HUNTING ZERO POINT

For a discussion of the science of Townsend Brown, his experiments and his ideas.

HUNTING ZERO POINT

Postby grinder » Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:58 am

Paul,

I have been reading Nick Cooks "Hunt for Zero Point" and I really don't understand one thing. He seems to dance around Townsend Browns work without ever really lighting on it. Like its some sort of forbidden topic somehow, yet he can't quite turn away. Do you know what I mean?

He mentions Browns work, then goes away from it,then comes back. Its like some sort of wierd dance he has going. Like he wants to address the issue but somehow misses it entirely.

Nick himself mentioned that it was because of the Philadelphia Experiment and Dr. Browns interest in "Flying Saucers" that turned him away, but I don't get that. WHY? Isn't that exactly what he was looking for? Why does he look square at Townsend Brown and not see what you have seen?

I guess it was just the right person at the right time, but Cooks' is a strange book, if you ask me, just because of the way that he keeps writing about Brown and then dropping him like a hot potato.

On page 27 (paperback) he says " But if during World War ll, if Brown had discovered a means of shielding US Navy ships from enemy radar (or even marginally reducing their radar signature) it would have rung right off the classification scale."

He writes several pages on Brown. Seems to have done some homework but after he says that "Brown died in relative obsucurity in 1983" he lost my attention there. Paul says Dr. Brown died in 1985 and I believe him. Its hard to take someone seriously when they are writing about the life of a man when he can't even get his death date correct.

Later on page 35 after spilling out all that he had gathered about the life of Townsend Brown Nick Cook simply says "(page 35) "I found myself trying to put the pieces of the puzzle together. The problem was, however I went about it, they wouldn't form into any recognizable picture. So he just throws up his hands sort of and walks off. He literally gave up. I'll bet he wishes (or will wish when he gets to reading your book) that he had been more persistent.

Congratualations Paul for sticking with it. and for finding the story I know will be a smash hit. grinder
grinder
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:20 am

oooops

Postby Victoria Steele » Mon Jun 26, 2006 5:03 pm

Sorry Paul,

I didn't mean to open a new post, you were right. So I am going to rewrite my message. Picking up what is left of my brain after reading " remember dear"

Oh Jeeze, I don't even know where to start so I am going to go back to my old message to grinder, sorta.

grinder ....... I wanted to thank you for opening this post! Its becoming more and more interesting to be able to compare what others have written about Dr. Brown compared to what Paul has written (catch that chapter 39 if you have any doubt at all about his depth of research. holy cow is all I have been managing to say but I am sure that I will come up with something better soon.)

I was on a rant on an earlier message that I misposted .... and now I don't feel the need to go back to exactly what I said. Its like a river you know, but anyway I did want to say that I am still upset with other writers who cant even get Dr. Browns date of death written correctly, yet we are supposed to buy into their suppositions about what Dr. Brown was or was not doing. That just really blows my whistle. Do these guys really think that they deserve to gain our respect and following when they can't even get that simple thing right.

I think that you, Paul deserve alot of respect and I am willing to tend it to you. And with that comes a little leeway too. At least when you are faced with a totally blank space where you need to try to figure what Dr. Browns path was , at least you are basing it on something solid and not pulling it out of thin air. And too I get the impression that you are actually allowing us as readers to take the matter into our own hands alittle and figure things for ourselves.

I do know that no one has yet presented the kind of material that you have offered. Not to say that you can't or won't make some mistakes along this trail but I know that you try hard to be sort of "self regulating" on your material. As someone said earlier, its important to make a body of work that will stand up against scrutiny and its obvious to me that you are working hard in that direction.

So what the heck was going on? I can see that he would try to "distance himself" from his family. Maybe for their own safety. People that deal around intelligence types usually have people interested in thier agendas and families can be a liability because they are where your heart is . And I guess I would worry for that little boy and of course Josephine, if I were Townsend. There had to be some really terrible men out there ... (one gaining power in Germany) but others too would be interested in finding out what was going on. Did Doctor Brown ever have to concern himself with his families safety? Or his own? Kidnappers or anything like that? Maybe thats why the Caroline Group didn't want Morgan to have a family. He could be "reached" then. More comments soon! Good work Paul! What happens next???????? Victoria
Victoria Steele
Mysterious Redhead
 
Posts: 932
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 7:06 am

Re: oooops

Postby Paul S. » Mon Jun 26, 2006 5:47 pm

Victoria Steele wrote:I didn't mean to open a new post, you were right. ... I was on a rant on an earlier message that I misposted .... and now I don't feel the need to go back to exactly what I said.


So, Victoria, you want I should delete that previous mis-post? I think you can do it yourself, too. Then the whole mis-started (and now locked) thread will vanish.

