From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 15:01:28 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 14:55:52 -0500 Subject: Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf > From: Steven Kaeser <email@example.com> > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 10:23:29 -0400 > Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 17:48:26 -0400 > Subject: Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf > Dennis- > Are you saying that the ACC/Transistor allegations have no > credence because Corso's story indicates otherwise? This must, > of course, mean that you have had a change of heart regarding > some of Corso's story and that "Corso the Conquerer" comment was > merely a holdover from previous beliefs. > I don't know much about Bob Wolf, and still find the ACC story of > interest. You seem to want to link Corso with the ACC story, > which makes no sense (as you point out). ACC hasn't indicated > any linkage, and Corso certainly didn't, and the continuing > discussion of such a relationship (even in passing) merely serves > to muddy the waters and doesn't lead to a rational discussion of > the situation. Of course, I can gather from your tone that you > believe this entire discussion is nonsense and not worth wasting > time on. Several prominent researchers would probably disagree, > including one who believed there was a lack of continuity in the > development of the transistor long before Corso or ACC hit the > scene (but I'll let him speak for himself). Although I am not directly investigating the ACC story any more I feel compelled to comment on some of the balanced opinions here. Linking ACC to Corso's information in his book would probably be unwise like Steve says as Corso provided very few details to an incident he had no first hand knowledge of. In my discussions with Jack Shulman he stated that he had not read Corso's book and I got the impression that he had no plans to in the immediate future for concern over "contaminating" his own information and research that he had acquired independantly through the wonder consultant. > Your skepticism is healthy, but let's keep the discussion on a > level playing field and not add to the confusion. It does little > more than provide your critics with ammunition. > Of course the "transistor code" (or transistor technology) wasn't > developed in a matter of weeks or months. There is a paper trail > that shows semi-conductor research had been ongoing for years. > However, that would not preclude the incorporation of concepts or > technology that was based upon the examination of foreign > material. The military did this with captured weopens of war, > and it would be no different for a capture alien craft. I have > contended in other posts that our scientists and engineers would > not have been able to understand any technolgy unless we already > had the technological foundation to understand it. If we were > already very close to developing an effecient transistor, and > several viable "hints" dropped out of the sky, then they could be > quickly adopted in the manner described. If the source of those > "hints" was protected by national security, then a paper trail > would have to be developed to prevent (or defend against) any > patent challanges. Shulman has indicated that the original > transisotr patent was only given tentative approval at first > because the application failed to show a clear development > history. I would like to see if there are any Patent Office > files in the archives to show how that application was handled, > but there's so much to do and so little time. The first two things I did when I decided to look into this matter were to ask John Greenwald to make a FOIA request on one Project Starpoint and to send a note of inquiry to Rob Swiatek of the U.S. patent office and board member of the Fund For UFO Research regarding the matter. Rob replied by sending me an e-mail on his opinion which is now well known to most members of this list. Excerpt: "In short, I'm real dubious about an alien origin for the transistor. I see no need to invoke one given the nice smooth technological curve that preceded it in the 30s and early-40s. Semiconductor development at Bell Labs and other places has proceeded apace in logical steps from the late 1800s to the present, with people in the early-1940s even predicting the transistor would be invented within the next few years. Thus, you can see where I stand. It sort of galls me that some people don't credit the human race with having the brains to develop technological devices such as fiberoptics, integrated circuits, night vision scopes: No, we owe it all to aliens apparently." Granted I feel the same way, but the question of whether human beings could develop such technologies is really not the issue so much as is "what actually happened?" I certainly feel that if the UFO technology somehow influenced transistor research to some degree it probably would not have been much longer before it was discovered independantly as the research projects were documented as being quite far down this road prior to July 1947 anyhow. This in effect makes the picture even more dubious in my opinion. I've read many of the wildly religious opinions on the whole alien transistor issue since this whole thing started from the gullible proponents to the naive naysayers. To take the conspiratorial point-of-view for a moment I find it deeply troubling that people think that officials in a major communications entity like Bell Labs would be so incompetent that they could not properly conceal classified information. I would consider it to be highly likely that the scientists that worked on the projects in question were probably never even told the origins of the "foreign technology" that was placed in their hands for research if such technology was present in the first place. The magnitude of something like UFO technology influencing the current technological trends of that time period would certainly be considered priority 1 in all areas including security and logic dictates that all other priorities would have been rescinded. It would be a mistake to underestimate the time, money, and resources that would be spent on the deflection of attentions surrounding something this significant. It's another example of the same old attitude "if I can't find any evidence than none must exist" that's beeen plaguing ufology for years. In summation, I am generally skeptical of UFO conspiracy within the scientific community or corporations possibly barring...say, military or defense contractors. The evidence for the alien transistor appears to be very, very weak largely consisting of heresay from 2 independant sources. Jack Shulman has stated that he has come into possession of documentary evidence to support his assertions in the form of a work book or lab book. A board member of the Fund for UFO Research told me that ACC's meeting with Air Force and DOD officials at Princeton did, in fact, take place. It would be nice to hear more first hand accounts from sources not associated with ACC or Bob Wolf. Jared.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp