archived as http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Sarfatti_16.doc [pdf] more of Jack Sarfatti is at http://www.stealthskater.com/Science.htm#Sarfatti Supporters and Critics of Dr. Jack Sarfatti [Bill Russell on Wilt Chamberlain when asked why Wilt seemed to have more than his share of critics among fans and sportscasters: "Well, they are 'wrong' in the sense that they don't appreciate the human factor. It's impossible to perform at 100% every minute of every game, and that's assuming that you stay injury-free and are not victimized by tainted referee foul-calling. But these same fans are 'right' in that he gives them that very impression. He does it to himself by maintaining he's "superman". He's not! …"] [StealthSkater: I have been a "grudging" supporter for Dr. Sarfatti. He does seem to possess keen insights into complex matters and the courage to postulate them and "damn the torpedoes" consequences of treading on shaky theoretical limbs. But I do not enjoy his acidic-abrasive "bedside manner" of debating. It causes more harm- than-good and probably explains why he never gets published in major journals. His "art form" of stomping on every exposed nerve in the human body with demeaning verbal "golf spikes" may be personally amusing to him. But then he screams to the heavens when more influential peers ignore him. What did he expect? Like Al McGuire who used to coach Marquette, he would do everything possible to get tagged with a 'technical' and then look incredulously when the referees so obliged. Dr. Sarfatti calls a "spade a spade" as far as he can tell. That, of course, is what we want our experts to do. But there are "politically correct" ways of doing that. "It's not Physics as I was taught" -- Jack Sarfatti. I agree with him 100% there! What I continually come across is the reported UFO-type technology involves science which is beyond anything our best minds can even conceive of. Maybe 300-1,000 years ahead of where we are today. Almost "magical" (see remarks by radar engineer Wilbert Smith, Skunk Works' Ben Rich, black project researchers John Andrews and Jim Goodall at (a) doc pdf URL-doc URL-pdf and (b) doc pdf URL-doc URL-pdf ). A wild guess on my part is that it involves mind-over-matter capabilities by genetically-advanced brains and psycho- reactive materials-of-construction (see doc pdf URL-doc URL-pdf ). I could be wrong, of course. But I don't know what else could be beyond the conception of our best minds like Dr. Sarfatti's.] And the rumored ET-military co-op reverse-engineering programs has been trying to fit whatever of "their's" can be shoe-horned into our existing stuff -- as much of a challenge for 'them' as for us. But Dr. Sarfatti has the bad habit of dismissing anything his theories cannot envelope. If that's not true, then he certainly has not given that impression to the public. And it seems nobody except him and his "favorites" are allowed to have experienced a paranormal event; everybody else is branded a "crackpot" or worse. Check-out Jack's admission to receiving a phone-call when he was a teenager that identified him as one of the best young minds that 'they' were going to recruit to help teach advanced science 1 to the rest of Humanity => doc pdf URL-doc URL-pdf . The voice said it was a computer from a time-traveling ET ship from the future. But I still like him and try to learn from him while biting my tongue and down in a 3-point stance. DON'T KILL THE MESSENGER (me/StealthSkater) -- the following is what I found existing on the Web. [StealthSkater note: I'm just guessing at the chronological order of photos of Jack I've found …] (1) (2) (3) (1) Jack Sarfatti and Fred Alan Wolf (2) From left to right, Jack Sarfatti, Saul Paul Sirag, Nick Herbert, and Fred Alan Wolf lower right in 1974. This picture appeared in Francis Ford Coppola's CITY MAGAZINE in the article "Faster- Than-The Speeding-Photon" by Rasa Gustaitus. Warren Hinckle and Stephan Schwartz, Editors. http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/histpcrg.html (3) http://www.sherryart.com/nerdboys/nerdboys2.html (4) (5) (4) (5) Sarfatti with the CV61 Battle Group, Indian Ocean, 1987 http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/sar.html 2 (6) (7) (7) (6) http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/hambone/people1.html#sarfatti (7) http://www.thinkingallowed.com/2jsarfatti.html (8) http://www.arcosanti.org/expArcosanti/visit/events/archive/paradox/ParadoxIg3.html 9 (9) http://www.qedcorp.com/stb/jacktina.jpg = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = StealthSkater note: the following 