Do You Even Calculus Bro?

Fascinating nugget on the relationship between temperature and CO2. 

Is this the right place to raise the post hoc ergo propter hoc subject?

Was Stephen Hawking An Information Gatekeeper

When Stephen Hawking came out in support of Palestine it was a seminal moment in the fight against the land thieving, genocidal ideology of Zionism. However we also know that Kissinger told  New York Post journalist Cindy Adams that the State of Israel will not exist as it does today by 2022.

This was reported in a Rupert Murdoch/Fox News owned paper so it's not to be taken lightly.

However getting back to Hawking, he may have just added his voice knowing it was safe to do so. Approved if you will.

Which leaves us with all the other questionable things he says and the stenographer like  attention the global media give him. The first basis of media deconstruction is anything the mainstream media worships is agenda driven. 

Aside from pseudo scientific topics like dark matter, dark energy and NASA's bullshit, Hawking has said many curious things about the threat of alien life.

Why doesn't anybody question Stephen Hawkings Guinness Book of Records entry for surviving Lou Gehrig's disease or ALS?

The explanation in the Scientific American is a diagnosis by viewing television and worth reading for its superficiality.

The Long Path to Understanding Gravity

Lovely calm presentation slowly taking apart the model of physics we are currently constrained by. The electric universe makes a lot more sense but it raises the question. 

Why does Science fear the big questions. 

It's a big answer and connects to a lot more than just physics.

Jim Al-Khalili | The Secrets of Quantum Physics

Jim Al-Khalili seems to be the poster boy for TV Science at the moment. Whether it's Science and Islam or Quantum Mechanics documentaries, he's making,  he's also raking it in. 

He does however in this opening episode do the best double slit experiment I've yet seen and because I'm a bit boring I do quite regular searches on the topic to see if there's a better explanation on Youtube. I still have questions but a lot more was pulled into focus on this occasion.

Jim claims to be a super rationalist but that seems to contradict his acceptance of quantum entanglement. Regrettably I'm not clever enough to follow the heavier equations lectures on Youtube for quantum mechanics and yet I find Jim's presentation a bit too slow with that irritating folksy teacher style that British TV documentaries think is the only way to explain stuff.

Seems like a nice guy though.

Tony Gosling, BBC Investigative Journalist on Conspiracies & Coverups

I'm very impressed with Tony Gosling. He's a classic British journalist and human being. Awake and aware.

The Science Delusion - Rupert Sheldrake

Science claims to understand reality so well it only needs to fill in the details. Deluded.

We Live In A Multiverse of Many Worlds

Just don't mention the lizards.

Energy Tech Suppression (Death Of Kraftwerk)

By the time I decided the latest Kraftwerk documentary wasn't really that good I'd saved a nice power station photograph. As luck would have it a reasonably well put together documentary of energy technology suppression was uploaded recently and I thought this might be a good time to post it and let you know I've been blogging the progress of the E-CAT cold fusion technology (and related posts) by Andrea Rossi over at my new blog called New Electrics.

Update: Original video censored.

Nothing Matters

Following on my Lawrence Krauss lecture and post on nothing, (he's fun but overrated) this excellent video on nothing serves a couple of purposes. Firstly I think The New Scientist is one of the least arrogant scientific institutions and that is to be applauded. Their lead stories are invariably about how much we don't know rather than the pseudo-sceptical fascism of techno-bores who can't wait to impress with their scientific prowess of rapidly dissembling theories (thermodynamics is in for an overhaul).  It is possible they're also just warming you up for cold fusion or vacuum energy because that's on its way in.

I think there's a wonderful philosophical-dimensional point to be made that if there's no space between two objects, i.e. they are touching, then nothing exists through the presence of something and that's a contradictory point I've made in the past, that flips the physicality argument (of something exists through nothing) made in the video. It suggests objectivity is beginning to finally lose its intellectual coherence. 

This means there's no such thing as the 'other'. I am you and you are me, it's all one, and can you lend me a fiver please.

