As I wrote in "Dark Ages and Inquisitions":
Science took a serious wrong turn in the middle of the nineteenth century, about the time Darwin published his Origin of Species and that is why we do, indeed, live in a Dark Age as a consequence. It wasn't that Natural Selection was wrong, per se, but the way the principles have been applied has been disastrous. Natural Selection was seized upon as the one and only underlying law of the Universe - and this seizing was done by individuals with a very particular psychological make-up as we will see. The same kinds of people that become uber-religious and kill people in the name of their god, can - and often do - become adherents of the religion of science. [...]
[I]n the nineteenth century, certain discoveries led to economic and political considerations, and that is when Science took the wrong turn because those folks who tend to black and white thinking also have other character traits that include a need to dominate others, as well as a strong tendency to greed. The pursuit of science became a career rather than a hobby, and an army of scientific workers was sought to serve the agendas of what was to become known as the Military-Industrial Complex.
© n/aThe "eccentric" Fritz Zwicky
Now, what is wrong with that last sentence? Did you catch it? Nobody BELIEVED Zwicky. What that means is, BELIEF blocked all of the scientific community from doing one, simple, scientific thing: check the math! And so, for over 30 years, science was ignorant of Dark Matter and all the work - entire careers - of hundreds, if not thousands or millions, of individuals, was lacking a key piece of data.
Because nobody believed Zwicky.
They didn't bother to check his math because he was "eccentric." That is to say, he was not an authoritarian follower.
Authoritarian followers have the psychological characteristic known as right-wing authoritarianism. This personality trait consists of authoritarian submission, a high degree of submission to the established authorities in one's society; authoritarian aggression, aggression directed against various persons in the name of those authorities; and conventionalism, a strong adherence to the social conventions endorsed by those authorities. Why do psychologists call authoritarian followers "right-wing" authoritarians? Are they all members of a conservative political party? No. Right-wing is used here in a psychological sense, meaning wanting to please established authority. One of the original meanings of the adjective right (riht in Old English) was "lawful, proper, correct," which in those long ago days meant doing what your local lord and the king wanted.Over and over again it is seen, in retrospect, of course, that irrational beliefs that are promulgated by authorities who desire to maintain control, and believed by the followers who want to be 'good', trump True Science; and here I mean the mode of Scientific Cognition, not just 'science' since the so-called Enlightenment. Over and over again, throughout history, going back even to ancient times, you can note that there were a few really intelligent free thinkers who made observations, drew useful inferences from those observations, and suggested solutions that were ignored, ridiculed, reviled, buried; and often, the thinker who dared to voice his ideas was destroyed by one means or another because Authoritarian Followers are also aggressive against anything that is not pronounced to be 'okay' by their leaders. Most often this destruction was - and is even today - due to power considerations: the individual has an idea that, in some way, threatens the political/social power structure.
- Cambridge Dictionary of Psychology
Why is it, one has to ask, that truth is so threatening to power?
Yesterday I read "Iraq: An Education in Occupation and Institutional Destruction" by Hugh Gusterson, published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Hugh Gusterson is an anthropologist whose specialty is 'nuclear culture'. He is very active in the Network of Concerned anthropologists and thinks that science in general, anthropology is particular, ought not to be militarized. The article is about the destruction of the universities, libraries, culture and education system in Iraq by the illegal and immoral U.S. invasion, along with the multiple murders of scientists and professors and intelligentsia in general. It's heartbreaking because it immediately reminded me of Katyn. Do you know about Katyn? Let me tell you about it.
The Katyn Massacre
In late August of 1939, Hitler signed a non-aggression pact with Stalin which, effectively, was an agreement between the two of them to divide Poland. When the Germans invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, the Polish people hardly knew what the Nazis had in store for them. According to the Nazi grand design for the solution to the need for 'lebensraum' (living space), the whole of Polish territory was to be gradually cleared of its native population for the colonization by German ethnic populations and eventually incorporated into the Greater German Reich.
Thus, unfortunately, the Poles themselves were one of the primary targets of the Nazis, perhaps moreso than the Jews. The Germans considered the Poles to be an inferior race as they did other Slavic nations. So, according to the plan, the Poles were to be sorted according to strictly racist criteria. Those Poles with German ancestry were to be reclassified as ethnic Germans. The transformation of Poland into a German province was to be carried out over a short period of twenty-five or thirty years. Hence, no mercy was to be shown to this population. And, to guarantee the success of this fast despoliation, the intelligentsia was to be liquidated. "It sounds cruel," Hitler reportedly told Hans Frank, "but such is the law of life."
Bodies unearthed in Katyn forest by the Nazis in 1943
Seventeen days after Hitler invaded Poland from the West, the USSR invaded from the East. Stalin's 'Scorched Earth' policy called for the evacuation of industries, factories, machinery, skilled workers and livestock - all to be moved East to Russia. Almost 200 major industrial plants were moved to Russia from Ukraine in two months. And, more than that, Stalin ALSO saw it as necessary to annihilate the intelligentsia of Ukraine.
In a speech given by Lech Walesa, President of the Republic of Poland, at the Cemetery of Polish officers in Katyn, June 4th, 1995, the following was noted (translated by Chester A. Kisiel):
"In September 1939 their world collapsed. Everything went to pieces: independence, law, joy in building their country, domestic tranquility. An onslaught from the West fell upon isolated Poland, soon followed by one from the East. [...] Many of them [became Soviet prisoners of war] such as the defenders of Lvov, [and were] assured nothing bad would happen to them, that they had been interned only temporarily, that they would be allowed to return to their homes. [...] How could they know that on the 5th of March, 1940, a few signatures on a short document sentenced to death more than twenty thousand innocent people? This document instructed: 'decide the cases without summoning the prisoners and without presenting charges; the sentence: to be shot.'Over twenty thousand of the brightest and best of the genetic pool of Ukraine were dead with one action. But, this was only the tip of the ice-berg. For example, the population of Kiev, in 1940 was 900,000. In 1945 it was only 186, 000.
"The NKVD carried out their orders precisely and methodically. A separate bullet for each condemned man... hour after hour, day after day after day; the procession of death continued. In the end, there was one common, nameless pit. There were no crosses, no names, no prayers."
"Then followed decades of concealing the truth. Lies, subterfuge and persecutions. In totalitarian Poland, the word 'KATYN' was an anti-State word. The threat of severe penalties hung over anyone who dared to place a candle under a cross with such an inscription. The families of the Katyn victims had to conceal keepsakes of their loved ones."The murder of the educated classes was blamed on the Germans by the Russians, and on the Russians by the Germans. Ultimately it was proved that Stalin gave the orders and the Russian NKVD were responsible for the massacre. The truth, however, is, that BOTH the Nazis AND the Russians were guilty. More than that, there is evidence that the Jewish Holocaust was just such an action: the most intelligent and talented of the Jews were sent to their deaths by various means, and the psychopaths of the Jewish population either collaborated with the Germans, or got a free ticket to Israel.
I once read an account of the Cambodian genocide carried out by Pol Pot and his regime. It was written by a school teacher. He explained that he had to hide his glasses because the Khmer Rouge regime automatically shot anyone wearing glasses because that supposedly signaled that they could read and write!
The fact is, if you read enough history, you will discover that killing the intelligentsia first is the aim of all invaders and conquerors because it is through the elimination or suppression of competent thinkers that any oppressive regime takes hold. This has been done so regularly and extensively throughout history that it staggers the mind to consider it. What it means, essentially, is that over and over and over again, psychopaths and their authoritarian followers have systematically eliminated from the human population, the best and brightest minds, removing their DNA from the human gene pool, and it is ALL of humanity that is suffering. It could very well be that this single strategy is the reason that humanity is on the verge of extinction right now.
The Malthusian Darwinists, of course, will say that it is just 'survival of the fittest'. I guess that depends on what you understand the 'fittest' to be. In the animal kingdom, where fitness is measured by strength and power, the ability to wallop the heck out of all rivals to your possession of food and sexual partners, selection of this type might be useful. But in the human species, where fitness and progress and even survival, depend on brain power, killing off all the brainiest people in any given culture can only lead to degradation and devolution of the species as a whole. And when that species holds in its hands the ability to destroy all life on the planet, well, I think you can see where that kind of selection will lead: a lot of power and not enough brains to know that it ought never to be used.
