Originally posted by schuyler
The problem with the Frank's Box approach is that OF COURSE you will be hearing words. The box is formed around a radio which scans the AM or FM frequency bands at a slow, medium, or fast speed. What you hear are real words spoken by disk jockeys, in advertisements, in music, or whatever is going on at these radio stations at the time. The theory here is that a carrier wave is formed by this cacophony of sounds and that entities can utilize these sounds to send messages to us.

Another component of the theory is that a Frank's Box "bonds" with the first person to use it in such a way that this person is often the only one who can understand what the box is saying. When you listen to conversations, such as above, you often hear people say, "Did you hear that?" and someone else will say, "Oh, yeah! I definitely heard that!" when everyone else is straining to make sense of the sound. At the very least you have to admit that the sounds coming from one of these boxes are difficult to understand, usually out of context, and amount to word snippets, not full-blown conversations.

Contrast this to the Spiricom approach, which has some of the same components. In this case the frequency is set in the 29 Megaherz range and the carrier wave is a set of 13 specific tones that is broadcast from one radio to another. The carrier in this case is known, not random, and is within your control. The recorded conversations from Spiricom are understandable. They are two way, coherent, and anyone can understand what they are saying.

Now, I know very well there are problems with the Spiricom issue. The whole thing may have been fake. There are issues with the protocol and with the participants, and no one else has ever been able to make a Spiricom replicant work. Indeed, I built one myself and so far, it doesn't work for me. There are also "problems with the problems." In other words, the criticism of Spiricom has its own issues.

My point in bringing Spiricom up is not to debate its truth, but the relative merits of the two approaches are apparent. With the Frank's Box approach, you really don't have much. It's quite possible you are picking up on real broadcast words at random that you force into context yourself. There's no real evidence that what you are hearing is from an entity at all.