This article was first published in issue 13, volume 1 / 2011 of The Dot Connector Magazine, official publication of Sott.net.

"Comets are vile stars. Every time they appear in the south, they wipe out the old and establish the new. Fish grow sick, crops fail, Emperors and common people die, and men go to war. The people hate life and don't even want to speak of it." -Li Ch'un Feng, Director, Chinese Imperial Astronomical Bureau, 648, A.D.

In 2007, a meteorite fell in Puno, Southeastern Perú. José Macharé - scientist of the Geologic, Mining and Metallurgic Institute in Perú - said that the space rock fell near a muddy area by Lake Titicaca, making the water boil for around ten minutes, and mixing with the soil and emanating a gray cloud, the components of which remain unknown. Having discarded radioactive poisons, this toxic cloud is said to have caused headaches and respiratory problems in at least 200 persons from a population of 1500 inhabitants. Other than this event, how often do we hear about people getting sick due to a rock coming from space? How about birds, fish or other animals? Ancient astrologers cite comets as ill omens of death and famine, but are there any other causes other than the ones due to physical/mechanical consequences of comet impact devastation in our fragile environment of which we should be aware?

As a physician, I usually concentrate strictly on medical and health-related issues, not history or catastrophism. However, like so many other people, I see signs of atmospheric changes on our planet which, according to many experts, may well be due to increasing comet dust loading. When I read about increasing reports of fireballs all around the world, and I know that these factors must have an effect on the health of individuals and societies, it motivates me to do the research to find the connections so that I am better prepared for what may lie in our future. If our planet is entering a new cometary bombardment cycle, and if these comets harbor new species of microbes unknown to mankind's collective immunological systems (as may well be the case), then being forewarned is being forearmed.

According to the late Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe of the University of Wales at Cardiff, viruses can be distributed throughout space by dust in the debris stream of comets. Then as Earth passes though the stream, the dust and viruses load our atmosphere, where they can stay suspended for years until gravity pulls them down. They compare numerous plagues throughout our history which coincide with cometary bodies in our skies. These researchers are certain that germs causing plagues and epidemics come from space.

In a letter to Lancet [1],Wickramasinghe explains that a small amount of a virus introduced into the stratosphere could make a first tentative fallout east of the great mountain range of the Himalayas, where the stratosphere is thinnest, followed by sporadic deposits in neighboring areas. Could this explain why new strains of the influenza virus that are capable of engendering epidemics, and which are caused by radical genetic mutations, usually originate in Asia? Wickramasinghe argues that if the virus is only minimally infective, the subsequent course of its global progress will depend on stratospheric transport and mixing, leading to a fallout continuing seasonally over a few years; even if all reasonable attempts are made to contain an infective spread, the appearance of new foci almost anywhere is a possibility.

While the US government claims to have killed Osama Bin Laden on May 1st 2011 in Pakistan, all of the evidence, ignored by the mainstream media, strongly suggests that the "terror mastermind" died many years ago. The US and world public are being deceived on an almost unimaginable scale. How many people will fall victim to this latest deception, and what are the consequences of believing such a monstrous lie?

As with most fabricated terror stories, the 'Bin Laden is dead' tale is full of contradictions, half-truths and outright lies. The fact that the story was fabricated from whole cloth is seen in the fact that the story is now changing from the details that initially 'emerged'.

Who precisely made the claim that 'Osama' had a weapon and shot at US forces and that he used a woman as a human shield? What situation could a US soldier have found himself in where he thought he was under direct fire from a person in a room when he was in fact not? What possible scenario could have played out where a person was perceived to have used a 'human shield' when that person did no such thing? These are the questions that need to be asked as part of a serious investigation into this matter. But don't hold your breath.

As of now, we can only conclude that these two scenarios were simply made up as part of an initial report on the alleged death of Bin Laden and they point directly to a conscious plan, right from the beginning (or even long before the actual events of May 1st) on the part of US authorities to concoct a false story to be disseminated to the public.

That's what we all should be shouting today. After all, 'Bin Laden' has died several times already, and there have clearly been several 'Bin Ladens' over the past 10 years:

First there was this Bin Laden:

Who got a bit older and sicker and turned into this Bin Laden:

A couple of years ago, as a hobby, and pastime, I set out to see if I could work out a better way of identifying potential sites to go meteorite hunting. I had learned to do battle damage assessment from aerial reconnaissance photos a long time ago in the Army and the blast damage, and ground effects from an explosive event, are pretty much the same, no matter what the source of the explosion might be. It's only a question of scale, and explosive force. Visually, there is very little difference in the appearance of a bomb crater, and an impact crater of the same size. So the military style forensic technique of reading the patterns of movement in the emplacement of blast effected materials on the ground applies well in the search for potential impact related geology. The quality of the image data now commonly available to anyone with a good PC, an internet connection, and a copy of Google Earth, is excellent. In the past five years, the publicly available image data has really come into its own. And today's 21st century satellite imagery allows us to study the surface of the Earth at a level of detail our fathers could never have imagined.