I would like to invite you to stop and try to imagine what life on Earth might be like if Science had actually fulfilled its mandate of explaining our reality and teaching us how to best respond to it. If science was actually a free exploration of Nature and drawing accurate conclusions, creating theories, testing those theories with no hidden agendas, what might it have accomplished up to now? Can you do it? Can you think of any area of life that could not be improved by having a truly scientific understanding and proposed response that was supported and implemented by the social/power structure?
Oh, you think it has been done? Think again. Read the history of science and human social development. When you see how repeatedly the few individuals who had the right idea were marginalized and/or destroyed, if you have any firing neurons after being born into a humanity which has been genetically manipulated to less intelligence, you will immediately realize that the same conditions - only worse - prevail today: what the mainstream follows is almost always what is politically expedient to those in power, with only enough truth involved to patch over the obvious tears in the now disintegrating fabric of society.
All of this COULD be the conditions of a world where true Science is a valued part of society. It could have been our world.
But that isn't what we have today. What we have today is the Chaos produced by pathological individuals that induces Consent from the Authoritarian Followers. As I noted above, Science took a wrong turn when it was co-opted by Power and diverted to the purposes of Imperialism and materialistic greed. The really sad thing is that the authoritarian followers who 'believe in authority' could as easily follow an authority that has their best interests at heart were such an authority to exist. I don't think it does anymore: the psychopaths have seen to that, co-opting and corrupting even science, to the core. As it is, the authoritarian sheep follow and support the very worst of humanity; pathological individuals who gain power by deception and manipulation. And in the end, as psychologist, Andrew Lobaczewski wrote:
"Germs are not aware that they will be burned alive or buried deep in the ground along with the human body whose death they are causing."Humanity is a Cosmic body and each individual is a cell in that body. But the humanity we see today is a disease-ridden idiot - a shambling, ragged, beast covered with oozing pustules of corruption representing science, religions and government - stumbling from one self-inflicted disaster to another. There can be only one outcome and this, too, is documented: in ancient literature describing how other 'mighty' cultures have ended:
As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the time of the Son of Man. [People] ate, they drank, they married, they were given in marriage, right up to the day when Noah went into the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.In case you think that means being 'Raptured', think again and ponder the following in reference to the above remark about vultures and eagles gathering around a fallen body:
So also [it was the same] as it was in the days of Lot. [People] ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; But on the [very] day that Lot went out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed [them] all. That is the way it will be on the day that the Son of Man is revealed.
On that day let him who is on the housetop, with his belongings in the house, not come down [and go inside] to carry them away; and likewise let him who is in the field not turn back. Remember Lot's wife! Whoever tries to preserve his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life will preserve and quicken it.
I tell you, in that night there will be two men in one bed; one will be taken and the other will be left. There will be two women grinding together; one will be taken and the other will be left. Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left.
Then they asked Him, Where, Lord? He said to them, Wherever the dead body is, there will the vultures or eagles be gathered together. Luke 17: 26-37
Then I saw a single angel stationed in the sun's light, and with a mighty voice he shouted to all the birds that fly across the sky, Come, gather yourselves together for the great supper of God, That you may feast on the flesh of rulers, the flesh of generals and captains, the flesh of powerful and mighty men, the flesh of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all humanity, both free and slave, both small and great!
