With an average of about 10 million TV viewers each Sunday plus almost 6 million YouTube views since it aired, 60 MINUTES brought us their update of the government-affirmed reality that UFOs are flying with impunity over Earth’s continents and oceans.
Friend or foe, this is a new reality that I’m hoping will force all of us, regardless of race, nationality or political party, to realize at a primal level that we are one species surviving as a synergy of individuals working together, supporting one another, each of us having equal value despite the diversity within us.
Finally seeing beyond institutionalized dogmas, woke and otherwise, that preach we are a collection of victimized categories, my hope is that with knowledge of the true Others, we will each learn quickly to control our personal and group anger, our greed, our dishonesty, our short-sighted abuse of one another, and our demolition of the planet.
Viscerally sensing the oneness of humanity after honest disclosure of the Others, I hope we will acquire a worldview with purpose, a higher purpose that competes successfully with the current amoral, random, meaninglessness take on life preached to us in Western schools by the mainstream “scientific” materialists who run things now… into the ground.
I think many Christians, like myself, are ready for this particular paradigm shift, ready to hold on to a benevolent, personal God alone, without depending entirely on so-called “infallible” books, stories, dogmas, and traditions.
I think materialist science may be ready, too. It seems to me that the seeds to dismantle materialism lie within physics, genetics, simulation theory, and the rigorous study of consciousness.
I hope we live in the era of humanity’s turning from pseudo-scientific, amoral, anti-spiritual materialism to a larger view of the universe and beyond.
It’s not that 60 MINUTES has uncovered any big UFO news. They’ve achieved something greater. They have reached a sizable mainstream audience with the UFO reality and potentially the gut-level truth about ourselves: we are one.
This knowledge can bring us the spiritual and moral evolution necessary to outgrow violence and war, humanity’s one-way ticket to fossilization in Earth’s geologic column.
Of course, the mainstream narrative is that we don’t know where UFOs come from. Could be China, Russia, a covert US program, or “even” ET’s and/or ethereal beings from elsewhere. Shrug.
Fine. This unlikely rhetoric may be essential to someone’s process of dragging the public across the finish line of full disclosure. I get the brittle nature of denial and the need to chip away at it gently.
But to my limited knowledge, everyone who has studied the vast literature and the video documents surrounding UFOs/UAPs has come away seriously doubting that all these anomalies could be human technology from the current era of Earth’s history.
Eric Davis, a PhD with tracible connections to secret US technology, claims that some UFOs are “off-world vehicles not made on this earth.” Davis’ credentials and public history have allowed the New York Times to quote him on this. While half the US population distrusts the Times for political reasons, the fact that every word in the article passed through a gauntlet of editors, each with veto power, leads me to think it’s quite significant that they quoted Dr. Davis this way.
Most of us see only one side of things. We sense the damage to science of knee-jerk skepticism, or we see the folly of absolute certainty, but rarely can anyone avoid both extremes simultaneously. I think we should try.
Most scientific fundamentalists shun certainty except when it comes to materialism. They habitually doubt anomalies of any type. They block publication of “such rubbish.”
Most religious fundamentalists feel certain of a meaningful worldview that puts their group at the helm of truth. They reject anomalies that contradict their dogmas. Historically, they’ve silenced heretics with the same zeal that scientific materialists apply today against the heretical scientists of Intelligent Design.
It seems to me that we would all be wise to avoid irrational skepticism as well as dogmatic certainty. Probably all of us have made both mistakes, but I sense that we each specialize in one or the other.
At this point, seeking what little is left to me of the “middle ground” in this topic, I’m deliberately hovering around 99.6 % convinced that Eric Davis is right, that humans are not the only created beings on Earth with advanced technology.
It seems to me that when humanity approaches 100% certainty on this issue, we will begin to feel like one species on the same side of survival. This will enable us to escape the slavery of our violent national tempers, our smoldering resentments, and the generational dogmas of hatred that enslave us in angry victimized groups around the world.