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

Cooks stew

Postby Mark Culpepper » Mon Jun 26, 2006 10:53 pm

Not a bad deal at all grinder and Victoria. I have Cooks book in front of me and it is all kinds of good fun to note how he sort of sidesteps the issue of Townsend Brown. Has anyone ever asked him REALLY why he did that?

Paul, have you had any correspondence with Cook because of all of them out there he is probably one of the better writers. At least he seems to carry with him more authority, being a writer for Janes certainly doesn't hurt his credibility.

And he said something which was placed on the back cover of his book and I am including it because I just have a hunch that maybe he was talking about something we all could look at further.

"The atomic bomb was not the only project to occupy government scientists during the 1940s. Anti-gravity technology, originally spearheaded by scientists in Nazi Germany, was another high priority, ONE THAT STILL MIGHT BE IN EFFECT TODAY. Now, for the first time, an acclaimed journalist with unprecedented access to key sources in the intelligence and military communities reveals suppressed evidence that tells the story of a quest for a discovery that could prove as powerful as the atomic bomb."

And I wonder in those words and in the things that he tried to see, but didn't , when he looked at Townsend Brown, if we are not looking at that second project. One that was as secret, no, more secret than the Manhattan project. Its an interesting book and I am looking forward to looking at it with the new eyes that Paul has given us.

Victoria, we missed you. always can count on some fireworks from your side of the fence.

Mark C.
Mark Culpepper
The Dean
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 6:02 am

Re: Cooks & The Others (Vassilatos in particular)

Postby Paul S. » Tue Jun 27, 2006 12:10 am

Mark Culpepper wrote:Paul, have you had any correspondence with Cook because of all of them out there he is probably one of the better writers. At least he seems to carry with him more authority, being a writer for Janes certainly doesn't hurt his credibility.


grinder, Mark, everybody...

Yes, I have had correspondence with Nick Cook, though not recently. I find him to be very responsive, encouraging, and genuinely interested in what we're all talking about here. He is in a completely different category than either Wm. Moore or Gerry Vassilatos (more on Gerry in a moment...), be careful you don't let your frustration with those jokers spill over on to whatever regard might be reserving for Nick Cook. I personally have found his book to be a valuable resource and my copy is extensively highlighted an dog-eared.

When I read grinder's post this morning, I was tempted to chime in with why I think Nick might have wanted to keep a distance from Brown. I think the answer is right in his book (and when I find the section I'm thinking of, I'll edit this post with the page #). Bottom line, I think, is that the "disinformation campaign" about Townsend Brown is still working.

But, rather than speak for Nick, I have made an effort to contact him, alert him to this thread, and I hope we will all be pleasantly surprised to see him chime in here.

As for Gerry Vassilatos, I have had some correspondence in the past week with somebody who hold him in some regard, we engaged a debate of sorts about his credibility, and I renewed my efforts (dropped years ago) to try and locate the man. I have now heard back from the publishers of both of his books (Borderlands Science Research Foundation & Adventures Unlimited Press) and neither has any idea how to contact him.

But Nick, I expect to hear from, one way or another, so stay tuned. I'll have more to say if/when he does.

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

Paint It (Blacker Than) Black

Postby Paul S. » Tue Jun 27, 2006 12:19 am

Mark Culpepper wrote:And I wonder in those words and in the things that he tried to see, but didn't , when he looked at Townsend Brown, if we are not looking at that second project. One that was as secret, no, more secret than the Manhattan project. Its an interesting book and I am looking forward to looking at it with the new eyes that Paul has given us.


OK, this much I have to say right now:

The thing that always gives me pause in all of this -- indeed, my highly moderating, if not downright controlling, internal editorial board -- is the whole idea of "how could the government or any body else be possibly engaged in this kind of research, for this long, and the world not know about it?"

And then, I remember, well, maybe there have been leaks, and maybe we've all seen some of them, but the disinformation machine is so powerful that we doubt what we see with our own eyes!

And I also remember that until Trinity and Hiroshima, nobody knew that the atomic bomb was being developed. Well almost nobody... Stalin knew, but that's a different story altogether...

In any event, I guess it is possible for the government to be building stuff, even fantastic stuff, that we'll never know about, and the Manhattan Project was the model for that.

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

leaked like a sieve

Postby Madison » Tue Jun 27, 2006 1:01 am

Paul and everybody,

We can talk about this more, of course. But I have always noted that further discussions about the soviets intelligence bureaus were that they were highly effective and it was no accident that the Manhattan Project .... though it was "secret" to most Americans was well documented and followed by the Soviets.