Then I saw the beast and the rulers and leaders of the earth with their troops mustered to go into battle and make war against Him Who is mounted on the horse and against His troops. And the beast was seized and overpowered, and with him the false prophet who in his presence had worked wonders and performed miracles by which he led astray those who had accepted or permitted to be placed upon them the stamp (mark) of the beast and those who paid homage and gave divine honors to his statue. Both of them were hurled alive into the fiery lake that burns and blazes with brimstone. And the rest were killed with the sword that issues from the mouth of Him Who is mounted on the horse, and all the birds fed ravenously and glutted themselves with their flesh. Revelation 19:17-21
The garden of earthly delights, by Hieronymus Bosch
Reader Comments
How could anyone at the time know he was right or the implications or non-implications of his discovery in the face of competing ideas/hypothesis and points of focus at the time? I ask because after reading a couple of science magazines it becomes apparent that "on the same topic" there usually is so many different explanations, ways of seeing things and recommendations of moving forward. They all demand time/resources to determine which is right which is wrong and at specific times, consensus is reached that "one is likely" thus effort is dedicated to that and others are pushed to the back-burner... But in hindsight, new revelations appear about decisions taken that shouldn't have been taken etc and this hindsight might come generations down the line...
But how can people know what is right or wrong, BEFOREHAND, before seeing the consequence, in the face of competing ideas, time and resources plus self-interest where people are following there own intuition? To me it sounds "Easier said than done."
A better illustration: Take a football game, you have the tactical discussion beforehand on what best way to approach a game, you hear competing ideas at which point you have to go with one or a select few... You play the game, maybe after you win and say, yeah our tactics worked, nice thing we listened to Guy A and not Guy B, but it might fail at which point hindsight will inform that GUY B was right and GUY A was wrong but then you think "How could we have known that beforehand?" At the point of putting ideas forward GUY A and GUY B were each very sure of there ideas, they gave logical arguments... You know, just think Tom Brady and Eli Manning from the Superbowl last night or Jose Mourinho Vs Pep Guaridiola --- no one can accuse either of being less scientific than the other in there respective fields but they all do things differently and none is 100% spot on all the time and no doubt at the point of making the decision they think "this is the best way forward"....
The way I see it, science is like football tactics, there is NO ONE RIGHT TACTIC, it all comes down to AGREEMENT... Through the agreement and how you follow through on it, you create your own reality or situation... This is exemplified in the real world by various leading teams that take on various tactics with relatively equal success and failure, some become passing teams others defensive teams, others counter-attacking (you know each creating there reality 'how they play' through there agreement and follow-through)... You can't be 100% spot on 100% of the time, stuff might happen that only hindsight can inform you on and given that you can't jump forward to look back, you just have to make a calculated decision which at some point will give a negative result because "STUFF" just has a habit of happening...
That is basically why I see Zwicky having been discarded, no one could have known unless they had the benefit of hindsight, even now Dark Matter is yet to be 100% verified but they are taking it very seriously because it seems very close to the truth on observed phenomena, but who knows, maybe there is some scientist out there who is currently being ignored but who is sitting on an idea that might take us all closer to the truth... But compared to all the other scientists with there equally valid ideas and logical arguments, who is to know the right one to give most of the resources and time to??
Having said that, I understand that how the world is today is wrong for quite a lot of people and one main reason for that is due to science not doing what it says on the tin which is most likely because of what is mentioned on the article ---- authoritarian followers and pathological people in positions of power.
Its not a matter of choosing the "best" path every time. All there is is lessons. The problem is that the doors to valid paths have been and are being slammed despite the honest efforts of those who built them (and at everyone's expense). And the doors to destruction remain wide open. But still there's hope. They can't shut doors that they don't "believe" in, can they?
Much of our science is mired in failed ideas of the 19th century that have nevertheless become the unquestioned consensus view. The cancer in our science exists when we begin to forget that a theory that is held up as a consensus view is not necessarily a solid fact. And the signature of the stuck reasoning, or failing point, in any given field can be recognized when you ask an academic a question and you get an answer that sounds something like this: “Well, most _______ists agree that______”, or words to that effect. [fill in the blanks as you see fit] I can’t speak for others. But when I get an answer like that I always follow it up with, ‘why would they think that’?
And when when an untested theory which is supported by the consensus becomes the unquestioned authority for too long, further progress in that field get’s derailed, and completely ineffective.
