Originally posted by Count
I'm at work now so I can't check the books, but wasn't "the bell" the actual apparatus which was tested, and not the henge-like structure?
ie. even if the henge is shown to be a cooling tower base, that in itself doesn't mean that the bell experiment itself didn't exist. So it wouldn't
be correct to say that "Nazi Bell" is debunked. Or am I picking nits?
Based on a quick read of the article linked above, it seems that the main 'beef' of the author is to show that others who have used Cook/Witkowski
research have been too quick to state their theories as established facts etc. and not to say that the whole theory presented by C and W is false.
In my opinion having evidence of a power station located can be taken as proof that something requiring lots of power was done at the site, and the
nature of it is still unknown to us.
I'm not quite sure what to make of the statement made by Gerold Schelm (the author of the article) that he had contacted Mr. Witkowski but "he was
unable to produce any evidence so far". I couldn't find any information about the author with a quick Google search which wasn't in some way
related to the article, so I don't know what his qualifications would be - but I don't find it at all surprising that an published author/researcher
doesn't have time to answer all emails which demand proof or evidence. It could be that I'm reading too much from that single sentence, and
(obviously) I'm one who "wants to believe"
I'll get back to this after I get off from work.
I'd like to make add some comments on this posting as well:
I'm at work now so I can't check the books, but wasn't "the bell" the actual apparatus which was tested, and not the henge-like structure?
Correct, but keep in mind that the only source claiming the existance of "The Bell" is Polsih author Igor Witkowski so far. All he could tell about
this device he allegedly read in some classified, unofficial Polish post-war trial records about an SS officer named Jakob Sporrenberg. No second
person or any other hint about the existance of the "Bell" has shown up yet. That much to the "actual apparatus".
ie. even if the henge is shown to be a cooling tower base, that in itself doesn't mean that the bell experiment itself didn't exist. So it
wouldn't be correct to say that "Nazi Bell" is debunked. Or am I picking nits?
Who said that the story about the "Nazi-Bell" had been debunked ? I didn't, I was showing proof for the real purpose of the "test rig" that was
promoted by Witkowski.
Based on a quick read of the article linked above, it seems that the main 'beef' of the author is to show that others who have used
Cook/Witkowski research have been too quick to state their theories as established facts etc. and not to say that the whole theory presented by C and
W is false.
Correct.
In my opinion having evidence of a power station located can be taken as proof that something requiring lots of power was done at the site, and the
nature of it is still unknown to us.
Again, I would like to stress the fact, that the old factory would have needed an enormous amount of electricity to run production, whatever was
produced there. So the existance of a power plant is not that surprising at all.
I'm not quite sure what to make of the statement made by Gerold Schelm (the author of the article) that he had contacted Mr. Witkowski but "he was
unable to produce any evidence so far". I couldn't find any information about the author with a quick Google search which wasn't in some way
related to the article, so I don't know what his qualifications would be - but I don't find it at all surprising that an published author/researcher
doesn't have time to answer all emails which demand proof or evidence.
About proof for quoting Igor Witkowski: This is the email that I received from him upon some questions that I asked him in another message, dated
Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:08:14 +0100 (CET):
Hi,
re 1: That's correct. I wouldn't rely on this, but I have reasonable
confidence, I just trust my friend who showed me it, an insider, or former
insider to be exact. You know, the situation with such a files is
presently very uneasy, amid various political allegations related to the
special services of the former system, -hiding, destruction of selected
files in unclear circumstances, so they had to be returned,
re 2. Yes, I know. The only difference, or one of differences is that by
definition cooling tower has to be 2.5-3 times higher than wider, i.e.
some 100 m high in this case (diameter of the pool or water tank is 40 m)
- some 30 storeys high, but there is no foundations for such a thing,
whatsoever, nor any trace of pipelines, either in the duct or in the
nearby power plant. So i presented another hypothesis, that it wasn't a
cooling tower, but frankly saying, I have no evidence as to the purpose, I
mean it wasn't mentioned in the sources, only that experiments were
carried out in a pool...
regards.
I. Witkowski.
You may want to contact him directly and ask for confirmation:
contact@igorwitkowski.com which is his official email address which can be found on his web site:
www.igorwitkowski.com...
You see, I have nothing to hide here, and what I'm posting can be verified (as usual...)
Golf Sierra