My last point is the resurrection of ether. This Victorian idea is now firmly back in science and while we haven't revived the use of leeches may I point out that materialist science is a joke. CERN, nuclear physics and all that smashing things up science is past its sell by date.

Materialist science is not our future.

Holy Communion With Quantum Entanglement

I left a comment at Wired on the subject of Quantum Entanglement. I'll clean it up later because I bash these out in a rage sometimes and I got too much going on.

Materialist science says if you can't touch, measure and repeat something physically, it doesn't exist scientifically. Around the turn of the last century quantum mechanics proved that's not true but the implications of that message, like Nikola Tesla's free energy research needed crushing so the owners can continue to bill us for the privilege of being born and staying alive on a planet that is our collective birthright to share.

The doctrinaire scientific mantra of "physicality matters most" is an intellectual ideology pursued and pimped by top-tier scientific academia to this day. It keeps people stupid as to the real nature of nature, of conciousness and of being. 

If one drops the materialist-science bullshit the implications are clear. 

Everything is connected to everything else.
 There is no other.
 You are me and I am you
Like the pea to grapefruit sized universe at the moment of big bang,
 that contained everything that ever existed. 

For those paying attention there is no 'size' to measure and dimensionality is a 4D scientific abstract unprovable within its own construct by the very same rationale that Kurt Godel's incompleteness theorem say's you can't measure the size of the ruler with the ruler. 

What does this mean? 

It means we've been duped, conned, hoodwinked and managed like livestock, left ignorant that what can't be touched counts more than what can be 'touched'. What can't be repeated transcends that which can be repeated, that the unmeasurable counts more than the measurable, for as Wittgenstein noted, the supreme irony of the repeatable science mantra is that it goes on smashing things up (CERN/FERMI/HIROSHIMA et al) until it blows everything up and nothing is ever again repeatable.

The safety catch is a sublimely genius mechanism that protects the integrity of this experience often called the holographic universe. We live in it energetically until such time as we no longer live in it and return to the more complex energetic state that created it. 

What name you choose to give that construct or how it originated doesn't matter because whether you like it or not there are profound clues as to its universal and ubiquitous intelligence that the observer and the observed can point to but never touch. The most poetic example is the moon being the same 2D size real estate as the sun in the sky. It's a cosmic coincidence of zero probability so perfectly matched it sings silently to the concious and the conciousness.

It says: Whatever you choose to explain this, it is not chance. 
It is intelligent and knows that it must stand back and let us learn that what doesn't exist matters more than what does exist.

It's a painful lesson, called free will and we chose it that way.

We can choose the future too. 


All of it.

Why Did Quantum Physics Scare Off Richard Feynman

I've always spoken well of Richard Feynman and I still believe he was a great guy with respect to being a human being and his overall scientific humility. However it's time to prune down his contribution to physics because in the final analysis he was too intimidated to be scientific about quantum mechanics and worse than that encouraged his students to stay away from the subject as the video above explains unambiguously.

Let's get one thing straight. You can keep your scientific materialism because the future is going on metaphorically and actually at a quantum mechanical level. The whole observation, repetition and measurement-science of materialism is maxed out and hasn't brought our species intellectually forward from the combustion engine which requires fossil fuels to fight over and has idiots with rulers telling thinkers what is and isn't.

Henry Stapp gets a little bogged down here with the relationship between existing information, intention (free will) and quantum wave collapse but make no mistake, broadly speaking he's saying we create our realities and while that requires a discussion of how collective realities work together the subject can be explained to primary children in a few hours. Instead we teach them to be obedient, to memorize, to be unoriginal and to be uniform in their opinions.

So the question remains. Why did physics and Richard Feynman do the unscientific thing and back away from the most important quantum mechanical (sub atomic) discoveries at the beginning of the last century? What sort of scientist advises his students not to try and understand something? Why did Richard Feynman tell his students to 'shut up and calculate' or was that David Mermin

I think the story behind that is much bigger than has yet come out into the open. I don't want to share what I think yet but I don't mind raising a flag on the issue so that I can elaborate on it later as conciousness picks up enough to understand that this is a holographic universe and we can shape it, up to, but no further than our wildest dreams (think about that) as long as we block out the huge chunks of toxic propaganda and for profit-media framing our realities by keeping us penned into ideas that are past their sell by date. 