Each one of our sciences can be traced back to a specific improvable, and failed idea that can be identified as the point where things took a wrong turn and got stuck. The 19th century was a bad time for many fields of research. In the fields of geology, and the Earth sciences that point was reached in the 19th century when sir Charles Lyell published his book, ‘The Principles of Geology’. The unquestioned belief became that all geology was the result of slow, and gradual forces we see going on around us today. And the cliché that “The present is the key to the past” became the unquestioned foundation postulate of the Earth sciences.
Yet anyone who spends anytime studying the stratigraphy of the Younger Dryas Boundary layer will quickly come to the realization that 12,900 years an impact related, mass extinction level, catastrophe happened to this world that was the single most violent natural disaster since the extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. The KT boundary is the only stratigraphic horizon the even begins to compare to the YDB In all, something like 35 genera went extinct in the Younger Dryas event. And the Clovis culture all but disappeared from North America.
The idea that mass extinction level catastrophes may have happened in human times has been completely discounted for more than 150 years. And the very idea whole mountain ranges could be raised up, or destroyed in seconds has always been something that was ridiculed as the arena of creationists, or Young Earth theorists.
The simple fact is that there has been nothing in written history that gives us any clue of what to expect from the impact of a very large cluster of cometary debris. But if you can accept the idea that thanks to 150 years of Uniformitarian-Gradualist assumptive reasoning 100% of the planetary scarring of the YD impacts have been miss-defined as volcanogenic, and that whole mountain ranges can be melted, ablated, and blown aside like wax under a high pressure blow-torch, then using high res satellite data, it’s not hard at all to find the geologically recent scars of a very large, multiple ablative airburst event in North America. And the blast-effected materials of the event are still lying undisturbed o the surface; almost as pristine as the day they first cooled!
Unfortunately, even if field work were able to prove today that I am exactly right about the terrains I’ve been studying for the past few years, the Earth sciences are so thoroughly embedded in that old worn out 19th century uniformitarian-gradualist postulate that I have very little hope of seeing it accepted by mainstream science in my lifetime.
After all, most geologists agree that catastrophes that produce sudden, and major, geologic change just don’t happen anymore. Those same geologists would also have you to believe that an impact related catastrophe that killed 80% of the life on the North American continent did so without leaving any lasting scars.
Go as far back into history and you will find wars, wars and more wars. Massacres, looting, lies and more lies - which still goes on today. I learned about Katyn in the film Enigma and was shocked by it. In the Gallipoli war, the Turks lost about 250,000 people, mostly young and a lot of educated ones. A whole class from the school of medicine, another class from the french lycee, galatasaray, (they had all volunteered) all died for defending their country. But at the end of World War I, we were invaded nonetheless. With the leadership of Ataturk, Turkey rose from its ashes a new state. Now invasion takes place without armies when there are eager greedy collaborators and traitors aplenty.
I think I know why those in charge (this century and last) try to destroy the intelligensia.... It is because they are the ONLY people who theaten their existence. The ONLY people that can call them into question.
People said Hitler absolutely despised the 'common people' - people who were stupid enough to support him. He was wary of the elite (because they had access to both education and powerful connections), but he feared the intelligensia. Probably because they saw right through him and his henchmen.
In previous centuries the PsTB attacked any group of people who's commerce or religious became too popular or powerful and therefore became a threat. Often a group's religion was used as an excuse to attack them. I'm thinking of the Cathars and Knights Templar and also those people living in countries 'targetted' for Crusades. What these people had was power, popularity, or the potential to usurp those who targetted them.
Another excellent article by LKJ. You are the best! Please review the Electric Universe literature regarding "Dark Matter",
it is not necessary in the cosmological physics using the plasma universe model enumerated for us by McCanney,
Thornhill, etc. The dark matter concept follows on the cosmological basis of the gravitional force as dominant, big bang, etc.,
which has been disproven by the work of the plasma researchers.
I am still interested in the C's comments about unstable gravity waves, and then later about the electric nature of the
cosmos (McCanney).
Whether or not dark matter exists was not the point; the point was that one guy who was eccentric proposed it as a solution that worked, and he was ignored. The same process is done in respect of the electric universe theory.
