Statements of the Investigators

Finally, we would like to take the chance to give some final statements to the facts that you have just read. Thank you for visiting this site and please spread the word.

Statement by Marshall Barnes

My statement concerning the results of this investigation is rather threefold. First, this is no victory for skepticism. Those skeptics out there who want to stand up and shout to the believers, "See, we told YOU SO!" should just sit down and shut-up. There was no "we" involved in any of this besides the investigators behind this web site. Not one noted skeptic who has ever made a peep against the Philadelphia Experiment has been correct yet and it took none of their previous pathetic "attempts" at debunking to solve this portion of the mystery.

Absolutely nothing that Robert Goerman, Loren Coleman, or Benjamin LeBlanc has said in public or in print contributed one iota of evidence against Al Bielek's claims, and in fact, I can cite numerous times when so-called, self-proclaimed skeptics have lied like Benjamin LeBlanc and Mack Shelton, obfuscated like Robert Goerman, hidden evidence like Robert Todd Carroll or the A&E network via Towers Productions, or just sat around on their fat backsides like Dr. Postman of the so-called "Skep-Ti-Cult" and called names from the sidelines or played armchair physicist when they knew absolutely nothing about what they were talking about, made any attempt to learn, nor could have understood it even if they had tried.

No, from my extensive 10 year exposure to the ilk of the skeptic community I have found that instead of pursuing the path that used to define skeptical review, which was to go out and investigate things (oh my gawd! Imagine that! No, it's too damn hard!), instead there has been a reliance on repeating and regurgitating the claims of disbelief that have come before, despite their lack of veracity or merit. Nor do skeptics seem to even check such statements for their veracity. Michael Corbin of ParaNet comes to mind who lept at the chance to run Jacques Vallee's debunking of the Philadelphia Experiment and called it "good research", when a simple check of the dates, places and military history devulged by Vallee's so-called "witness" would have proven to Corbin early on that Vallee's witness was a phoney. But no, he bought it hook, line, and sinker until it was later revealed to be the biggest pile of steaming hot disinfo ever plopped on the UFO community. Robert Todd Carroll also bought into it and when confronted with the lengthy evidence to the contrary, saw fit to minimize it by saying that I was just "claiming" that the story was disinformation, as if there was no real basis for that claim. The fact is the U.S. Navy, Time magazine, accounts from a German Naval captain, and the records of the hundreds of allied seamen lost in the North Sea are the ones claiming that Vallee's witness is a liar. I was only reporting their existence. But Robert Todd Carroll, acting like I've seen plenty skeptics behave, ignored those obvious facts because they conflicted with his own belief system. Instead of dealing with it, or admitting that perhaps the Vallee article was not what he thought it was at first, he treated the information that had sunk it elsewhere on the net, like it was simply a small speed bump. Then again, it wouldn't be the first time a skpetic didn't let the truth get in the way of his spreading a good lie.

I loathe what passes now for popular skepticism because it loathes the search for the truth. Instead it worships doubt, denial and denigration. Popular skepticism at best is no more interested in the truth than their mirror opposites on the other extreme that will believe anything without the slightest reservation. The only difference is that one group will believe anything no matter how outlandish the claim and the other, the cult of popular skepticism, will believe any reason to disbelieve a claim no matter how ridiculous. At worse, popular skepticism is hypocracy at its height. Despite its claims of being "scientific", it is no more scientific than the Church was that sought to stymy the great minds of the Renaissance. In fact, popular skepticism is always fallable and yet always seeks to stand in the way of progress and innovation.

According to the skeptics in various ages we shouldn't be flying, using submarines, seeing things on other planets, have ever ventured into space or landed on the Moon or Mars, or any other numerous things that we take for granted and are too numerous to mention. For every major invention, every scientific breakthrough, there have been a bunch of pin headed jerks saying that it couldn't be done. There is no telling how many breakthroughs have been squashed in their infancy because of the pompous, bombastic arrogance of so-called skeptics and their tendency to use their power and positions to defend and further their own ignorance to influence the world. In other words, the true spirit that inhabits popular skepticism is that same intolerent spirit that caused finger pointing and cries of "Blasphemy!" except now it's Penn Jillette giving the finger and yelling "Bullsh*t!" on national cable TV.

