"Fourthed" I suppose
I'm confused about the whole "issue" presented though, as the thread title and original post seem to be "fishing" for information on the "plausibility" overall of the "Bell" project. From what I gather the entire concept of the "project" derives from a single source report with numerous 'assumptions' of association?
Some of Kiwiguy's question can have a definitive answer though, such as:
I am not trolling. I genuinely want to know if any member have ideas or information that would silence nutters who believe in UFOs and anti-gravity theories which swamp the net.
Simply put; No because the "nutters" wouldn't accept such information or ideas because they simply conflict with their view of reality. My answer is that if you're NOT "trolling" but are seriously asking this question then you have to go back and understand how the 'nutters' see things and understand there will NEVER be a satisfying answer for such people unless they are told what they already believe is real.
Edwest's ideas are of course "plausable" but as noted; there needs to be evidence. The more extrodinary the claim the more eviedence is needed. A basic understanding of the time period in question shows a VERY murky overall understanding of what constituted "atomic-reactions" and even 'radiation' outside of a very specific and narrow range of science which was not generally understood until at least the late 1960s. Like electricity and magnetic fields in the early part of the 1900s, (much like "nano-tech" today in fact) "Atomic" was used far more often OUT of context during the 30s through the 50s than IN context.
For example the phrase "Artifical Radiation" doesn't actually SAY anything as MOST "radiation" is not naturally occuring. Recall also that "radiation" in and of itself doesn't particularly MEAN anything being dependent on the context in which it is used AND the type being discussed. (Neither of which is really clear in the statement)
Triton asked:
Can anyone speculate why the rubber matting was removed and burned after each test and the chamber was washed down with brine for 45 minutes by inmates from Gross-Rosen concentration camp? Is brine used in decontamination procedures involving chemical weapons agents? Burning of contaminated rubber? Does radioactive decontamination involve the use of brine and the burning of contaminated rubber?
Of COURSE anyone can 'speculate' reason why, the main point (as you point out) is how does that speculation apply to the question at hand
("I" can speculate that the rubber was removed and burned because the chamber was a 'test-chamber' for fetish costumes for high ranking Nazi's and they needed to keep the designs top-secret.... Then again "I" am a sick and twisted individual after all
)
I've read "The Hunt for Zero-Point" myself but never understood how the fact that the structures noted in the story of the "Bell" being physically present somehow 'proved' the overall story. The fact that the structures exist is A data point but not a conclusive one. It would seem to me that actual investigation work would have to be carried out which I haven't seen as of yet.
More specificlly to your question; "brine" doesn't really help a whole lot since the term itself is highly vague. "Brine" is what contaminated (chemically or otherwise) wash-water from decontamination procedures is usually called, along with some forms of salted, or chemically enhanced water used in decontamination. Burning of "contaminated" materials was often used to dispose of said materials even into modern day clean up procedures, though we are more aware these days that "burning" materials more often than not actually releases contamination rather than destroying it such was not common knowledge in the time period being discussed.
The overall procedure clearly indicates some sort of 'decontamination' procedure, but nothing specific since it could be chemical, biological, or even materials contamination. (Experimenting with mercury could lead to mercuy spills and the need for clean up, etc) So in order to at least begin to determine the overall context of the procedure investigation would have to be done to try and isolate what KIND of contamination was being isolated. If any I might add. It is always possible that contamination of some sort was simply a feared possiblity and decontamination was carried out as a control and safety measure.
In all the "plausability" of the "Bell" is possible, but there seems to be no evidence to point to WHAT work was done or WHAT the goal was so that the "dots" can in no way be connected without further work being done on confirming various facts from fiction.
Myself I WOULD like to see MORE evidence simply because I'm curious, but I don't see any possible 'discussion' base on what little has been presented so far. The only possible outcome is conjecture and speculation which comes down to personal interpritation and belief. Rather than resolving anything such would simply lead to more conflict so I vote for closing the thread unless someone can some up with more evidence and/or information than so far has been presented.
Randy