Has anyone thought that what is responsible is that a scientist through his/her training is heavily programmed with "You're better than the person on the street," not only that, “You are on 2 different levels, you the scientist being almost semi-divine” and therefore as a consequence they have this inalienable feeling of privilege, especially on the subject of decisions and opinion... I mean why else don’t policy makers even bother consulting with what people think about their decisions or the human consequences. Has anyone ever had his or her professor imply something to the tune of "those un-educated "demanding" lot don't know and can't understand what's good for them?" When was the last time you heard a policy maker asking your opinion on whether they should raise or lower taxes or the interest rate?
I truly imagine being an academic is a full time role, really got to personify the role, engage with the politics, sing to the tune of the establishment, maybe kiss a few backsides here and there... At that level you are above mere human occupations, one might even say human emotions, one experiences such cultivated and 'sophisticated' emotion that if it were wine it'll be some of the most expensive on the shelf... I suspect this is where the consensus view emanates from ---- from deluded people who think they are all that just because they came up with some stuff, got their work published in peer-reviewed-journals, occasionally attend lavishly expensive dinner parties in Vienna that are oh so boooooooring, paid for by their employers of course and occasionally listen to classical music whilst musing about how to "catch" nature in the act and adding to their collection of acknowledgements.
I mean if this lot get it into their head that something is right, all I can say is good luck trying to change it, especially given that if you are out of the circle, you are just another crackpot on the unforgiving fringes of academia... The rejects hanging on for dear life or trying desperately to get in...
And the sad fact is that most of science is essentially un-provable... Such out-dated Newtonian thinking that you should be able to prove what you assert isn’t for the 21st century --- modern science has evolved to higher realms... all you need is to make a series of very complicated arguments, show a semblance of links between what you are saying and what is in nature, leave huge blanks that can’t be verified but just enough that it seems like “it can be true” then kiss a$s like crazy, then you are well on your way to scientific royalty... Oh one last ingredient, the more exotic the better, that means feel free to invent as many new particles, universes, dimensions, whatever else your mind can fathom into your theory. To solidify all this, you have to have the maths to back it up, feel free to invent new maths if you want, pay no attention that no experiment or technology on this planet can ever be devised to test this stuff out, just make sure it makes sense on paper... Now you are truly on your way to scientific royalty given that you have kissed the right behinds of course... This will be the new cornerstone of a fledgling discipline that will rule over how we see whatever it is the theory suggested for the next couple of centuries or at the rate of the modern world, decades until some other person out there comes up with an even more ridiculous one that puts yours to shame.. All this will be busy sucking away billions of research money as well, industries will be spawned from nowhere to become global monoliths... Thus how consensus becomes soooo entrenched they can't be overturned, only rebranded... OSIT.
It was printed quite large in an art history book we had in our house when I was a teenager.
I remember wondering what it was all about. It seemed very fanciful to me, or perhaps meaning to show the various human emotions using physical examples.
I never studied those old stories of doom. But I don't particularly look forward to the next mass tragedy. Not because of the death. But because of the confusion it can cause. That can stick with you a long time.
but the root of the problem is ego. I understood a long time ago that any idea presented nonchalantly will be picked up and run with. Think hundreth monkey. If you don't care about "owning" the idea (and the potential material rewards), all you have to do is place it and let it evolve, and quite often you will see the change in your lifetime. Sometimes it works posthumously, and TPTB know this and have used it for centuries.
For example, in a corporate atmosphere, you don't have to be one of the "movers and shakers" to get your ideas across; simply discuss them in a casual conversation with a coworker in front of a "mover and shaker". The "mover's" ego is such that he will take your idea, proclaim it as his own and implement it. You have no ego which needs to be stroked, so as long as the idea is out there and implemented, it doesn't matter whose idea it is. Same with fashion. Don't tell people that they "have" to wear this or that, just wear it yourself. Part of the people will wear it because they like the "look" and the rest will wear it because "everyone else" is wearing it. Manipulative? Perhaps, but that is the way this particular world "works". Plant the humane seeds and let them grow!
