First, I find it amazing
that the majority of posts here said nothing about Dr. Boylan's original post, but instead descended into
arguments over time travel and physics.
Secondly, While I found the thread by Dr. Boylan entertaining (and I won't claim that everything he said is false), I have to say that I am disturbed
at the broad strokes he paints with.
If one reads his post, nothing is specific except for his claim regarding Dr. Wen Ho Lee.
He says: "It also helps to realize that the government uses the word "nuclear secrets" as a code phrase for all kinds of secret advanced
Really? How do we know this? What sort of evidence is there other than this claim? Why are there no specific examples that others can verify?
"...government scientists working at Los Alamos "Nuclear" Laboratory, NM have succeeded in generating a holographic portal. They have used this
portal to travel across space-time, and possibly interdimensionally, and have seen into another world. What they saw there, my informant says
cryptically, both frightened and intrigued them. He did not add any additional details."
I know people that worked at Los Alamos personally, and they never ever spoke about anything that would remotely suggest that "nuclear" or "nuclear
secrets" were anything but that.
Moreover, it's great
that his NSA informant was able to get him some of this information. But, why is there nothing but this informant's
word? How come there is no way to verify
the statements made by the NSA informant? All we have to go on is some unnamed person's word that the
government has used a portal at Los Alamos to travel across space-time, possibly interdimensionally, and that they have seen into another world?
Excuse me, but how tenuous is that?
More than that...if everything is so super shadow world...how is it that Dr. Boylan is allowed to provide these broad brush strokes of "truth" to
the public in an Online forum and elsewhere?
Finally...and this is the part that takes the cake for me.
These government scientists have "seen into another world. What they saw there, ... both frightened and intrigued them." Dr. Boylan's informant did
not add any additional details.
So ummm... yeah.
Why no additional details on this frightening, intriguing world? Why didn't Dr. Boylan press this informant for more details? Why would the NSA
informant even mention this world at all? What purpose does it serve?
It's like saying the following:
"Guys! There is more to the universe than you know!"
Does that statement tell you anything?
How about "The truth is out there."
Does that tell you anything? No.
Ok...does Dr. Boylan's original post tell anyone anything?
Until there is a shred of evidence anyone here would be happy to point the rest of us to... Dr. Boylan has simply delivered a very nice story.