released was either bogus or real.

But what about Al Bielek? Some of the stuff he says seems like pure fiction. But the detailed information he gave concerning the Philadelphia Experiment really has me wondering. Ever heard of James Corum? Apparently James Corum gathered a group of scientists together to actually find out if indeed there might have been a Philadelphia Experiment. The group did succeed in producing some surprising results with the Tesla Egg of Columbus apparatus. James Corum does say there probably was enough precedant for the Philadelphia Experiment to have been done.

James Corum
 
I think comparing 'Titor' to montauk is a little at odds. Titors claims are a joke. Montauk claims are back-ups by some very strange occurances.

They really are in a different league.

On Rob Lazar, I think that his case is pretty interesting, the fact when George Knapp asked him to show him round Los Alamos labs, and he did, was an interesting thing. He did this before his security card was revoked,

He's ovbviously college educated, you dont get head hunted into Los Alamos buy sitting at home and teaching yourself.

As soon as the area 51 thing came out, there were no uni records of him. Los Alamos said he never worked there. Until he presented them with a pay slip record. Which prompted them to admit he worked there, but not on 'black' projects.

just wierd inconsistances like this are simple evidence that he 'might' well be telling the truth. Weather its all true, is another matter. We only know that he wasn't lying about the other stuff, and people were already trying to cover that up.

kind regards,
Olly
 
just wierd inconsistances like this are simple evidence that he 'might' well be telling the truth.

and monkey's 'might' come out of my butt. But surprisingly I do want to believe The Lazar. I want to believe there are ufo's and aliens and conspiracies and kewl shyte like that going on all the time. but most of all I want my Flying Hovercar!!!!!!!! I think I deserve a flying hovercar.
 
how would you react in your 'flying hovercar', If you passed a low flying helicoptor/light aircraft. Just out of interest?

You realise the people in the copter/plane are looking at you and pointing....what would you do?


Kind regards,
Olly
 
You realise the people in the copter/plane are looking at you and pointing....what would you do?

Look at them, laugh, and point back. Then do loop-the-loops around them, maybe even nudge up against them let them know who's boss of the skies. if I was really mad I would jam a stick in the spokes.
 
plus if you wanted the insurance money, all you'd have to do is go infront of them and slam the brakes on. Then you can tell the police, it wasn't your fault they ran into the back of you....
 
Thats my Olly, always thinking 2 steps ahead.

plus if you wanted the insurance money, all you'd have to do is go infront of them and slam the brakes on. Then you can tell the police, it wasn't your fault they ran into the back of you....

yah, I KNOW the tail-lights on my hovercar are in perfect working condition, they Must have ran into me. GOT TO SUE GOT TO SUE, CALL MY LAWYER! WHIPLASH! Ooohhwwwwwwwwwwwwieeeee
 
Back
Top