It shows it from a slightly different angle, but still shows how behavior can be influenced by proxy. It follows it from the basis of marketing to young people, where leading execs flash out the leaders of peer groups and only concentrate there efforts on them as these leaders are what are known as "trend setters" or as you said "movers and shakers" --- the 20% that influence the remaining 80%... Once they successfully ensnare them, then the trend setter will influence the rest of his/her social group on behalf of the marketer... All this is done covertly of course...
There is also this very interesting movie called The Joneses. Essentially it is a fake family-- people hired to pretend to be a family, who move to a neighbourhood befriend the community and sell them products by proxy of course... So they can invite next door for dinner and during the conversation, talk about family vacations and they will mention a specific travel company that they always use and how amazing/cheap it is etc etc, or one of the "fake" kids enrolls at the local school and his/her aim is to increase the popularity of a specific gadget, the father joins a golf course and his aim is to make popular some new sports wear etc... They essentially do this by selling a dream not just gadgets but a way of life because they represent that dream, they live that dream in front of everyone else.
Anyways, very interesting concepts.
What caught my attention is how that is captured and subverted by the PTB and then re-sold back for consumption... I particularly liked the description of the mook and midriff character, it really describes quite well a lot of males and females I know, all heavily defined by these caricatures.. The thing that is so worrying, is that the people acting out these roles think they are being original, expressing there individuality and acting as autonomous human beings. Little do they know that these roles have been carefully crafted and re-sold back to them...
I liked how the commentator described it
"Market it to them without seeming to do so."
And there weapon of mass destruction as described by one of the interviewees,
"Films, music, books, clothing, sports teams etc"
Oh and just to show the validity of the caricatures described,
In this [Link]posted on the forum section, the researcher informs the viewer that about 60 yrs ago, the biggest worry for the young american female was how exactly she was going to contribute to society but now, it is "how she looks, what others think of her" etc as exemplified in the documentary by the midriff character...
Just goes to show that culture, [the books, movies, music, etc] really does dominate the human being...
In the dark matter comment, there is no criticism intended, really just a question, as we are all seekers after the truth,
as I am interested in delving further into much of the material you have presented on your site.
You article is totally right on and I couldn't agree with you more about virtually everything.
Thank heavens for you, SOTT and the Cassiopaeans.
I think we all tend in some ways to become rigid in our thinking, and sensitive to criticism due to the world in which we live.
In professing many of the truths that I have learned from your site and follow up research to others, I am usually rebuked because most people don't want to hear the truth and as Gurdjieff said they would rather beat you over the head (usually figuratively) rather than acknowledge the truth. My wife and I were born in the same year as you (year of Dragon). She 4 days before you and is very intuitive - the day indicated in an Astrological book as the day of revelation - but I often have a hard time acknowledging construction criticism that she gives.
At MUFON a couple of years ago Richard Dolan sort of brushed me off about some blue triangle UFO pictures I asked him about that I had taken without realizing what they were, and then I saw virtually the same on Linda Moulton Howe's Earthfiles site recently. Have you seen those? We all need to keep an open mind.
And are easily led.
Good article again. The same coverup of truth (or ignoring if you will) can be said also about the fields of archaeology and medicine. Not only science & history.
Nostradamus was using herbs to heal when all the other 'doctors' were bleeding people. One of the reasons he was marginalized and demonized by the church.
If cancer were cured, the US economy would collapse. So all these pink ribbons are just so much fluff and blather. That's why they call it the medical "INDUSTRY". Think about it.....we can't CURE cancer, but we can create chimera's
[Link]We can't cure cancer, but we can make 'bullet-proof skin'.
[Link]I suppose it's important for the criminals to be indestructible. And you KNOW, if these articles are being published, the research has already been done. One wonders what types of horrendous creatures are running around cages beneath the 'science academies' of the world.
With archaeology as well, there are numerous sites worldwide which demonstrate beyond cavil than humans have gone through at least one advancement previous to our current civilization. The Bosnian pyramid is just beginning to reveal its secrets. And then there's Puma Punka in S. America. The stones of this exquisite monument are made of diorite. They can only be cut with diamond.