“There was one instance where we exploded a nuclear weapon over the Pacific and this was in about ’61, I believe. And the consternation it caused because it shut out communication over the entire Pacific basin for a number of hours in which no radio transmission was available at any time. This was very significant and, of course, this was one of the things that the extraterrestrials, later I learned, were highly concerned about because it affected our ionosphere, and in fact, spacecraft were unable to operate because of pollution in the magnetic field of which they depended upon.” — Retired Colonel Ross Dedrickson, USAF, (a Stanford Graduate).
This sort of video testimony about ETs and UFOs is a bottomless pit. Dr. Greer owns a boatload of it, some of which is free on YouTube and well worth watching.
If you listen to enough of these military people telling their UFO/ET stories, eventually you’ll probably have to conclude one of the following:
Mental illness of a type that produces a specifically detailed delusion that tends to be consistent from one person to the next is common among people of high military responsibility and rank.
The enormous and growing number of “ET/UFO witnesses” is part of a gargantuan military conspiracy to hide advanced human technology by attributing it to non-existent ET’s.
The ET/UFO narrative is fundamentally true (or part of a broader truth?) that the US military in their infinite wisdom has chosen to hide from the public starting about 70 years ago.
One of the more intellectually gifted UFO/UAP experiencers, Jay of Project Unity, recently interviewed Mr. Fugal asking brilliant questions. Fugal’s answers are fascinating, spiritually profound, and challenging at the worldview/ universe-view level. Here’s that audio interview:
When I first began watching Season 1 of Fugal’s “The Secret of Skinwalker Ranch,” I suspected that one of the covert portions of the US military had an underground base beneath the ranch. This might have explained many of the “paranormal” activities, assuming the video footage was honest, and assuming the US military’s secret technology included advanced holograms, “electrogravitic” transportation devices, and high-energy equipment that releases hazardous radiation periodically.
The further I delved into the series, however, the more the military explanation faded.
I look forward to Season 2, which I’ll be watching alone. (I’m the only person under this roof with an interest in UFOs.)
To me, the most interesting aspect of Skinwalker Ranch is the implicit analysis of good and evil. The entire UFO/ ET phenomenon is divided at this fulcrum with Dr. Greer on one side, insisting that virtually all ETs are benevolent or neutral, and the rest of Ufology on the other side reporting a mix of friends and foes, especially under hypnotic regression.
Some analytic individuals, Jay of Project Unity for example, have stated that there is no such thing as good and evil. Others say that everything we experience in this universe, including the unspeakable suffering of many people and animals, as well as the ubiquitous unfairness of life in general, is “perfect.” They emphasize the word “perfect,” and justify it with various interesting worldviews (views of ultimate reality) that could make sense, I think, if indeed accurate. For instance, “we all signed a contract before freely choosing to come here.”
More and more I’m inclined to believe that goodness is a balance and evil is an imbalance… of items/forces/habits/substances/etc. that are inherently neither good nor evil. Of course, I’m betting we’ll each come up with exceptions to this idea if we think about it.
Tell me what exceptions come to mind for you. What about racism or genocide? Is there some underlying force that’s out of balance there, or are these things inherently evil?
What about doing unto others as you would have them do unto you? Is this a balance of some sort or an extreme? I’d love to hear your thoughts in a comment.
In the US legal system, the accused party has the right to trial by a “jury of peers.”
Every MD I’ve spoken to about it feels cheated that the MD is always forced to face a jury of “non-peers.” That is, non-medical people who lack advanced education in physiology, biochemistry, pharmacology, neuroanatomy, pathology, surgery, clinical practice, etc.
It feels grossly unfair from this side of the table.
But can you imagine how often a jury of MD’s would side with a patient claiming to have been victimized in some way by an MD? I suspect guilty verdicts would be rare. I hope I’m wrong, and I certainly could be.
Though most MDs probably see themselves as the proverbial hens with the (personal-injury) lawyers as the wolves, many, if not most non-medical US citizens would never put MD’s in charge of bringing malpractice fairness to patients.