And I think that this country has learned alot from their way of handling intelligence matters from that sad experience.. "Disinformation campaignes being one of them. I think that Cook even pointed out that the word and the concept "disinformatsiya" was expressly "coined" by the Russians.

So someone who was running a second and parallel project would have learned from all of that and hoodwinking the Russians would have been a primary objective.with them.

I submit here that the second project was much more widespread in scope and more cognizant of the fact that this was a multigenerational project. Those that went in, went in for life. Those that were recruited by those original members , were recruited for life also. At least, thats the way it looks from your story Paul.

Dr. Brown was "interviewed" while on the Caroline in 1933 and then "brought in". (I expect for life because who was he meeting just the month that he died? Morgan ..... his young "recruit" )..... I have a feeling that Morgan wasn't the only one that "joined up". Can someone ask Mr. Twigsnapper if that was the case for him too? I don't know that he would answer us but its worth the question.

And I am fascinated by your last chapter Paul. Its like the whole world is a powder keg, with the fuse lit! And if I was an early intelligence agency, even a private one, I'd be recruiting pretty hard. Cause if I didn't and war broke out where would I get the men that I would need? They'd all be in the service! (And please note, if you have read anything about Stephenson himself , thats exactly what he did when war broke out. He hired hundreds and hundreds of women.)

I imagine that the guys that did "join up" for this kind of job got some sort of "dispensation" from the military. You think?

Anyway. It all makes perfect sense Paul . Forward! What happens next? Madison
Madison
Space Cadet
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 9:09 pm

reading Cooks book

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Tue Jun 27, 2006 1:23 am

Paul and all,

I think of all of the books currently out there which mention Townsend Brown, Nick Cooks' is my favorite. I like his careful, thoughtful style but he does puzzle me sometimes. I have wondered also if he has ever looked back to a path he didn't take?

On page 34 He mentions that Dr. Brown "helped found" NICAP and describes that it was an unofficial study group set up to study the blooming interest and rise in sightings of "Flying Saucers " and UFOs in general.

Now that makes total sense to me. That someone with the credentials of Townsend Brown would look into the activities of strange sightings ... of things whose propulsion systems were not understood. Why shouldn't he be interested in that? It makes no sense to me that Nick Cook then declares that action alienated him from the mainstream BUT THEN ALIENATED TOWNSEND BROWN FROM HIMSELF TOO. Why would that be? I don't understand why he would take that position! I can understand that someone in Iowa would buy into the rhetoric that you were "nuts" it you talked about "Flying Saucers" .... I can understand those guys maybe throwing Dr. Brown in with that lot. I can see why his friends and even neighbors in the fifties would have looked at him strangely ........ but why would Cook choose to go in that direction too? It makes no sense to me! I sure hope someday that you will be able to ask him that directly.

He says " The trouble was, of course, that this alienated him even more from the mainstream. It also further alienated him from me". Why?,why?, why?

Elizabeth
Elizabeth Helen Drake
Sr. Research Asst.
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:11 am

Nick Cook checks in

Postby Paul S. » Sat Jul 01, 2006 7:12 pm

Just a quick note to let everybody know that I have heard from Nick Cook.

He e-mailed me this morning to let me know that he is "heads down in the final stages of delivering a book" and unable to divert any of his time or attention from the completion of that task. He did not say what the book is, though there has been some speculation that there is a follow-up to "Hunt..." in the works for some time.

He assures me that when he comes out from behind his "purdah" (I had to look it up; it's a Persian word meaning 'curtain or screen') in "a month or so" he'll take a look at these forums and see what he can add to our discussion.

Till then we're on our own...

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

Re: leaked like a sieve

Postby Paul S. » Sat Jul 01, 2006 7:47 pm

Madison wrote:We can talk about this more, of course. But I have always noted that further discussions about the soviets intelligence bureaus were that they were highly effective and it was no accident that the Manhattan Project .... though it was "secret" to most Americans was well documented and followed by the Soviets.


My only thought about the Manhattan Project as it relates to this story is, "if they can keep something like that top secret (at least from the unwashed masses, if not the enemy) for as long as it took to get the Enola Gay over Hiroshima, then what else could they be keepinng equally secret now?

"Stealth" is a good example too, and may yet prove to have some direct bearing on our tale.

And I think that this country has learned alot from their way of handling intelligence matters from that sad experience.. "Disinformation campaignes being one of them. I think that Cook even pointed out that the word and the concept "disinformatsiya" was expressly "coined" by the Russians.


I would also like to inject the possibility that some projects may actually be proceeding simultaneously in a number of countries, not the least Russia. And I should add, also, that the scope and influence of "The Caroline Group" is quite international, and such undertakings could well be proceeding under multiple, national umbrellas with the full knowledge and support of such a group.