No, this is no victory for skepticism, it's a backhanded slap to its face because for all of Robert Todd Carrolls, Robert Goermans, Benjamin LeBlancs and Mack Sheltons, any one of them could have done what we have here and they just didn't have the brains, the guts, and yes, the balls to do it. Oh yeah, here's another one - None of what we've proved here disproves the Philadelphia Experiment story - Al Bielek didn't invent it and neither did Carl Allen, alias Carlos Allende. While not one skeptical claim against the legend stands up to scrutiny (Robert Todd Carroll's addition to it all in his Skeptic's Dictionary is farciful self-indictment if there ever was one), the evidence in favor of the U.S. Navy attempting to achieve optical and radar invisibility during WWII is mounted far past the point of reasonable doubt, and will be posted eventually on this site. This includes the true identity of the infamous Dr. Franklin Reno, aka Dr. Rinehart, the physicist who had talked to Carl Allen and was interviewed by William Moore in his book, The Philadelphia Experiment:Project Invisibility which is the most accurate source of information about the Philadelphia Experiment legend, though it is far from perfect. Like other parts of the Bielek PX/Montauk hybrid hoax, the Dr. Rinehart mentioned in the Montauk books is not the one interviewed by William Moore and it's not John von Neumann, either. While we are not sure of that man's identity we are sure that we have found the real Dr. Rinehart.

So despite the fall of your favorite whipping boy, you skeptics of the Philadelphia Experiment have gained nothing. In fact you've lost your credibility, the battle, and soon the whole war.

Second, the reasons behind why Al Bielek and by association, Preston Nichols and Duncan Cameron, have perpetrated this fraud I think are rather prosaic. It appears, though it is not confirmed, that Duncan's father, Alexander Duncan Cameron, may have known of the PX story because he was in the U.S. Coast Guard at the time and stationed near one of the early testing areas. We've already established Al Bielek's early knowledge of the PX. Preston Nichols' seems to be when he worked for Airbourne Instrument Laboratories and was saw an old file on it when studying information on various ultra high and low radio frequencies, or so he claims. The truth is that AIL has verified that he did in fact work for them at that time and AIL turned up independently on my list of military contractors which the NDRC may have had involved with the Philadelphia Experiment's development. At that time, they were based in Columbia University. With each having their own background and exposure to the PX history, at some point, after they first met, and probably prompted by the release of the Philadelphia Experiment movie and no obvious follow-up to the Moore book, they decided to extend the legend on their own. One only has to compare their accounts and the way they have presented themselves at lectures and in interviews with the exact same things that veteran "wannabes" have done. Those men who choose to stand-up and say "Yes, I was there at the Tet Offensive and you should be glad that you weren't. It began on a day like any other..." Men who seem as genuine and believable as anyone could imagine and yet are lying with every word.

Any number of people have remarked how believable Al and Preston seem despite the far-out and unverifyable nature of their claims. When reading an article in a veteran's magazine, about these wartime wannabes, I was struck by the identical behavior between them and Bielek and Preston. The only difference was the subject matter, absolutely nothing else.

My support of the Bielek version of the PX had always been based on the inability to prove either way whether he was telling the truth. Listeners to the Art Bell show may remember that when Mike Siegel was the host and Bielek was a guest, Bielek got himself into a bind over some issues and I called up the program and bailed him out. However, as I found more and more evidence supporting the fact that the Philadelphia Experiment was a real event but found none that supported Bielek's version, I became suspicious. My suspicions actually had their origins from statements that he made that night to Siegel about having papers from a Navy doctor that treated the crew of the Eldridge. These papers had been mentioned to me before by Al but when I asked him to send me copies he quickly declined to do so, saying something to the effect that he wasn't ready for them to be released yet. I heard that night the same sudden hesitation in his voice when, to his surprise, Siegel asked to see copies of the letters and Al begrudgenly said he would send them. As far as I know he never did, and I remember at one point Siegel saying that he had yet to get them.

Those letters were the beginning of the end for Bielek's credibility because when I did get a chance to see them, thanks to a researcher named Chica Bruce, I saw on their face that they were fakes, fakes designed by someone unknown to fool your typical, guiliable PX fan but to anyone, anyone that possessed any real knowledge of the entire PX saga, on their face they were fakes. Like trying to pass off a Susan B. Anthony dollar as an extremely rare and ancient coin to a professional coin collector.