Advertising is hugely toxic in this matter too. It reinforces you to believe you're a consumer instead of a creator. You consume food of course but more importantly you create life in many many ways from ideas to babies.

This is all about free will and by coincidence earlier today, I see that peer review is stifling innovation too. But by now you might know my views on scientific materialism. It's down a cul de sac.

Professor Simon Schaffer - History & Philosophy Of Science (Cambridge)

I was reluctant to listen to Melvyn Bragg's latest 'In Our Time' discussion on The Scientific Method. I assumed it would be historically inaccurate and preaching the gospel of science. This is the one where science thinks it's a meta-theory and has metastasized into a Latter Day Saints Church of Scientific Materialism. 

This is considerably more dangerous than any other religion. We've always killed each other over the business of God but by and large have left the planet intact to start over again. Our current materialist science trajectory is a wasteland of pollution, planetary asset stripping, ecocide and nukes. The last point is the most pressing as Depleted Uranium (DU) weapon used in the Middle East by the Christian West has left a radioactive footprint greater than Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

The disposable society creates disposable humans.

Materialist science's greatest failure is its ability to grow more food than ever so that half the planet are obese and the other half are starving. With a population estimated at seven billion there have never been more hungry or sick people on the planet today. 

I don't like losing opportunities because my biases got in the way. I decided to give the Scientific Method by In Our Time a try but my suspicions were confirmed when Melvyn Bragg subjects senior UCL lecturer in Philosophy of Science, Michela Massimi on air with an inexplicable monologue of infantile scientific jingoism. This is a term I invented to describe a consumer society deluded that materialist science will shepherd humanity through another 1859 coronal mass ejection. The telegraph system was knocked out that time. It was the closest to iPhone technology we had and as we're cyclically due for another it's worth spending half a day researching who has an underground base ticket the State has been building for VIP bankers since the 40's paid for by ordinary tax paying workers.

Fortunately Simon Schaffer dissipates the early negativity by sharing Isaac Newtons principle obsession with super woo eschatology when he wasn't knocking out better Keppler algebra. The show picks up after this and becomes one of my favourites but despite Melvyn not because of him. I felt upbeat after listening and that was so very welcome as I expected to feel irritated. If the scientific narrative gatekeepers are astute enough to elegantly outline that our science is intellectually incoherent then there's a chance we can rescue science and get a better role and redefinition of it's method, its purpose and it's coexistence with the unmeasurable and the unrepeatable.

Look, I don't have a problem with science that takes care of hungry bellies at home instead of landing on the moon. I'm all for a science that levels inequalities globally instead of building more blow up science projects like the CERN large hadron collider. That kind of sick science has only one immediate beneficiary and that will be the military industrial complex's craven need for new enemies in space to plunder the galaxy when our planet is spent.

Our materialist science has to go. When it fails (as it will when the cost burden imposed on Universe is greater than Universe accepts) we need to have a conversation about the kind of science that provides what we need instead of what we want. I felt very grateful last night that the likes of Simon Scaffer are equipped to make the right kind of suggestions with examples that ordinary people can understand.

Very very rarely I have an urge to get back to the UK of CCTV. The History of Philosophy and science at UCL or Cambridge just overtook doing a Masters at SOAS in Asian Studies.

You should listen to the show. I never have anything good to say about the science establishment and so here is my type of scientific anomaly. 

Maurice Cotterell - The Cycles of the Sun & 2012

Maurice Cotterell of Future Science reputation, also has a wonderful explanation of gravity that the people at CERN have way to much money and status invested in the materialistic sciences to reconsider if their premises are mistaken - it's a science that is too big to fail and most unscientific.


However this talk is heliocentric and based on observable sun cycles over thousands of years.

Science Thinks It's A Meta Theory

Which is a problem that wont go away until materialist science recognises this ego trip for what it is. It's no superior to the voodoo of religious manipulation unless it defers to this area of self awareness. Till then science indignantly refuses to acknowledge the unique and unrepeatable.

Via We Must Know

Is Matter Frequencies and Waves?

Via We Must Know

Plasma Cosmology (The Electric Universe)

I'm only vaguely familiar with the essentials of plasma cosmology and to be candid I dislike materialist (exploding) science so much that I favour the electric universe style of thinking because of the response it elicits from mainstream astrophysics and cosmology. However I know enough about the holographic universe to shift the debate in that direction successfully if pushed and there's a handful of sound arguments within hand's reach to kneecap Newtonian Science (and Einsteinian gravity science). The short argument is show me the graviton (a fictional character in science and comics), even the Higgs boson if you wish.

I'm doing a bit of research on plasma cosmology, so I found a post titled 'How I know Plasma Cosmology Is Wrong'. I thought that's the kind of resistance I need to cut my teeth on and began to read. The post lost my interest after a few paragraphs of insulting people and ideas instead of getting down to business so I cut bait and flicked down to the comments. I'm glad I did. I found one comment from a person using the name of the Swedish electrical engineer Hannes Olof Gösta Alfvén.

It's so beautiful crafted and likeable I'm going to paste it below in italics as a reminder to myself and others how elegant reasoning can be persuasive and more importantly instructive. It's also a fantastic argument for the kind of science I'm interested in. One that celebrates the mystery instead of leaning like a drunk on a lamp post to increasingly threadbare Ptolemaic models. I also must link to this podcast audio interview with Thomas Fusco. I listened to it twice earlier (and intend to listen again) for its demolition of why contemporary physics is running out of material to work with. An irony the dim materialist scientists are unable to grasp. The interview doesn't start immediately so you have to put up with annoying people but it's worth the wait in the end because Thomas Fusco author of Behind The Cosmic Veil has an extraordinary insight into why infra-red patterns on humans are different from paranormal activity (bear with me). From this observation he takes apart Einstein, CERN, Newton and the whole multiverse theory speculative road show while elegantly explaining  a little quantum theory including quantum entanglement and which I'm tempted to call the (identical twin) doppelgänger effect after the radio hosts reductive observation. it's very provocative.

Here's the plasma cosmology comment.

Re: "However, plasma cosmology also asserts that electromagnetic forces between plasma flowing through the solar system and through the Universe and the magnetic fields of objects (or even the objects themselves, as they'll often decide, for instance, that comets must have a substantial electric charge) make significant contributions to the motion of objects that mainstream astronomy is able to explain entirely through gravity."

Rob, it does appear that you are truly at the very beginning of your investigation into the Electric Universe.

For instance, you might want to take a closer look at what all-sky surveys tell us about the interstellar plasma structures we can observe at the 21-cm wavelength (oftentimes called HI). Gerrit Verschuur has published extensively on this subject in his books "Interstellar Matters" and "The Invisible Universe", as well as numerous peer-reviewed publications. And he is quite clear that the structure of this plasma is in fact filamentary, as would be expected for a plasma conducting electrical currents ...

"Preliminary results from high resolution HI mapping of gas and, dust in an apparent HI "cloud" indicate that the neutral gas and dust within and around its boundary is itself highly filamentary" (Interstellar Neutral Hydrogen Filaments at High Galactic Lattitudes and the Bennett Pinch)

Furthermore, Verschuur has observed critical ionization velocities (CIVs) to be associated with these interstellar filaments. When a neutral gas (so thin that collisional interactions can be ignored) meets a plasma such that the kinetic energy of their relative velocity is equal to the ionization potential of the neutral gas, then the kinetic energy is converted into ionization of the neutral gas. This was incidentally suggested by Alfvén in 1942 and later discovered in the lab in the 1970’s.