I submit here that the second project was much more widespread in scope and more cognizant of the fact that this was a multigenerational project.


Hmmm... there's the "m-word" again -- 'multi-generational.' That's a concept that is going to need some exploring, too.


Can someone ask Mr. Twigsnapper if that was the case for him too? I don't know that he would answer us but its worth the question.


I think Mr. Twigsnapper might be waiting for me to tell that story when the appopriate time comes.

And I am fascinated by your last chapter Paul. Its like the whole world is a powder keg, with the fuse lit!


You're right, of course, and I don't think the case can be understated. This period we're in now, between, say, 1938 and 1940 -- from Hitler's first foreign incursions to the beginning of the Battle of Britain, is a real turning point not only in our story but in world history, and, I suspect, a time when "The Caroline Group's" involvement became much more active, if still very much behind the scenes. So we're going to have to do our homework here.

On that note, I'm pleased to see we've got a separate thread going on "early radar,"

http://forum.ttbrown.com/viewtopic.php?t=309

...and that subject covers a LOT of territory, so I think I will direct my other comments on this period to that discussion.

(And please note, if you have read anything about Stephenson himself , thats exactly what he did when war broke out. He hired hundreds and hundreds of women.)


More homework I'm going to have to do in order to dovetail the big picture with our story.

I imagine that the guys that did "join up" for this kind of job got some sort of "dispensation" from the military. You think?


That "special dispensation" could just as well have included a role IN the military.

Anyway. It all makes perfect sense Paul


Well, sense. Sometimes.

Forward! What happens next?


I dunno... bake some brownies? Celebrate the 4th of July?

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

double duty

Postby Mark Culpepper » Sun Jul 02, 2006 2:32 am

You said that part of the deal with joining up with the Caroline Group might have meant ALSO joining the military.

The thought struck me. How many militarys? I mean ..... If the Caroline Group was truly international ..... would they have had agents in Germany? Italy, Norway?

How would that have worked? Caroline agents as German officers? Now theres a twist. Hiding in plain sight maybe? Maybe some of the odd "mistakes" made by the Germans were actually caused by this group. Maybe I am REALLY off base, but could that be a possibility.

But its interesting to me, if we are to give their existance credence, how this Group seemed to step in to nudge the Allies into a better position.

But, Couldn't they have "disposed" of Hitler earlier? I mean, look at all the death and destruction that might have been avoided if a Caroline member had been able to put an end to that sort of force. If they were so powerful, why couldn't they accomplish that?

Did they even want to? , or was it important for that whole human tragedy to play out? Almost too much to think about all at once, so I am going to stop. Just random thoughts on the nature of the Caroline group. Obviously they were powerful but I wonder if they ever had complete control over situations? It seems like they gave thier members choices. When you do that ... do you have to stand by then when the choices are horribly wrong?

--Mark C
Mark Culpepper
The Dean
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 6:02 am

Choice & Destiny

Postby Paul S. » Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:03 pm

Mark Culpepper wrote:You said that part of the deal with joining up with the Caroline Group might have meant ALSO joining the military.


I mostly meant to infer that the two are not mutually exclusive, and that it is entirely possible for a "TCG" operative to have a dual role. Hence the notion that such a group is able to operate within the very effective shielding of the world's intel and military institutions.

The thought struck me. How many militarys? I mean ..... If the Caroline Group was truly international ..... would they have had agents in Germany? Italy, Norway?

How would that have worked? Caroline agents as German officers? Now theres a twist. Hiding in plain sight maybe?


Without going into details, I think it's safe to say you've made a valid assumption. "TCG" is/was most assuredly International (global?) in its scope; there will be stories to that effect coming down the pike in future installments.

Maybe some of the odd "mistakes" made by the Germans were actually caused by this group. Maybe I am REALLY off base, but could that be a possibility.


Another interesting observation.

But, Couldn't they have "disposed" of Hitler earlier? I mean, look at all the death and destruction that might have been avoided if a Caroline member had been able to put an end to that sort of force. If they were so powerful, why couldn't they accomplish that?

Did they even want to? , or was it important for that whole human tragedy to play out?


I think you just answered your own question there, though, of course -- and typically -- the answer raises yet more questions. I don't know if "human tragedy" is the perfect description for our earthly drama, though it certainly expresses one aspect of it. In any event, I think your observation that it is not the role of "TCG" to interfere in the script is probably a good one.

It seems like they gave thier members choices. When you do that ... do you have to stand by then when the choices are horribly wrong?


Certainly looks that way...

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward


Return to The Science of Townsend Brown

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron