Talk:Jack Parsons/Archive 1

Jealousy?
It states that Parsons was very jealous of Hubbard and Sara's relationship but everything I've read, including Parsons' letters reprinted in A Piece of Blue Sky, seems to reflect a man who was a whole lot less jealous than you would expect under the circumstances. Any citations for this jealousy? -- Antaeus Feldspar 03:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio poem?
Edit by GeoffCapp (remove uncited copyright violating poem unless/until someone has proof in writing of Parsons' Estate permission to use (this does not qualify under fair use))


 * Is there a filed copyright on record for that poem, or even a copyright notice in the publication? In 1943, copyrights weren't automatic, and according to Public domain: "Published in the U.S., without a copyright notice: From 1923 to 1977: in the public domain" AndroidCat 01:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Details
It seems that by March 1952, Hubbard and Parsons were reconciled. Parsons is one of the persons receiving an auditing session by Hubbard in the lecture series Scientology: Milestone One (aka Dawn of Immortality). Hubbard calles him his friend in the years afterward and seems to have kept contact with Marjorie Cameron as he tells anecdotes of her keeping vials as a token of Jack after his death. Parsons is mentioned in works of popular culture: Paradox's Big Book of Conspiracies and Alan Moore's Cobweb story in Top Shelf asks the big questions.


 * Hubbard is, sadly, not a reliable source. He also referred to Aleister Crowley as "my good friend", whereas Crowley actually considered Hubbard a scoundrel and a con-man for what he did to Parsons. --FOo 08:27, 11 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I know Hubbard's skill at name-dropping. But in the lecture series Hubbard talks with Parsons. This is in 1952, twice after he fled with his girl/money/who knows. --Leocomix 08:49, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Security clearance
Any chance that someone could do some high-quality research and tell us just what happened with Parsons' security clearance? The information out there seems to be confused; the most coherent picture I can put together is that he lost it temporarily in 1948 when someone thought his membership in a "sex cult" was subversive, but it was restored after a hearing, and then lost it for good in January 1952 over the matter of showing the Israeli government some classified documents (of which he may have been co-author.) 1952, of course, was the year he died. The problem is that many sources tell only part of the story, and/or get the 1948 incident confused with the 1952 incident. Getting the account clear and cited would be nice. -- 65.78.13.238 (talk) 23:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Old comments
A recommendation for additions to this page: Preserve some kind of balance between discussions of Parsons the engineer and those of Parsons the mystic. It would suit Wikipedia for this page to become either a torrent of overwrought Thelema, nor a whitewash of that side of Parsons' life. --FOo


 * Was this the fellow who blew himself up with fulminate of mercury trying to create an alchemical homunculus? -- IHCOYC 13:35 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * I have read credible assertions that he was producing mercury fulminate at the time of the explosion, but not for what purpose. It seems to me at least as credible a conjecture that he was producing it in his laboratory for his straight job. --FOo 02:11 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * The Los Angeles Times ran a long biographical piece on Parsons around 2000 in their Sunday magazine. I can't find it now, but interested individuals might uncover it. Cheers, -Willmcw 09:28, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)


 * I've got a biography of his published by Feral House that was written in the last couple of years (2004, I believe). I've read through it once, but I did not glean a lot of information from it due to my lack of "magickal" knowledge, either of history or practice. It does mention his various start-ups, his work on the JATO bottles, and the early solid- and liquid-fuel experiments done by the JPL folks at Arroyo Seco (sp?). I'll dig into this article as my first wikipedia project once I've read up on Crowley and his ilk and gone over the book once more. The book supports the "accident" hypothesis, but does mention the humonculous angle (mentioned twice by the author's sources, but the theory was never really supported.) Parsons' second wife, Cameron, thought it was murder and insisted that the blast came from beneath the floorboards (i.e., planted explosives) rather than the Pasadena investigator's hypothesis that Parsons was mixing something dangerous in a can and simply dropped it. (The fact that the blast blew off Parson's right arm and appeared to have occured near to the ground, coupled with multiple anecdotal mentions of his tendency to perspire excessively which could likely have compromised his grip, seems to point to this conclusion)psilogen 10 Nov 2005

Was Sir Peter Pendragon (the main character from Crowley's Diary of A Drug Fiend) Inspired by Jack Parsons? 201.101.5.200 (talk) 00:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I doubt it. Parsons was 8 years old at the time of publication. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Parsons and the Occult
Where is the citation on this assertion:

"They were aided in this work by Sampson Bennetts of the Rosicrucian Order and his wife Sara Melian Gabriel, a spiritualist from India."

I've read a lot about Parsons and I;ve never heard of these people. A search seems to all loop back to this assertion on Wikipedia. Highly suspect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.204.147.39 (talk) 10:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It was vandalism. I tracked it back to May 13, 2007, when an anom. user placed the same name, Sampson Bennetts, into several different articles as vandalism. Aleister Wilson (talk) 10:07, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Rocket to the Morgue
"'For Hugo Chantrelle was an eccentric scientist. In working hours at the California Institute of Technology he was an uninspired routine labratory man; but on his own time he devoted himself to those peripheral aspects of science which the scientificpurist damns as mumbo-jumbo, those new alchemies and astrologies out of which the race may in time construct unsurmised wonders of chemistry and astronomy.' (Rocket to the Morgue The Ninth Day: Friday, November 7, 1941)"I think the book Rocket to the Morgue by Anthony Boucher is an interesting resource for people looking for a character-sketch of Jack Parsons. While the book is fiction, a number of the characters and locations are extremely true-to-life, down to Robert A. Heinlein's "Nitrosyncretic Lab". One of the scenes is at "Hugo Chantrelle"'s place, but I don't know if it matches Parsons'. The book was written in early 1942, and devotes at least a page to Hugo Chantrelle's double-life and predates later events involving Parsons and Hubbard. The next time I reread the book, whenever, I'll take notes. (And no, you can't borrow my copy. :) Obviously none of it can be used as fact in the article. AndroidCat 06:10, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Embarrassment
This silly, badly written little article is the worst excuse for a Wikipedia entry I've ever read. Mempile (talk) 03:12, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Then fix it. That's how Wikipedia works. --Rodneyorpheus (talk) 12:12, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed changes to "Parsons and the Space Age" section
I'd like to make two changes to this section.

First, "He came up with a solution that could only have come from someone having a knowledge of alchemy and magic: Greek fire. " violates No original research and should be removed.

Second, "Wernher von Braun would acknowledge Parsons as the father of America's space program.[4]" violates Verifiability as the listed source does not provide a quote from Braun that backs up the statement, it simply alleges it was said. Pmw2cc (talk) 20:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me, have at it. --Rodneyorpheus (talk) 15:16, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Pages moved with this one going to John Whiteside Parsons. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:00, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Jack Parsons → Jack Parsons (rocket scientist) — I don't see that this Jack Parsons is that much more famous than Jack Parsons (academic and filmmaker). Jack Parsons (disambiguation) should be moved here (to just Jack Parsons).ospalh (talk) 09:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment. Looking at the bibliography section of this article, it seems that he was published under his full name. Would a move to John Whiteside Parsons not be appropriate? PC78 (talk) 17:54, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * A change to John Whiteside Parsons with Jack Parsons (disambiguation) linking to it would be the best solution I think --Rodneyorpheus (talk) 20:38, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Parsons, Hubbard & the yacht scam
"Hubbard talked Parsons into funneling his savings into a venture to buy a fleet of yachts in Florida, then sail them through the Panama Canal to sell at a profit in California. As was immediately clear to his friends and associates (including Crowley), but only gradually to Parsons himself, this proposal was a massive rip-off, and a frantic Parsons was forced to chase down Hubbard and Betty in Miami before they sailed off around the world. As Parsons explained in another letter to Crowley, the pair almost did escape, but the resourceful magician managed to invoke the demon Bartzabel in a hasty hotel-room ceremony, whereupon Hubbard’s “ship was struck by a sudden squall off the coast, which ripped off his sails and forced him back to port.” Source: "Lifestyles of the Nerdy and Perverted"

"I couldn’t make this stuff up if I tried," writes author Rob Latham. I'm not sure where to put this (or if), but I urge other editors interested in Parsons very odd life to read Latham's essay. --Pete Tillman (talk) 01:22, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Page moved. No opposes and two valid supports, including nom, after full listing period. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 14:00, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

John Whiteside Parsons → Jack Parsons (rocket propulsion engineer) – The page should be renamed as per WP:COMMONNAME. Examples include references cited in article and public use (such as the "Jack Parsons Lab" nickname for the JPL). NASA's official Jet Propulsion Laboratory website references Jack Parsons. A Google search for "John Whiteside Parsons" yields 497,000 results. "Jack Parsons" yields 13 million. JJARichardson (talk) 21:00, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose: The suggested disambiguation is not WP:NATURAL and the parenthetical dab wording is too colloquial. If you want a parenthetical term, I suggest something less loaded, such as "engineer", "propulsion engineer", or "rocket propulsion engineer". Another possibility could be John W. Parsons, to deemphasize the middle name while partially retaining it for dab purposes. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:49, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I have modified the name change proposal as per your advice. JJARichardson (talk) 21:00, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That version seems OK to me. Of course, not all "Jack Parsons" Google hits are likely to be for this person, but if you're sure that "Jack" is much more recognizable by most people than "John", I'm willing to assume you're correct at this point. I got 3 times the Google hits for "jack parsons rocket" versus "john parsons rocket" and a similar ratio for "jack parsons propulsion" versus "john parsons propulsion". I'm not sure what is the proper tipping point between WP:NATURAL versus parenthetical disambiguation, but I think I've contributed something at this point and am bowing out. —BarrelProof (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Support: It is clear that he is better known as "Jack Parsons". Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move February 2014

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 14:15, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Jack Parsons (rocket propulsion engineer) → Jack Parsons (rocket engineer) – "Rocket engineer" is the phrasing used in articles such as Wernher von Braun and Jack James (rocket engineer). Rockets are generally about propulsion! JJARichardson (talk) 21:01, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Copyedit April 2014
Hi

During the copyedit, some things came to light which may need attention:

Lead:
 * "Parsons sold the Parsonage, resigned from the OTO and went through various jobs, while acting as a consultant for the Israeli rocket program." (Para 3)
 * Was he acting as a consultant from selling the parsonage, or while he went through various jobs?
 * Well, he became a consultant for the Israeli project while working in one of those "various jobs" (specifically for the Hughes Aircraft Company). Hope this helps. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:25, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
 * That does, thanks.

Marriage and the GALCIT Rocket Research Group: 1934–1938:
 * "He manufactured nitroglycerin for illegal bootlegging from their home" (end Para 2) - not sure what to do there: to me it reads as if he was making dynamite in his basement and selling it to criminals that came to his house to buy it, as I'm not sure what illegal bootlegging means in this context. In my mind bootlegging is copying something or alcohol related. Do you know if this just selling it as home-made dynamite to anyone, or specifically to "the underground" or criminals, or making "Acme"/"Halifax Powder Company" ones and selling it as his own? I'm also guessing bootlegging is almost always illegal, so that may also be redundant.
 * Perhaps something like "To make ends meet/earn extra money/pay for his research he manufactured nitroglycerin [...]"? Chaosdruid (talk) 15:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Fair point, I'll make that edit myself. Just a heads up that I plan to add extra detail to the article in coming months, so I'd really appreciate it if you could keep and eye on it and make/suggestions improvements during then? JJARichardson (talk) 17:29, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Embracing Thelema and JATO: 1939–1942:
 * Smith wrote to Crowley, claiming that Parsons was "a really excellent man nbsp;... He has an excellent mind and much better intellect than myself nbsp;... JP is going to be very valuable - This is correct if Pendle has it exactly this way in the book. If this is a synopsis, and the ellipsis are additions to cut out part of Pendles text, they should be [...] to show that we removed parts of the text. not having Pendle, I cannot easily check. Chaosdruid (talk) 19:29, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * "for which he was imprisoned" (Para 5) - Not entirely sure, but guessing it should be "for which Seckler was imprisoned". Will need to change if it was Parsons that was imprisoned.
 * "The first JATO tests using a Ercoupe plane" (Para 6) - the rest of the paragraph does indeed talk about other tests using Ercoupes; however, if this were the first ever JATO tests, and the Ercoupe was incidental (i.e. could have been any old plane), there should be a comma in there "tests, using".
 * "the fuselage in the plane's tail" - tail is not synonymous with "rear", that would be "tail section". The tail is separate from the fuselage, so either "the fuselage in the plane's tail-section", or "the fuselage and the plane's tail", or just one or the other; "the plane's fuselage" or "the plane's tail-section".
 * "the fire, containing shed and shrapnel all barely left the experimenters unscathed" (Para 7) - Understand the fire and shrapnel could scathe them, but unclear as to how a containing shed could? If I was to guess, I would imagine "the fire and shrapnel from the rocket and its containing shed barely left the experimenters unscathed."