2 sets of e-mails were from 2 different physicists, one from academia and the other in the defense industry. Although they are well-versed in all of the headline-making theories, they are hands-on R&D researchers in advanced propulsion technologies. I am keeping their identities in confidence because of the "stigma" the UFO topic causes to a scientist's reputation. This can be seen from an e-mail I received from Prof. Max Tegmark: From: "Max Tegmark" <[email protected]> Date: Tue, April 29, 2003 7:00 pm To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: great easy-reading article! ... and now some "fun" reading for you Hi Mark, Thanks for your message and the encouraging words. I'm particularly glad to hear them, since this is one of my first cracks at writing less technical articles. 3 > What I did find -- not surprisingly -- is that the people who indeed know what is going on in these "black" worlds never write about it on the Internet Indeed. In my opinion, there's a lot of prejudice in the physics community towards writing about things seen as too philosophical. Thanks also for the link - I'll check it out when I've caught up with my backlog. Best wishes, ;-) ///// ( O O ) | " | |------oooO---------Oooo------| | Prof. Max Tegmark | | Dept. of Physics | | Univ. of Pennsylvania | | Philadelphia, PA 19104-6396 | | www.hep.upenn.edu/~max/ | |_____________________________| | | Oooo. .oooO ( ) ( ) ) / \ ( (_/ \_) { StealthSkater note: read Dr. Tegmark's Scientific American article on "Parallel Universes" at doc pdf URL .} (1-a) From: {name withheld} Date: Sat., Nov. 28, 1998, 7:53pm (EST-3) To: [email protected] Subject: Re: unannounced nuclear test & anti-matter Mark : you wrote: > I read Darlington’s book. I remember hearing on national radio news about an unannounced nuclear test in Nevada. I only hear it once. It was around the time that Lazar claims. I never heard of Lazar until I saw his model kit in a Hills department store a couple of years ago. Not knowing any better, I thought it had something to do with the neutron bomb which had just been introduced about a year earlier. (I hope I’m right on that, my memory is not too good here.) So regardless of what the U.S. Geological Center (or whatever) told you, I know I hear that announced on the news. There were literally hundreds of unannounced tests over the years. The thing is, they’ve ALL now been announced, retroactively. There weren’t any other tests out there, other than what 4 has been accounted for. Lazar made the mistake of incorporating certain elements into his story that couldn’t be checked at the time, but lately became freely available to the public. (I’m thinking of the Russian satellite photos and also the announcement of the unannounced tests.) > Also I read a short news item in our Sunday newspaper years about “the giggle factor concerning anti-matter” was finally over for mainstream scientists. It didn’t say much more. I thought maybe they succeeded in producing this stuff in an accelerator and then finding some way to store it. Again, this was before I ever heard of Lazar and Element- 115. Anti-matter is certainly producible but the energy requirements are huge. > I would be interested if you would apply your perfected “Lazar treatment” to the claims made by Preston Nichols and Peter Moon in their Montauk Project / Philadelphia Experiment books (Sky Books). I don’t know much other than I’ve heard the names. > Do you think remote viewers like David Morehouse are credible tools to investigate wild claims like those of Corso and Lazar? His book seemed a little more down-to-earth than that of Courtney Brown’s. I think remote-viewing is a quite valuable tool. I’ve personally seen it work. However there are a number of flakes out there that give it a bad name. Morehouse is one, Brown is another, and there’s also Ed Dames, the head flake. There are some excellent viewers like Joe McMoneagle and Lyn Bucanon. I’d put a fair amount of weight on what they say. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = (1-b) From: {name withheld} Date: Sun, Nov 29, 1998, 7:52am (EST-3) To: [email protected] Subject: Re: misc At 01:24 PM 11/28/98-0500, you wrote: > During my graduate years I was married and my wife was best-of-friends with another secretary. In due course I became good friends with her husband Jim, who was a history major. After graduation he was accepted into Naval flight school and soon was flying A-6’s & A-7’s off carriers. We took a vacation once and visited Jim & Leslie down in Florida. He was so enthusiastic about his career and wanted me to see where he worked.