Re: Hulda Clark reputation damaging

From two posts:
"
They just call it something like the "bio lab" or so. You just have to google "happy birthday mars rover curiosity" and "sing"

or "tones" and you'll find it. I don't think ANYONE would describe how that is possible for that and NOT for diagnosing their

citizens.
...
Oh, I mostly "saw" and "heard" it, because that's what they explained in videos as the reason why they have a tone-generator

in the rover.
"

First, it isn't "something like" a bio lab. With wet-chemistry sample preparation, one chromatograph, and two spectrometers,

it's a real honest-to-god bio lab.

Second, it has a mechanical vibrator as part of the feed system, not as any part of the analysis instruments. We have the same things on our production floor to feed small hardware parts into a press. Again, it is a *mechanical* vibrator. The fact that you can take it's control signal and run it through a speaker and thhe signal just happens to fall within the audible range of frequencies doesn't mean that actual device is exerting any kind of electric field influence on the dirt. It is a variation of panning for gold or sifting flour, meerly another way of separating the big parts from the little parts.

Third, I have a digital watch that has an alarm function and a beeper. Each year on my birthday my watch plays "Happy Birthday" instead of just beeping. I do not think that this means that my watch can detect cancer.

Even if the synchrometer worked - a.n.d i.t d.o.e.s n.o.t - nothing in the SAM remotely resembles it. And, nothing in the SAM can be used on a live human body without significant damage or death. The SAM instruments are execellent examples of destructive testing - the sample is destroyed in the process of testing it.

And while the SAM is a miracle of design and fabrication, it is a new package of fairly old technology. Everything it does is decades old, so there are no secret technologies, and nothing that hasn't been available to labs. There is no Conspiracy here - it isn't used to diagnose disease because it can't do that. And it's dangerous as hell. So to parallel your statement, I think almost ANYONE who can read and understand a couple of Wikipedia articles CAN describe exactly how it is possible for something to analyze a dirt sample in a little bottle by burning it up with a laser, but not detect cancer deep within a live person.

ak
Tweet