Almost a century ago, using aerial photography, a geologist named Harlan Bretz noticed evidence for the mega-floods that sculpted the Grande Coulee, and the 'Channeled Scablands' of eastern Washington. What he had found, were the patterns of fluid flow, like the ripples you see in the sedimentary deposits of a stream bed, but these 'ripples' are hundreds of feet high. He saw them as empirical evidence of a major catastrophic flood event, on a scale that the standard theorists of his day thought was inconceivable.

Continued from Connecting the Dots: Earth Changes Are Upon Us

As above, so below.

The planet is undergoing dramatic changes. Snowstorms and floods, tornadoes and premature heatwaves abound; swarms of powerful earthquakes are collapsing societies; technological achievements are turning against us because of greed and negligence; and the skies are filled with marvels and portents of the kind we have only read about in the accounts of bygone eras.

The human masses are one more element in the picture of the cosmos, and as such, they are playing their part, quite in tune with the 'battle of the gods' above. Is it because they instinctively feel that the planet's history is reaching a climax? Or have they been provoked by their leaders, who think it's time to tighten the screws of control out of fear of losing their resources and privileges during the trying times now on our doorstep?

Victor Clube, author of The Cosmic Serpent and The Cosmic Winter, commented during a lecture:

I'd like to remind you now that one of these peaks [of cometary activity] that you are looking at here - the 1601 occurs round about 1640 through 1680, and it coincides with the end of the Thirty Years War in Europe, and the Civil War in England. I mentioned this briefly last night. Cromwell, and others of that time - I only name him because, of course, he's a familiar name to you, but there are many others - described all the upheaval of the time, in millennarian terms, as due to "God's revolution" only a century after Copernicus' De Revolutionibus.

My point here is that the word "revolution" is popularly used nowadays in a social sense. It didn't have that at the time Copernicus was writing; it acquired it. It acquired it at the time of the English Civil War. And it was because of the perception that things in the sky were driving things, terrible things, that were happening on the ground. Only three hundred and fifty years ago, then, mankind was still in the era of an invisible sky god from a once visible heaven associated with angels, fallen angels, and dangerous demons hurling thunderbolts.

We have to get rid of the idea that our ancestors thought that space was empty. They didn't have [the] specialized astrophysical knowledge that has allowed me to build the Taurid stream for you; they just knew it was there. That's really rather a remarkable thing. We've had to unlearn that knowledge in the last three hundred and fifty years in order to put ourselves in the state of rediscovering it.

©Samuel Coccius

Basel, Switzerland, 1566

So, what was The Enlightenment only forty years after Cromwell? It was the pragmatic English decision to get rid of all the angels and demons, invisible sky gods, and a once visible heaven. It was the decision to stop worrying about the evidence of fireballs and the supposed behavior of comets. It was a decision to reconstruct the cosmos without heaven in the solar system and put it in the ether or outside the cosmos altogether of infinity a la Bruno. It was the decision to create a purified, less frightening cosmos in much the same way as Aristotle did after Plato. On both occasions we shifted from astrology to physics, and from a sky of foreboding to a sky of inspiration, from prison and terror to freedom and hope.

Indeed, the cry of the revolutionary periods of 1640 to 1680 and 1760 to 1800, the time of the American War of Independence, was the cry of freedom from heavenly oppression, demons, and fireballs.

For the last two hundred years of Enlightenment we have been rewriting history so that the cry of freedom is from earthly oppressors. No wonder the world has gone wrong and the astrophysicists today cannot come to terms with the Taurid torus. I'm really trying to say that this is just not an astrophysical discovery that we are talking about. Everything has got to, sort of, turn around in order to come to terms with what is being said. And this, in a way, is rather like what Irving was describing beforehand. There is a paradigm shift involved in recognizing that it's not just ancient history we have got wrong - it's all history.

As we have seen in Part I, Earth Changes Are Upon Us, 'angels, demons and invisible gods' are back in the form of earthly and cosmic changes. At the same time, the world of men is marked by control, revolts and wars. We do not believe it is a coincidence. Still, whether the elite knew what was coming and whether the masses sensed it or not, we want to map out the details of how this happened at the level of society, politics and economy. It is a story that can be traced at least as far as 11 September 2001, from the beginning of the War on Terror™ - a diabolical stratagem of distraction, terror and oppression to prevent people from seeing the signs of cosmic threats - to the genocide of whole nations and the manufactured economic crisis, all of which Sott.net has followed closely. In this follow-up to Part I we will attempt to bring our readers up to date with the orchestrated chaos unfurling across the planet.

Connecting the Dots is a new series of short videos about...well, about everything.

In this first installment, we talk about nutrition. You might almost call it the key to everything. Eat the wrong foods and your brain won't work correctly. If your brain doesn't work correctly...well, you get the picture.

