Replies

"A few years ago I listened to a tape of a guy named Carl Sanders who claimed to have been in on the research for the microchip technology you're referring to. Just now I did a quick search for something on this and found this which may interest you.

Ah, Carl Sanders. Why, I wondered, did the hair on the back of my neck go up when I heard that name? So, I did a quick search too, and was quickly reminded:

From the desk of John S. Torell - "Carl Sanders"

and...

From the Desk of John S. Torell - UPDATE ON CARL SANDERS

and...

Carl Sanders debunked

Not every messenger is as he presents himself to be. In this case, the messenger is evidently a multiply-confessed (multiple times to multiple people) liar, with a history of lying, confessing to the lies (when caught in them and confronted with the lies), who then went on to lie again, and again, and again.

What is sad is that the number of links touting this guy is far and away greater in number and prominence than the few that shine the light on the man behind the curtain. And, from looking at the Google summaries, I get the impression that his claimed feats grew by leaps and bounds since he was confronted in the mid-1990s. One link had him tied in with "ET Technology", and had him claiming that his (imaginary) chips could be "picked up by satellite" -- a notion that anyone with even a cursory understanding of RF generation and propagation characteristics will immediately recognize as bunk. (Even the "Digital Angel" hucksters eventually dropped that absurd story.)

It's sad that the church is troubled by this sort of person, but it's nothing new, and even sadder, will likely continue to be the case in the future. There are people who learn how to scratch the "itching ears", and make a comfortable income in the process.

Thank you for posting those links which debunk the Carl Sanders legend. I must confess that the person who first gave me a tape of Carl Sanders in 1993, when I asked her a few years later if she had heard anything about him recently, said that she heard that his stuff had been largely exaggerated. I hesitated in providing the link that I did to him, but when I did a simple Google search myself, I didn't check them all out and saw something saying that he his claims had been verified. I assumed the controversy was mostly a baseless criticism spawned by jealousy.

I can see that I will probably have to find a few people here who have been taken in by his claims and set them straight.

Thanks again.