The letters were supposed to have been given to Al by Phil Schneider who claimed that they had been written by his father. Without going into details, the letters were so ludicrous because they weren't even supportive of the Bielek account. The dates were wrong, the ship names were wrong, ranks and service protocals were wrong. So wrong in fact that officers of the U.S. Navy that I consulted with, on verifying the military aspects of the documents, suggested that I go to their criminal investigation division because anyone passing those letters off as being real Navy communications was committing a fraud! But when Chica told Montauk book publisher Vince Barbarick (the real name of Peter Moon) about this, he vehemently countered that I wasn't in the military so I didn't know what I was talking about. It wasn't until I did some research and dug up documents that proved I was right, that Chica believed me. Even still, in her book, "The Philadelphia Experiment Murder: The Physics of the Insane" (and now we're finally learning where the insanity really stems from) Barbarick interjects, after stating the reasons why I feel the letters are a fraud, that I'm not, nor never was, in the military so I wouldn't know all the ins and outs of how military communications work. Barbarick's insistance on casting doubt on my ability to determine whether the letters were genuine or not, when clearly they weren't, made me realize that there was a new kind of cover-up afoot - a cover-up to protect a vulnerability in the PX/Montauk hybrid story that Barbarick had now been turning into a successful cash cow.

If I began to doubt the party line, no one better than Barbarick knew what those implications could be. That I would start digging and find out the truth. After all, Barbarick had been there on the 50 yard line and front row for what my investigations made of Jacques Vallee's much celebrated "Anatomy of a Hoax" debunking attempt. Al himself had participated in the coup de grace that destroyed the much bally-hooed PX survivor wannbe, Drue, when I ambushed him on a national radio program with the fact that I had discovered that nearly all of his claims were fakes and could be proven so in a court of law. "Boy, you really got him", Bielek exclaimed overjoyed on my voice mail afterwards. Bielek had rightly sensed that Drue was a disinfo plant but more to the point, he was competition for Bielek himself. And it was a sense of competition, from me, that I believe was sending Al to dig up as much "evidence", no matter how lame it was, to support his claims, because I was constantly finding evidence that neglected to verify his account of events.

This culminated in the online attacks against me and my book "Evidence: The Rinehart File" based solely on how I was protrayed in the hype on the back cover description (truly an "insane" logic here, since Barbarick writes the same kind of hype on the back of his own books!) and not on any of its content which was 85% exclusive official douments, archive material and other hard evidence (unlike any of the Montauk books) for that supports 95% of the claims made by Dr. Rinehart to William Moore in his book on the PX. Ludicrous attacks on my so-called "ego", with the addition of racial epitaths, remarks about my financial means, and daily activities which Barbarick obviously forgot could all be traced back to him directly through IP numbers supplied by the cable company that supplies internet access to his very street. But whether he actually posted them or not, the posts contained distortions of information that only he initially possessed. So he was only proving how truly diabolical and "insane" he could be, when pressed.

You see, if Bielek's story is fake, then there is no PX/Montauk connection, which draws the very credibility of the Montauk saga into doubt and then the whole house of cards could go, resulting in an end to his little book empire he had built up around this "legend" that he had discovered that Bielek, Nichols and Duncan had concocted. And in the end, we now know that Bielek's story is fake. There was no Edward Cameron and as such there were no Cameron brothers jumping overboard and landing in a base in 1983 to be captured and taken underground to a fantastic facility and greeted by a friendly old scientist who says, "I've been waiting for you for 40 years!". No, there's always just been good ol'"Uncle Al" spinning yarns just as much as the man who's picture he stole spun real yarn and made a fortune. Except poor Uncle Al never made a fortune of his own but he did get some fame, and I really don't hold a grudge against him at all, because just as I'm sure those of us that have doggedly chased the legend of the Philadelphia Experiment because we were techheads will admit, Al Bielek kept the story alive, and fortunately there was a real story behind it, after all. Because we felt that there just might be something to it, we pursued the science and though I'm not sure of but a handful of us who have come close to really understanding how it was done or could be replicated, it has been that pursuit of knowledge, real scientific knowledge, that has benefitted us. That's alot more than I can say about what the naysayers and skeptics have done, who to a man have shied away from even trying to disprove the PX, using science. Not even bona fide scientist Jacques Vallee tried that. And while I'm saying that there was no PX/Montauk connection, that doesn't mean that there were no sordid experiments going on at Montauk. And though I, probably alot more than most, understand the physics behind what has been implied there, it doesn't mean that it really happened.