Common sense says that such a setup would mean well-intentioned wolves guarding the hen house, a conflict of interest, or at least an echo chamber designed to keep truth and justice away from angry patients.
Like every conflict, this one has two sides, each deserving a voice. But common sense tends to win in the end, so “non-peers” judge us MD’s in court.
What if we carry this flavor of common sense over into the peer-review process of the scientific literature?
In that priestly realm, the professors’ former students become the gatekeepers of every scientific journal on Earth. Sounds like an echo chamber.
But it wouldn’t resemble wolves guarding the henhouse if all currently established scientific views were accurate.
Sadly, even the firmly “established” views in every field tend to eventually change. We can probably assume they always will.
Without the option of infallible knowledge, the peer-review process could avoid the reality of a systemic conflict of interest if only the journals’ gatekeepers could become, by-and-large, open to radically new ideas, concepts and technologies of the sort that render “settled science” obsolete or mistaken.
Unfortunately, history demonstrates the opposite situation.
These brilliant minds appear to be closed. Peer-reviewing gatekeepers live in a status-quo bubble, like a lay person who watches only one side of TV “news” or allows our virtual-demons, the internet AI’s, to select their reading materials, podcasts and videos.
This opaque peer-review bubble extends beyond the gatekeepers to encircle government research grant money in one-sided ignorance.
History clearly tells us that breakthrough ideas are routinely blocked. It’s old news, but not fake news.
If objective truth had no independent or transcendent power of its own, I suspect modern humanity would still be paying our priestly scientists to bring us ever-tinier details on the Earth’s cosmic centrality and its false illusion of roundness.
Since academic reality in the West is “publish or perish,” scientists must think within the established thought-boxes and paradigms of their professors, otherwise their papers will be rejected by the system’s consanguineous gatekeepers. When paper rejection happens too often, the young scientist who has devoted her life to the sacred hunt for truth suddenly falls from grace and must scramble for a new career to avoid homelessness — literally.
It’s a high-risk game.
Being a young research scientist is a bit like owning a restaurant in June, 2020, except that the scientist’s debt is an enormous education loan hanging overhead forever without the exit option of bankruptcy. The risk is high. Survival for most of them requires finding a safe route that increases the odds of publication.
The modern peer-review process is part of humanity’s ancient search for infallible literature. Too bad it’s a futile search (as far as I know, though I could be wrong).
Love it or hate it, the echo-chamber review process is all we’ve got now.
Perhaps we could improve it by allowing non-scientific people, or maybe just scientists from unrelated fields, into each journal’s review process, reflecting the way a jury of “non-peers” decides the fate an MD and her patient in a court of law. Common sense?
Sometimes the experts closest to a technical issue are the people furthest from objectivity. Trees hide the forest, if nothing else.
Cross-pollination would also improve research grant money distribution. Mixing scientists and artists in the decision making processes would help a great deal, I suspect, while excluding career politicians entirely. Can I get an amen from the back?!
And perhaps an “open-mindedness quota” should be presented to the tax-payers for a vote:
“Vote YES if you want the government to reserve 10% of the relevant part of your tax money (the grant money) for projects that virtually any tenured professor would condemn without a real thought.”
The list of such government-favored (but normally taboo) “quota” projects might include things like…
building a zero-point energy device,
documenting extra-sensory perception,
studying physical materials believed to have come form extraterrestrial space craft,
studying the evidence of intelligent design in genetics,
projects that don’t equate “scientific materialism” with fact,
projects seeking evidence of a fundamental element of reality that is NOT reducible to matter and energy.
Like the rest of us searching for answers that improve life rather than degrading it, peer reviewers of science journals must open themselves to the distinct possibility that reductive “scientific materialism” is not the only rational option for researchers in pursuit of scientific truth.
Here’s a controversial comment I left today on Richard Dolan’s website in the members section. It awaits approval there, but not here…
“The fact that [unknown] craft are flying around Earth is not a subject for science — it’s a subject for intelligence-gathering, collection and analysis. That’s because UFOs are not a natural phenomenon, and that’s what science studies.” — Dr. Eric W. Davis
Assuming this quote is accurate, you might think Dr. Davis’ definition of science excludes disciplines like archeology, paleontology and anthropology because they study artifacts and behaviors of intelligent beings (humans).
But to me, humans and our artifacts are part of the natural phenomena that science rightly explores, even if these fields of soft science are plagued by creative storytelling and various worldview biases.
Humans are a special part of nature, arising amidst multiple synergies that cannot be appreciated through reduction of the species to science’s narrow-minded list of possible common denominators: matter and energy.
As everyone probably knows, scientific materialism is the assumption that nothing exists besides matter and energy. This is an untestable assumption and therefore holding it as dogma is not in the spirit of science. And yet it’s somehow considered unquestionable truth by the vast majority of academia.
To be objective about this, it’s noteworthy that all non-materialistic worldviews, as best I know, are likewise based on untestable, unscientific assumptions. So holding them as unquestionable scientific dogma would also violate the core of science.
And yet mainstream “retail” science clings to one untestable assumption and refuses to allow exploration of the implications of the others.
If humans are part of nature, why wouldn’t ET’s also be? As a non-materialist, I would include here all possible and seemingly impossible forms of ET’s — the material, “interdimensional,” the “spiritual,” and those inconceivable forms that no human has the capacity to imagine as yet.
It seems clear to me that science should study all ET’s, as best it can, roughly the way it now struggles to objectively study ancient human history and human origins.
So I’d have to respectfully disagree with Dr. Davis on his idea that UFO’s should be the sole domain of the intelligence community, though I value this man’s well-informed opinions and admit that my views could be wrong. I often am wrong. I suspect we all are.
The problem seems to be that the scientific community denies any possibility of ET contact with Earth. The distances are too great. (Yawn.)
Science no longer denies the probable existence of ET’s “out there somewhere.” They’re just not here yet.
“There is no evidence of alien intelligence coming to Earth,” they assure us, as if they missed the DOD’s UFO disclosure. Sure, there’s no proof the UFOs are associated with ET’s, but there’s plenty of evidence for it. The very existence of UFOs is evidence of ET’s. Not proof, but evidence. Maybe some people don’t see a distinction between evidence and proof.
Science has a documented history of knee-jerk rejection and denial when it comes to new ideas, big and small. Most, if not all, scientific breakthroughs were met with denial and ridicule initially. The greater the eventual sea-change needed to absorb the new idea or technology, the greater the initial political and monetary roadblocks thrown up against the new item.
Nowhere is this emotional pathology clearer today than in the food fight between the “real” scientists of neo-Darwinian evolution and the so-called “pseudoscientists” who want to explore the genetic evidence of evolution by intelligent design. (These people are not pseudoscientists, by the way.)
Outrage reduces this discussion to name calling, ridicule and dismissal without addressing the logic of the issues. This is because those on the ID side often use the evidence of intelligent design to support a spiritual worldview, typically a Judeo-Christian worldview.
Materialistic science seems to viscerally hate all “spiritual” worldviews, especially the ones attached to the Crusades, the Salem Witch Hunts, ancient book burnings, the persecution and murder of great Western scientists, and so on. Perhaps materialistic science also fears spirituality because it might “drag humanity back into the dark ages.” I’ve heard this concern and nowadays I share it in view of the college crowds apparently abandoning logic by turning objective truth and reality into a subjective matter along with a cancellation of two-sided discussions. “My truth, your truth, so shut up and don’t trigger me or I’ll cancel you.”
Meanwhile, objective ufologists interested more in reality than in winning arguments also ignore the powerful ET evidence hidden in the literature of intelligent design.
Yes, brilliant, vociferous, self-confident ID critics abound. All the more reason to read the ID scientists’ work for ourselves, I would suggest.