Verschuur furthermore states in Galactic Neutral Hydrogen Emission Profile Structure:

"Analysis of Galactic neutral hydrogen emission profiles that have been corrected for sidelobe radiation confirm the existence of three distinct component line width regimes identified by Verschuur & Magnani in 1994. In addition, a fourth becomes recognizable in the data in directions of low total column density. The line width regimes are around 50 km s~1 (component 1a), 31 km s~1 (component 1b), 13 km s~1 (component 2), and 5.2 km s~1 for the narrow lines arising from cool H I (component 3). In this paper, the new data are presented and compared with previously published results. The possible origin of the distinct line width regimes is briefly examined, and it is concluded that a new interpretation is needed, one that involves a plasma phenomenon known as the critical ionization velocity, which will be fully discussed in a subsequent paper."

In another paper, On the Critical Ionization Velocity Effect in Interstellar Space and Possible Detection of Related Continuum Emission, he states:

"Interstellar neutral hydrogen (HI) emission spectra manifest several families of linewidths whose numerical values (34, 13, and 6 km/s) appear to be related to the critical ionization velocities (CIVs) of the most abundant interstellar atomic species. Extended new analysis of HI emission profiles shows that the 34-km/s-wide component, which probably corresponds to the CIV for helium, is pervasive. The 34-km/s-wide linewidth family is found in low-velocity (local) HI profiles and in the so-called high-velocity clouds (HVCs). In addition, published studies of HI linewidths found in the Magellanic Stream, Very High Velocity Clouds, and Compact HVCs, all of which are believed to be intergalactic, have noted that the typical values are of the same

order. If the CIV effect does play a role in interstellar space, it may be expected to produce locally enhanced electron densities where rapidly moving neutral gas masses interact with the surrounding plasma. Evidence that suggests that this phenomenon is occurring in interstellar space is presented. It manifests as a spatial association between peaks in HI structure offset with respect to peaks in high-frequency radio continuum data obtained with the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe."

In his book, The Invisible Universe, he provides some background on HI and the widespread presence of these filaments:

"The neutral hydrogen atom consists of a proton with an electron in an orbit about it. Both the proton and the electron have a property called spin, which can be in the same direction (called parallel spin) or in opposite directions (antiparallel) relative to one another. The total energy contained by the atom in these two conditions is different. When the spin state flips from the parallel condition to the antiparallel, which contains less energy, the atom gets rid of the excess energy by radiating a spectral line at a frequency of 1420.405 MHz, generally known as the 21-cm line referring to its wavelength in the radio band. The 21-cm line is the signature of HI and makes the gas observable to astronomers on earth." (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p52)

"It wasn't until some 50 years after the detection of the HI signal that a comprehensive all-sky survey of the HI spectral line was completed under the guidance of W. Butler Burton at the University of Leiden … The completed project is known as the Leiden-Argentina-Bonn (LAB) survey. To give the reader some feel for the enormous scope of this project, the LAB Survey observed 400,000 directions and obtained a spectrum with 1,000 frequency channels at each location … Figure 6.1 is an all-sky HI map made from the LAB Survey data where the color is a measure of the total number of hydrogen atoms along the full line-of-sight through the Galaxy in any given direction … An intriguing feature of this map is the presence of arcs or filaments (long streamers) visible as great threads of emission, whose shapes are almost certainly controlled by magnetic fields between the stars." (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p52-53)

In that same source, he also explains the predicament of the "anomalous high-velocity clouds" ...

"Not all is understood about the distribution of HI in the Milky Way. For example, large areas of sky are found to contain HI [hydrogen] moving at velocities that are not expected if the gas is confined to the plane of the Galaxy. In particular, when a radio telescope is pointed above or below the galactic plane, only relatively local gas traveling at velocities between +-20 km/s with respect to zero, defined in terms of the average random motion of stars near the sun, should be observed. However, HI at very high negative velocities, which indicates motion toward us, is found at high galactic latitudes. These structures are known as high-velocity clouds, although detailed maps of such features show them to be filamentary instead of cloud-like. Their distance and origin continue to be the subject of controversy. The bulk of these HI structures in the northern sky follow an arc defined by a weak radio shell found in radio surveys …" (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p55)