It seems irrefutable to me after 20 years of analyzing the career of Stephen Harper that he is incapable of providing democratic governance. Harper arguably shows some traits of what psychologists refer to as malignant narcissism, a dangerously heightened sense of self importance. Otto Kernberg, a leader in the study of personality disorders, describes malignant narcissism as "extreme self-absorption and insensitivity that often result in a trail of victims -- emotional wreckage left in the narcissist's wake." The victims Kernberg refers to are, of course, individuals, but in our case the principal victim is the Canadian nation -- its humanist accomplishments, its art and culture, the foundation of its science, its international standing and its democratic governance.

Murray Dobbin, Sept 10th 2009, The Tyee

Canada is in the the middle of another federal election, and this time there is a good chance that Stephen Harper's Conservative Party will win a majority government. This is very bad news for the Canadian people and the country as a whole.

From his beginnings as Chief Policy Officer of the western protest Reform Party and President of the ultra right-wing National Citizens Coalition, Stephen Harper has always espoused staunchly conservative views that mirror those of his ideological heroes in the U.S. A closet fundamentalist zealot, he has been consistently supportive of stronger government control and tax cuts for big corporations. He's anti-union, anti-immigration, pro-privatization of health care, pro-military, tough on crime, in favour of building more prisons, cutting funding for the arts, social services and education, an advocate for free trade and establishing closer political, economic and military ties with the United States.

Canada is on the verge of losing its national sovereignty and being ruled by a dictator with a hidden agenda and an iron fist. Yet a large segment of the Canadian public seems dimly aware of the many possible negative consequences as they continue to be in thrall to this proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing.

Last year, I wrote about corporate psychopaths and the "five-phase" process they use to maneuver their way into positions of influence and affluence. Heck, I might as well add "effluents" to that list. After all, an interaction with a psychopath will leave the same taste in your mouth and may just end up killing you. Plus, it rhymes. Take the example of Kevin Morrissey, managing editor for the Virginia Quarterly Review, who was driven to suicide after repeated harassment and belittlement by his boss, Ted Genoways.

Morrissey's plight is a perennial one, and it gets right to the heart of ponerology. Criminal psychopaths get drunk, get in fights, lead lives of serial criminality, and when they kill people, they tend to use weapons, or any convenient object that happens to be laying around. Successful psychopaths, on the other hand, lead relatively "normal" lives. They don't break the law (at least overtly) and can come across as ideal and highly successful citizens. But whether it's after years of pushing boundaries, tearing down a person's will to live with soul-eating mind-torture, or the "collateral damage" caused by the toxic chemicals their corporations release simply because they just don't care and can make a quick buck, successful psychopaths kill too. The main difference is, they kill a lot more, and they get away with it.

But it's not just the corporate bigwigs and Tucker Max-esque "boyfriends". As we've seen, a look at the machinations of political groups like the Soviets and the Nazis with the same perspective is quite revealing. Psychopaths gaining access and prominence in political groups use the same five-phase process as the those studied by Babiak. And not only does the five-phase process occur within the cutthroat dynamics of "power politics", it also occurs as the group as a whole strives for and achieves political domination. Or, to add a little color to counter that somewhat academic exposition: scum rises to the top. It's how it gets there that is interesting, and those early stages are the most elusive and poorly studied. Until Lobaczewski wrote his book, that is.

I've been amazed by the actions of official agencies to the unfolding radiation crisis at Fukushima. Watching the news reports from official channels in the aftermath of the disaster, I started asking myself several questions: Why has there been such a poor reaction from the World Health Organization? Why is the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) playing down the radiation threat? Why are some news pundits around the world actually trying to claim that radiation is 'not that bad' for human health? So I made an effort to answer these questions for myself. What I discovered was that there is no point in relying on data and reports provided by the various institutional exponents of nuclear energy "safety" and here's why:

The main goal for the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) is to propagate atomic energy. This is stated clearly in paragraph 2 of the IAEA statute:

"The Agency shall seek to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world."

Moreover, many UN agencies are subordinate to the IAEA. This particularly applies to the World Health Organization (WHO). On the strength of an agreement signed on 28 May 1959 (WHA 12-40), the IAEA can veto any research carried by WHO which would be in opposition to implementation of paragraph 2 of the IAEA statute. One statement in this agreement reads:

"It is recognized by the World Health Organization that the International Atomic Energy Agency has the primary responsibility for encouraging, assisting and coordinating research on, and development and practical application of, atomic energy for peaceful uses throughout the world without prejudice to the right of the World Health Organization to concern itself with promoting, developing, assisting, and coordinating international health work, including research, in all its aspects."

So it's easy to assess the relative value of reports about the effects of nuclear disasters published by the pro-nuclear institutions, including the famous 2005 report on Chernobyl (a favorite reference for pro-atomic lobbyists). In short, in the interest of "encouraging, assisting and coordinating research on, and development and practical application of, atomic energy" such reports are very probably biased and tend to downplay the extent of the radiation danger to people.