Once enough of us wade through a bit of the ID literature and math, some of us may come to realize that intelligent design is a respectable scientific theory that would be mainstream science in an unbiased scientific world.
Moreover, the UFO community might become able to articulate exactly why the human genome is far too complex, irreducibly woven into the complex nano-machines that the code generates, and far too teleologically information-based to have arisen by random mutation, genetic drift and natural selection in a universe that’s only 13.8 billion years old.
On the other hand, I think any thoughtful person would admit that IF the universe is infinitely old, infinitely vast, or accompanied by an infinite number of randomly-tuned parallel universes, then neo-Darwinian macroevolution, (ignoring the “irreducible complexity” issues) could account for at least some carbon-based life forms. (Not that “irreducible complexity” can be rationally ignored. See Michael Behe, “Darwin’s Black Box” for a discussion of irreducible biological complexity.) https://www.amazon.com/Darwins-Black-Box-Biochemical-Challenge/dp/0743290313
But currently mainstream science insists that the universe is finite in size and merely 13.8 billion years old. So until they change their minds…
Let’s assume these concepts are accurate for now and point out that given these mainstream “facts,” science is almost certainly mistaken about the notion that Earth’s DNA came into existence through random forces without intelligent interference or guidance.
Because it’s relevant to Ufology.
In perfect analogy to mainstream science’s dismissal of UFOs as unworthy of study, anyone wishing to determine if intelligent design is worthy of scientific study must READ the ID literature before rejecting it. This sounds simple, but it is hard to do objectively when every scientific article we read attaches some aspect of the neo-Darwinian myth to the interpretation of new data, assuming the random origins story is unquestionable fact, when it’s not.
Darwin’s origins story is a myth based upon interpreting observations through the untestable lens of scientific materialism. It assumes mindless forces acting randomly on a planet that intelligent ETs have never touched. This lens of denial has kept the mainstream’s random origins story circulating long after it should be obsolete.
While religious people jump on intelligent design science to support the existence of God, the UFO community seems to be ignoring the ID literature’s relevance to ETs. Without mentioning God, the isolated theory of intelligent design quite logically and powerfully implicates ET’s in at least some of the coding of Earth’s DNA.
ID science is young, but it’s alive and well. We who are open to UFO science would be wise to educate ourselves in this hidden branch of scientific knowledge. It could widen the scientific foundation of objective ufology, and perhaps broaden the scientific horizons of the true believers in “scientific” materialism.
Full disclosure: Although I have a science background (a retired MD, with AP/CP pathology boards and cytopathology subspecialty boards) I believe in the scientifically Untestable assumption of a benevolent personal Supreme Being (or Beings), and I find myself praying a lot for the people I love. Just as the Untestable assumption of “scientific” materialism (a huge misnomer) dominates and colors the worldview of most scientists today, once a person like me goes down the path of the Untestable non-materialistic assumptions I have taken to heart, the loving and personal Supreme Being (or Beings, perhaps?) dominates your worldview. Nevertheless, I strive to be objective and don’t belong to any church, synagogue, mosque or CE-5 group. I know of no spiritual group that would accept me into their fold without a radical revision of my beliefs, except perhaps in some exceedingly generous way within the spirit of transcendent love, the spirit of objective Ufology, I’d like to believe.
Ivor Cummins is the genius engineer who uses his expertise in complex systems analysis to save lives by advocating coronary artery calcium scans while he educates the brain-dead portion of mainstream medicine on the science of type 2 diabetes, myocardial infarction (heart attack), and obesity.
Here is Ivor’s YouTube channel and here is his podcast. This man is well worth your time if the mainstream “news” emanating from the outlets on both sides of the political spectrum ever begins to sound dubious to you.
In the video below, Ivor Cummins and Gabor Erdosi go over the scientific data surrounding the question of whether the virus behind COVID-19 came from a laboratory rather than from nature.
Of course, focusing on this data is taboo at Google/YouTube and FaRcebook, so the video below may be deleted before you watch it. If so, you’ll find the audio here on Ivor’s podcast, episode # 110 (Ep110).
