• 1568 Days Ago
• 10/31/2007

"Oppenheimer's Ghost"

Thanks to Jason Pontin for this article. Was he the speaker in the video on "Oppenheimer's Ghost" who has an English accent and pronounces nuclear "nuqlar"? My Webster's Dictionary indicates it is to be pronounced nuclear with an e as pronounced in each. When I hear Americans pronounce nuclear as nuqlar, I think they are incorrect. Maybe I'm incorrect.

I regret what happened to Robert Oppenheimer and his clearance. I can understand his strong point of view having been so instrumental in realizing such a destructive force as the first atomic bomb. He didn't want it misused and thrown around. I can also understand the government's point of view in some of their fear of Oppenheimer's stands, or possibly worrisome behavior for a person in his position. I regret most that for Oppenheimer, this very special person who had performed one of the highest services to his country, that he was so rudely swept aside by publicly ripping his security clearance away. I think our country still needed his advice and capabilities. They could have quietly and officially limited his security clearance to certain projects at certain levels. And from what I have learned, the Japanese military was in such shredds and their cities already so demolished they were no real threat to the U.S. when we dropped 2 atomic bombs on two Japanese city major population areas. Why drop 2 bombs and not only 1? And if 1 why not in the ocean near Japan and not on a city? And atom bombs were exceedingly hard to come by then. Why not first show the Japanese government and public the results of our tests; then demand they surrender unconditionally, and keep those 2 bombs? And this makes the U.S. the first country to drop not only 1 atomic bomb, but 2. It seems to me what Oppenheimer feared about atom bombs being hastily and wisely thrown around happened, as well as their throwing out the value of his reputation, capabilites and tremendous contribution to the U.S.

New paradigms in science, for better and or for worse, may require new paradigms to deal with them. What about "remote viewing". It might be a possible means of dealing with misuse of nuclear technology. If you haven't heard of this, look it up on Amazon.com.  There are courses in it given by retired CIA agents who were hired to do remote viewing for the military. Remote viewing is, for example, where a person may sit in a room in the U.S. and view mentally, not through looking out of his eyes, a picture, possibly a missile base some place else in the world. If something is able to enter your mind (I would guess from satellites like into a television set) then it seems logical to me that your mind could transmit to the outside as well. This subject used to be classified secret. I attended two lectures about remote viewing given by former or present United States intelligence agents. Neither lecturer would discuss the basis for remote viewing.

My following thoughts border on science fiction. However, when it comes to classified scientific capabilities such as nuclear dangers as related to remote viewing, fiction may be the most we have to deal with. These ideas are likely an insult to purely scientific endeavors; so please consider my wishful thinking as nothing more than this. In the United States, if we have leaders that subvert the intensions of U.S. Constitutional principles, create and or enforce unjust and unwise criminal laws, create tremendous shady investment conditions and deals especially at the expense of the U.S. government - maybe this big brother watching you remote viewing could somehow stop and prevent some of these dangers. It might act like an autmotobile speed governor, only prevent their minds from functioning in these areas. If no one felt sure enough in his own judgment to run for office, maybe we would be better off to let computers make some of these decisions.