1) I would favour using the ellipsis. 2) It was Seckler who was imprisoned. 3) Yes, all of the prior tests used the Ercoupe. 3) "The plane's tail-section" would be most accurate. 4) I support that correction. JJARichardson (talk) 21:46, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Aerojet and invention of storable solid rocket fuel: 1942–1944
 * "while its second was from the Wilbur Wright Field" (Para 2) - could do with clarification as it is unlikely that an airfield would buy them, rather than the organisation that was based there. Also felt like Aero-Jets first and second contracts could do with dates of some kind. Chaosdruid (talk) 16:53, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * "and imposed payroll cuts instead of reducing JATO output." (Para 3) - this seems to come out of nowhere, raising questions such as Why/what caused that/what was going on?
 * "head of the OTO" (Para 3) - what is OTO?
 * sequence of events - as I read this section, it starts in 1943 (paras 1 & 2), talks about 1940 & 1942 (para 3), and then goes to 1941 at the start of paragraph 4. I realise this may be because of focus, ie first paras are GALCIT RRG, then Aerojet & travelling around/OTO, then his personal life.
 * dates - the last two paragraphs appear to be saying that all those events took place in 1941. Is this correct?


 * Both were installations of the U.S. Navy, so it would be appreciated if you could rewrite the sentence accordingly. JJARichardson (talk) 17:40, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

L. Ron Hubbard and the Babalon Working: 1945–1946
 * ""In the ads placed in local paper Jack [...]" (Para 1) - if it is as printed, and should be missing the "a", then maybe include  [sic]? Chaosdruid (talk) 17:13, 11 May 2014 (UTC)


 * It should be "the". I've added that in. And by the way, it's really excellent and helpful that you knew what x-metal actually was! JJARichardson (talk) 18:03, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

General
 * the Group/the group/The Group - I had been treating this as if it were a general common-usage term (group), as per Manual of Style, and so changing "the Group" to "the group". I trawled through MoS for an hour looking for clarity, and am now thinking it should perhaps follow the guidelines for Institutions - as they are said to be "The [..] Group", I am proposing to put them all to "The Group" if that is indeed how they are commonly called. Chaosdruid (talk) 18:44, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

That would be acceptable, especially since there are references to groups in other contexts. JJARichardson (talk) 18:49, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Comments
I have started with the lead, would appreciate any comments before I continue. I will, as always, try and preserve the writing style "as is" in the article. One notable exception would be using the date comma format "In 1896, Fred did this [...}". As many sentences were constructed with the dates within the sentence parts, or at the end of sentences, I matched them. I would also point out that date-comma format is explicitly mentioned as a no-no in Chicago MOS. Will continue later tonight. Chaosdruid (talk) 20:24, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Good to see someone taking an interest in the article, Chaosdruid! All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I have raised a query at the moment, I did not add those spaces throughout the refs, and am querying that with GOCE before I continue, as it seems the beta editor is semi-autonomous and I prefer to make my own changes rather than something making changes for me without notifying me and then saying that I did them. Chaosdruid (talk) 21:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the improvements you've made already. Thanks for taking this on! JJARichardson (talk) 21:59, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
 * We have an explanation, it was a bug with the sfn and sfnm templates when using the Visual Editor Beta. For now at least I can carry on, just not using the VisEd :¬)
 * I'll carry on copyediting in a cpl hours, after the F1 show. Chaosdruid (talk) 10:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Breaking for food. Chaosdruid (talk) 20:17, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Another editor went in and made some changes, and I have to go for the night as I have run out of time. I will continue again in the morning as I am free all day. Chaosdruid (talk) 22:50, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Found this, don't know if any of you have seen it. Might be out of copyright and useful for at least the pics? Chaosdruid (talk) 16:53, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Breaking as I am told I have to go shopping ... RL is so bothersome. I'll strike this out when I return - no less than 2 hours though. Chaosdruid (talk) 17:52, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Apologies, have had a medical issue that prevented me from editing for most of this week. I am recovering, and able to get back on it tonight or more probably tomorrow. I would have been back yesterday, but the painkillers were affecting my vision. Chaosdruid (talk) 19:27, 2 May 2014 (UTC)


 * No worries at all. As I said, there's no rush. JJARichardson (talk) 19:43, 2 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I've finished the first run through, the main copyedit, and have run dashes and other scripts.
 * I will leave it until tomorrow for final read-through and then make any changes agreed above that have not already been done. Chaosdruid (talk) 22:01, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Removing from sex offender Category
At 12:18, 4 July 2014, User:JJARichardson, who has done much admirably work on this article, added Category:American sex offenders with the edit summary "sex offenders category is technically correct due to statuary rape of Sara". I am removing this category as pejorative and (probably) technically inapplicable for the following reasons: If evidence is found and added to the article, the category easily could be replaced; meanwhile, per WP:COP and WP:COPDEF, it does not appear to belong here: "Categorization of articles must be verifiable. It should be clear from verifiable information in the article why it was placed in each of its categories." —Geoff Capp (talk) 01:06, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * ASO is a subcategory of Category:American criminals by crime, which appears to be predicated on actual criminal charges and/or conviction, for which there is no evidence provided in the article.
 * Sara was 17 at the time, and while that would have a chance of qualifying for statutory rape today (assuming anyone actually wanted to bring charges, which is rare enough), there is no evidence provided to establish either:
 * that there was a statutory rape law on the books in the relevant jurisdiction(s) in 1941, nor
 * that the age of 17 was below the threshold limit for a charge of statutory rape under such law.