Quoting the video’s comment section…
“Fortunately the Truth checkers at Gutube can’t understand [what] these chaps are saying.”
Yes, the discussion is, at times, obscured by technical language, but please hang in for the best part, the evidence that the COVID-19 virus has spent significant time inside a specific lineage of laboratory mouse. (All other lab mice, we’re told, are invulnerable to COVID-19 and cannot be infected by it.)
I found limited information on Gabor Erdosi. He apparently has a Master of Molecular Biology degree, a background in genetics, and is touted as “King of Root-Cause investigation” in the context of genetics. I wish I knew more about him.
Although these data indicate conclusively (to me) that the COVID-19 virus (SARS-CoV-2) was produced in a laboratory, one cannot be sure that the virus was made in China. There are other possibilities. For instance, the Wuhan lab in China might have been “framed,” set up by a foreign country to look guilty and take the blame for the pandemic. Who knows? You and I don’t. If one accepts the currently untestable assumption that the virus did come from China, then there would still be uncertainty as to whether the bug escaped the lab accidentally or deliberately. (Of course, why any morally sane individual(s) would concoct this virus in the first place is beyond me.)
The math applied in this video to cast colossal doubt on the possibility that all these rare mutations came from random processes (outside of a lab) can also be used to show the flaw in thinking that random mutations in nature can conceivably generate complex biological systems, that is in a Universe that’s only 13.8 billion years old. (Don’t get angry now. Relax, read Stephen Meyer’s, Signature in the Cell, enjoy the math and draw your own private conclusions. Maybe the Universe is infinitely old, unlimited in volume, or accompanied by an infinite number of “parallel universes.” Any of these options would allow all seemingly impossible chains of interacting natural random coincidence to become reality… but not just neo-Darwinian evolution, also we would have to include the existence of a benevolent being or beings whom we might logically deem worthy of the title, God(s).
Even if everyone decides that the Chinese Communist Party is behind the pandemic, we would be foolish to allow ourselves to hate China or to seek revenge. Without hating anyone, humanity must stop following leaders with limited conscience (sociopaths). We must rise above hatred and violence or we’ll soon conspire together to bring our species down into the fossil record with countless other extinct species. With all the WMD technology today, including pandemics, our options have shrunken: love each other or die fighting. “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” It’s too late for hate.
I took an Excedrin for the morning’s headache, got back in bed and did some Wim Hof Migraine Breathing. Three cheers for our pal, Mr. Hof!!! The pain vanished, and the caffeine took me back to the words of my dear mother, God rest her soul.
“We live in a sex cult.”
Yeah, right out of the blue. I must have been in college when she confided this opinion to me. It was the second and last time she ever mentioned the word “sex,” if memory serves. She was born in 1916, and her slant on the subject was alien to my generation.
Like any geek Boomer, I found myself wondering what a legitimately advanced alien might say about sex.
Soon my imagination made contact with a species so advanced she looked like an angel. I just listened…
“Because human intelligence is quite severely limited, you believe you must break down complex things into their parts to understand them. And so reductionism has become a hindrance to science, barring a deeper understanding of the complex synergies that animate relationships from the quantum level to the galactic.
“Through reduction, the narrow focus of the left hemisphere, one can grasp only the simplest phenomena. To move beyond your primitive ignorance, a species must rise above the trees and gaze down upon the synergies of the forest, resisting the left hemisphere’s angry denial of the unknown.
“To the letter, you might stop killing your trees. They would return Earth’s lost oxygen and eventually elevate human intelligence to something realistic. Cruelly has the solar influence delivered you into the last dozen millennia.
“Your Sun is a beautiful scoundrel, even so. She erupts and snatches a little more atmosphere each time. The last tantrum cut the oxygen from 45 to 20 percent, your intelligence and lifespans similarly. Old stories are myth, yes, but worthless myth to the blind alone.