The reason this matters is that in the laboratory -- such as the z-machine or even the Tokamak -- plasmas, dusty or not, will exhibit filamentary and Faraday motor structures when they are conducting electrical currents. Here, I will direct you to the works of A.B. Kukushkin and V.A. Rantsev-Kartinov, who first identified these structures within the Tokamak. They created a probabilistic reasoning algorithm (artificial intelligence) which could automatically infer these structures from imagery. They then applied this algorithm to cosmic imagery, such as in their paper titled:

Similarity of Skeletal Structures in Laboratory and Space and the Probable Role of Self-Assembling of a Fractal Dust in Fusion Devices

There are in fact many other papers by these two which deploy the same technique to all sorts of cosmic imagery. The notion that plasma scaling is the cause for the universe's fractal nature is something which deserves further consideration.

At this point, I'd like to return to Verschuur's book, The Invisible Universe, where he provides some cautionary words of advice for conventional thinkers:

"At the Serendipity meeting, Kraus stated that meaningful accidental discovery occurs only as the result of 'being in the right place with the right equipment doing the right experiment at the right time.' Another noted astronomer, R. Hanbury Brown, added that the person should 'not know too much,' otherwise the discovery might not be made!

This summarizes a very interesting phenomenon. Many research scientists, especially the theoretically inclined, 'know' so much that their chance of making a lucky or creative discovery may be severely curtailed. If we know too much, our vision is sometimes narrowed to the point where new opportunities are not seen." (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p14)

"Jansky knew a little astronomy, but not enough for it to get in his way and cause him to reject the possibility that radio waves originating in the cosmos might be real.

Grote Reber, a professional engineer and radio ham in his spare time, was one of the few people who recognized the interesting implications of Jansky's discovery. Reber was certainly not hampered by any astronomical prejudices about whether or not the cosmic radio waves could exist. Instead, he was interested in verifying their existence and followed up on Jansky's work. To this end, Reber built the world's first steerable radio dish antenna … in his backyard and mapped the Milky Way radiation during the period 1935 – 1941 … He pointed out that the new field of radio astronomy was originally caught between two disciplines. Radio engineers didn't care where the radio waves came from, and the astronomers

'… could not dream up any rational way by which the radio waves could be generated, and since they didn't know of a process, the whole affair was (considered by them) at best a mistake and at worst a hoax.'

The very essence of research is that once an observation is made it requires some understanding and interpretation in order to formulate a plan for making further observations. It was initially very difficult for astronomers, entirely ignorant of radio technology, to interpret or understand the significance of Jansky's or Reber's epoch-making discoveries." (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p14-15)

"If the science was to flourish, either astronomers had to learn about radio engineering or radio engineers had to learn astronomy. The new science therefore grew slowly." (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p16)

"Breaking through preconceived notions is something that has frustrated many a scientist (as well as philosopher, politician, or lay person). Who, at that time, could possibly have guessed at the amazing scenario that now accounts for the cosmic radio waves. Radio signals from the Milky Way are produced by cosmic ray electrons spiraling around magnetic fields stretched out in space between the stars. In the 1930s and 1940s no one knew that interstellar space contained cosmic ray electrons or that there were magnetic fields between the stars. At the time, cosmic rays were defined as protons (but not electrons) from space that struck the earth continuously. Cosmic ray physicists didn't concern themselves too much about the origin of the cosmic rays, nor did they know what happened to the electrons. Those researchers were mainly interested in studying the composition and physical properties of the particles that did reach their detectors. The absence of electrons was noted, but who would have thought that the electrons didn't reach the earth because they had wasted their energy radiating radio signals in interstellar space." (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p19)

"Jansky could hear the faint radio hiss from space in his earphones and went further to report on his quantitative measurements of the intensity of the received emissions. However, his discoveries went largely unrecognized by astronomers, either because they never got to read Jansky's technical papers, which were published in a journal aimed at radio engineers, or because the astronomers, not familiar with radio engineering, simply were not interested." (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p42)

My hope is that these quotes will inspire some critical thinking in either yourself, or at least the audience you are attempting to gather. The story of radio astronomy is strikingly similar to the situation which is being alleged with plasmas' role in the cosmos. We'd all be wise to take a cautionary stance in light of the emerging research, and arguably foolish to cast aside the innovation which might accommodate a new science, in some sort of attempt to defend our existing belief system. I say, let the research continue, and let's see where it ends up!