[Link]But I think nothing compares with the elephant in the living room - the Sphinx. This spectacular monument shows inarguable signs of water erosion. Unfortunately for mainstream archaeology, there hasn't been water in the Giza plateau for 12,000 years. Darn the Luck!!!
[Link]
I especially like your coverage here about the Katyn massacre. It eludes to the fact that the Stalinist regime far and away exceeded the Nazi's, slaughtering more then 50 million people in their quest for absolute control. Another conveniently ignored fact about the Bolsheviks is that the revolution was begun largely by Jews. Many of whom were actually from the east side of New York and not Russians at all. But we can't have truth about history coming out. It would severely curtail the reparations currently being paid by Germany and the US. Revisionist history is profitable.
Ignoring scientific fact is another facet of control. Tesla would have given the world free energy, but JP Morgan was having no energy source that was un-metered. Further up the line, in 1980, Science and Mechanics magazine published a long article on a Magnet Motor developed by Howard Johnson (no relation). Mr. Johnson was however a very credible inventor holding several dozen patents to his name including one for the anti-skid brakes currently found in auto's throughout the world. Mr. Johnson's Magnet Motor would have supplied electric power for free. "5000 watt home generator powered by permanent magnets" was the heading. But the JP Morgans of today are having none of it. I still have the magazine cover from that edition. In 1976, someone in California put a 1.5hp electric motor, a car battery and a solar panel on a Moped. The bike reached speeds of 55 mph. IN 1976!!! Strange, no developments in that field except of course in space. But that's all government benefits.
The future of science, medicine and education will not come from the organized institutions currently controlling the content. It will come from the garage inventors, from the herbalists and the internet. It's no wonder the powers that be want to be able to shut down the internet. The truth is coming out.
A significant point was made in the article:
"and an army of scientific workers was sought to serve the agendas of what was to become known as the Military-Industrial Complex. "
The implication is that consensus has been hijacked! The aim of scientific pursuit has been hijacked!
The aim is not the humanitarian-utopia so elequently defined by Laura; but something sinister and narrow.
The blame does not reside with 'authoritarian followers' if it is accepted that they are acting out innate characteristics; it [the blame] resides with the authorities they follow; apply this reasoning to the pattern of killing off intelligensia: simply power maintaining power.
"The really sad thing is that the authoritarian followers who 'believe in authority' could as easily follow an authority that has their best interests at heart were such an authority to exist"
No such authority exist because they are being deliberately exterminated.
IMHO
Im totally agree on this part:
In case you think that means being 'Raptured', think again and ponder the following in reference to the above remark about vultures and eagles gathering around a fallen body.
and i remarked this with a comment said by one ofmy friends Moraney:
Nobody is going to save you, because according to the Andromedans, if you’re sitting here waiting for a savior, you’re not doing the work yourself. And who would come down here to take you off the hook? For what purpose? You will only recreate the situation again someday.
Alex Coiller
14th century monks used to debate how many angels could fit on the head of a pin well the 20th century physicists (reincarnated monks???) have mathamatically discerned that at 10 to the minis 26th sec the whole universe fit on the head of a pin??!!??!! my old botany prof used to tell us "ask yourself , does this make sense????" when you have to invent an invisible substance
to fill in a 90% gap in your picture of the universe, DOES THIS MAKE SENSE?
newton (using Leibnetz's calculus) had no comprehension of the significance
of electricity perhaps with what we are observing with our wonderful space telescopes we can start using math to explain our observations rather than using it to try to bend reality NGC7603!!!
Humanity needs to move beyond group think. This article's focus is science but group think also corrupts politics. When we honor the individual, the new idea, and recognize that strength of the group lies in diversity, not unity we will have come a long way as a species. In particular I am thinking of the difference between a democracy and a republic. In the public of ideas, we need to respect the individual, different idea and choose those ideas that work best for ourselves, ignoring the popularity of others choices.
for another article that cuts through the PTB's lies and subterfuge.
Revealing the light of truth and knowledge has a way of illuminating the dark corners of fear and ignorance that the 'paths so desperately need for their feeding.
It's nice to see their food source is rapidly dwindling,