Once you stand way back away from the big picture, what you find is that the Montauk legend is like the hub of a wheel. A hub on its own is not big enough to go anywhere, but, once you add spokes and a wheel, now you can go somewhere, but the wheel needs that hub just as well. So with the Montauk story consisting rougue CIA/Operation Paperclip Nazi types playing mind control and time travel games when they weren't molesting young teenage boys, you then add spokes of known conspiracy material - missing children, secret advanced government technology, occult secret societies, UFOs, the Earth's energy grid, etc and then you add the outer rim connecting all the spokes together, that rim being that's it all a part of the coming "changes" and the New World Order and how we're supposed to learn to raise our consciousness and you've got this tall tale that can go somewhere, and it has. It doesn't mean it's true. After all, Barbarick himself has constantly, repeatedly inserted the word "legend" into the Montauk story, even to the point of defining the word 'legend' on numerous occasions. "If the story were true, then why not just stand up and say so", I always thought. Now we know why. Because it's not.

Personally, I've already learned everything that I had hoped to, so I no longer care. I'll leave any further pursuit of that tale to my compatriots here or those who we may have inspired. But it will take even more work and those who take up the challenge will be facing just as many adversaries as we, if not more. There is more than one agenda behind the Montauk legend and the least one you have to worry about is any covert government one. To those who wish to take it on, I say stay quiet, look hard, use your brain and trust no one but yourselves. Good hunting.

In closing I would like to address those who have believed Al Bielek and say take a look at what he promoted beyond the Philadelphia Experiment. Various end of the world scenarios, right? Why he even changed his version before the year 2000 of where he and his brother landed to say that they landed in 2003 and that there was going to be a global takeover in 2000, and now recently has changed that to having landed in a much later year and that the takeover is due this year! If he were alone at this I would kind of chuckle and say that's par for the course, but he is not. Day after day, at an ever increasingly alarming rate, the alternative information community has become deluged with so-called experts who are predicting our doom. The first big one was Y2K, then there was 5/5/2000, not to mention the ever looming spectre of the "I Am" map, and then the Nostrudamos "King of Terror" that should have struck us back in the fall of 2000. Oh, and then that planetary alignment from about a year ago. And then all the 9/11 hype and how Al-Qaida was holding a woman from Angola prisoner who had ebola so that their scientists could use her as a ebola producing factory and destroy the US in March of 2002 like Taliban John said. And then Saddam Hussein was a prediction of Nostrudamus who would bring on Armageddon or how by now a solar magnetic extracta was supposed to have already wiped out most life on Earth anyway. The point I'm getting at is you're being manipulated. After Y2K, there were forces out there that saw how much the public got into this 'end of the world' stuff and conspiracy theories and, behind the scenes, from a variety of sources and for a variety of purposes, stories have been deliberately spun to blow your mind, as we used to say. When it was just UFO conspiracies and the like, it was fun. I know, I got in before the X-Files was even on air and saw plenty of stuff that I knew was crap but because there were also plenty of good cases and good things to chase, it was just a good giggle along the way. Sadly, those days are over.

What I'm witnessing now are attempts at what looks like the manipulation of mass consciousness to attain certain preconceived outcomes and people that I used to think had some ability of discerment, are going right along for the ride. Without giving a major discertation, let me just say this - what you believe, matters. Who benefits when say, 7 million people constantly think that the world is going to end on a certain date because some planet is going to crash into us or some jerk from another dimension is going to open a stargate and let our alien masters through? Who benefits when 10 million people believe that a specific type of terrorist attack is imminent because some jack-ass of a radio talk show has people call up and tell their dreams of some looming dread event? Who benefits when you get scared, and what can they do with that fear? Without naming names, let me just suggest that the next time you hear that so-called expert on the radio fortelling oncoming doom, that all of you focus your minds, concentrate on the future real hard and say, "HE'S WRONG!"

Enjoy life, everyone. That's what it's for.

Statements by Fred Houpt and Gerold Schelm

* * *