The Observer & The Observed, The Dreamer & The Dream. They Are The Same Thing.

If you dig about to find what's going on in quantum mechanics (it's not physics baby) and then read and listen around to thinkers in spiritual mysticism or shamanism or whatever metaphysical framework you want to call it; they are saying the same thing. 

There's a dark side with these matters too as any Satanic dabbler can share. The white coat laboratory Freemasons at CERN wont tell you they're punching holes into other dimensions without a clue of what they might be letting in through the back door but that's their very well paid agenda. There are ways to discover the basics by going inside (the Kingdom of heaven is within you) and this podcast interview of Neil Kramer by Occult of Personality Greg Kaminski covers the positive ways you can dissolve the illusion of separation, that to be candid, we all chose to incarnate into for this particular game show.

It's top notch subatomic to universal-mechanics FAQs and peace of mind. Conciousness is probably the least understood and largest subject one can imagine. Pun intended.


Update: If you don't have time watch the clip below for the condensed argument. It's not just good. It's exciting.

Dr. Wilhelm Reich & The Censored Science Of Orgone Energy

I had a vague recollection that Wilhelm Reich was connected to some fringe psycho-sexual therapy practise earlier last century but got listening to an interview on the subject and rediscovered yesterday that the scientific, legal and bureaucratic establishment did everything to shut his research down and lock him up.

These days that's a green light open arms invitation to investigate further. I now fully understand how Terence McKenna leapt into action and car on hearing how Rupert Sheldrakes ideas were meeting fierce resistance from the scientific establishment and made his way to the first bookshop to find more information. The first video on his work I discovered was UFO connected so that sealed the deal and I fell asleep listening to a ray-gun like rain making machine that also attracted (and destabilised) flying saucers as outlined in the presentation below.

Michael Talbot - The Holographic Universe (As Above, So Below)

The more I study the new physics model including much of the holographic universe, the more I find it all hangs together in a way that the paradox of the standard model and quantum mechanics makes increasingly irrelevant. The materialist science junkies are relegated to smashing things up into smaller and smaller (metaphysical?) pieces while all the cool kids like Nassim Haramein and Jay Weidner are weaving them together into toroidal shaped vortexes of beauty and harmony.

Michael Talbot died prematurely from a rare cancer, and falls into that group of thinkers who challenged the materialist message sold by consumer fetishism's priests and scientists. People like John Lennon, Bob Marley and Bill Hicks who also died early, and for whom I question the nature of their death.

Remember: Study hard, work harder, consume as hard as you can and borrow hardest. Never question the premise of it all. 

Lloyd Pye & Regents Professor John Horner Palaeontology

The second video of Lloyd Pye is my upload and is roaring up the charts on my Youtube video list. This tells me that people are beginning to question the archaeological doctrine of the day. Lloyd Pye was also interviewed by Red Ice Radio last week and I've posted it first as it's the latest information. It's excellent. 

Thinking about this subject I noticed Professor Regent of Palaeontology John R. Horner was interviewed by Wired and I watched it fully prepared to dismiss another stuffy academic but actually the guy is not a stiff and has good questions, bold ideas and the kind of humility that science rarely articulates. Instead we're by and large lumbered with an arrogant science that pretends it's never wrong when the whole purpose is to attack it with a new idea that is stronger. Real science is a journey not a destination. 


Couple this vain dogma with tenure-seeking, back-scratching peer-review crusties and we're intellectually dominated by spineless old white men when it comes to understanding our history, conceiving the present and directing the future. Jack Horner is not one of those men.