 * I wouldn't intend to defame the subject of the article and added it in the good faith of objectivity, so thank you for removing it. I also appreciate all the other improvements you've made. JJARichardson (talk) 14:38, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Concerns over creeping expansion
- hope that you are well! I just had a few thoughts about how this article has developed over the past few months, and wanted to express a few concerns that I have. When the article was awarded FA status back in January it looked like this. Looking at it now, it is clear that it has been greatly expanded in various places, in particular in the lede, and I fear that these changes might not only make it less readable but also would endanger the article's FA status. There has also been a switch of the image used in the lede, but that currently present does not provide a good clear image of Parsons' face, which I think is definitely necessary there. I do appreciate that it can always be a temptation to include as much information as possible into an article, but we must bear in mind that that is not Wikipedia's job; instead we must seek to provide a clear, concise overview of a subject. Many of the edits made since the FA award have clearly been improvements, but I am concerned over this gradual expansion, and think that we should perhaps hone it in a bit and edit some of the prose down; I'm particularly concerned by that third paragraph in the lede. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:40, 16 July 2015 (UTC)


 * User:Midnightblueowl Given that I do not WP:OWN this article you are welcome to edit my contributions however you see fit. You provided the framework that I've worked in over the past year to bring this article to FA status and I thank you for that. The reason I have expanded the lead slightly is to provide a more cogent but condensed narrative of Parsons life that is described in detail in the body of the article, as during the successful FA review some editors expressed concerns that the life of Parsons the scientist as opposed to the occultist was not described adequately enough. The reason I made the 1944 photo of Parsons the main image is because it is a high resolution image of him in his professional heyday, but you are welcome to change this to the 1938 image of him if this is preferable. As it stands I am personally fully satisfied with the article and don't plan on making anymore substantial expansions, other than when the TV series portraying Parsons' life is released in the near future. JJARichardson (talk) 12:58, 16 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I see you've changed the image back; I think that that was a good move. The close up of his face is a bit blurry but at least it does show his face, which the other image didn't really do. I might have a tinker around with editing prose here and there but I shall try and ensure that I don't damage anything that you've created here. You've done some really great work with this article JJA, so I hope that you don't take my comments as criticism because they certainly won't meant in that manner ! Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:56, 16 July 2015 (UTC)


 * No worries, I'm open to constructive criticism and any edits that will improve prose clarity. JJARichardson (talk) 22:26, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Broken reference
There is a notification on the article that "FOOTNOTEPendle2005303" is broken. I have no idea how to fix this so assistance would be appreciated. JJARichardson (talk) 19:06, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Incomplete info on Babalon working
The article says that after this was done, he took the arrival of some woman called Cameron to be the elemental appearance of Babalon he was trying to invoke. The idea was to then work with her to cause the appearance of a 'Moonchild' - a thelemic messiah - somewhere by immaculate conception of some woman (this was also supposed to be a manifestation of Babalon - a little confusing).The article states that he took the work to be 'completed'. Did he think this Moonchild had actualy appeared somewhere? There is no mention of it. 95.149.54.104 (talk) 22:33, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Parsons wasn't particularly clear about this either. The literal conception of the Moonchild was apparently not fulfilled through the Babalon rituals, but they were apparently successful in bringing Babalon into the mortal plain in a supernatural sense. Parsons then continued the rituals via becoming the "Antichrist" in 1946 and described the epiphany that Babalon would appear on Earth in the years following that ritual, in which time he was killed in the explosion. Then Cameron claimed that Babalon was fully manifested in the first place in her being via the Babalon Working. So the best we can do is rely on the sources. JJARichardson (talk) 22:12, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jack Parsons (rocket engineer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140407100222/http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/hunting-the-hell-portal-where-the-founder-of-nasa-s-jpl-divined-cosmic-rockets-with-l-ron to http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/hunting-the-hell-portal-where-the-founder-of-nasa-s-jpl-divined-cosmic-rockets-with-l-ron

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:06, 20 May 2017 (UTC)