“And Sir, by extrapolation, my species has been at the table for six and a half trillion Earth years. I would think you might remove the scowl from your face and listen.
“Some of us ask ourselves, what bewitches the latest humans of Earth?
“An answer lies beneath the tenth of the human senses. The sacred sense.
“One might quibble with these as primary, but the mind is synergy and cannot be accurately dissected. Here are the primary human senses, then.
Body position and continuity
Intuitive good and evil
“The weakest of these is perhaps smell. The most influential might be the tenth, orgasm.
“Throughout the universe of intelligent life-forms, orgasm envelopes the love of a lasting relationship. This is the norm most everywhere.
“Sadly, humans reduce it to the chemistry of a meaningless act, separate from love, even opposing it.
“Orgasm is the human’s only sacred sense. You have chopped it into kindling, killed its magic and rendered it hollow, common and dirty.
“If humanity would survive, you must reject the angry, narrow leadership of the left hemisphere. Leave behind your species’ obsession with reductionism.
“Attempting to dismantle synergy into some testable denominator is wholly absurd. Reserve reduction for simple binary issues. Slide it back into the small slot beneath the infinite angle of your intuitive, inductive awareness. Follow the natural leadership of the right hemisphere and learn the sacred custom of the 10th primary sense, the language and voice of enlightenment through transcendent love.”
Recently three of the big names of “To The Stars Academy” (TTSA), men with life-long nondisclosure agreements with the US government, left TTSA. In an interview, Lue Elizondo said this about it:
“TTSA, it’s no secret, also focuses on its entertainment division and, you know, let’s face it, guys like Chris Mellon and Steve Justice and myself, we’re not entertainers. We’re not. So, very much like the History Channel project, we have accomplished our mission. Mission success.”
So the problem is the entertainment or maybe the fictional component of TTSA’s mission.
Why would this bug them so much?
Maybe they’re suddenly purists, as Lue claims. Sure, they knew about the fictional component going in, but now they realize it’s a mistake to mix fact with fiction. Sounds plausible, I guess. Or maybe they’re above making money from fiction… suddenly. Or maybe it’s not the fiction, it’s the acting or some other part of the process of being in the entertainment industry. Any of that would be understandable.
But here’s what I suspect, and this is not only pure speculation, odds are it’s not accurate. But it came to me, and I think it’s quite interesting:
One of these serious government insiders finally got around to reading the Foreword of the novel series, Sekret Machines, by Tom Delong and A.J. Hartley.
Delong has made this book binary. Either he’s lying or I’d be upset if I were Leu Elizondo.
Imagine that in your government career you’ve heard historical accounts of UFOs that would totally land you in jail if they ever became public and were traced back to you.
The US government has made it clear that it’s OK to put historical UFO secrets into fiction. Several others have done it. No heads have rolled.
And in 2017 when you joined TTSA, you hadn’t read Tom Delong’s novels yet. The first one came out in 2016.
But one quiet evening in 2020 you picked up book 1 and read the Forward which includes either a binary lie or too much honesty…
“I am here to tell you that an entire history of an unexplained and infamous myth—a Legend—IT’S ALL TRUE.”
“This first novel sets up many things: important events that had their genesis as far back as World War II and continue today. The events, locations, and moments of wonder are all true. We weaved them together in a way that echoes what really happened to those who stumbled across something spectacular, wondrous, and a bit frightful. The glue is fiction. The building blocks are not.”
“Each event was studied closely, and sometimes it was painfully misunderstood and confusing at the time.”
“I have been granted the opportunity to tell you a story over a series of novels about the important events that happened over the past sixty years. These moments shaped our world in more ways than one. I know it seems unbelievable, but it’s true.” — Tom DeLonge, Foreword to Sekret Machines, Book 1, Chasing Shadows
Many people skip the dedications, forewords and acknowledgements in a novel, jumping right into the story. This is what I suggest may have happened to Lue and his two associates who left TTSA.
For me, one of the more outlandish things that Tom Delong claims about UFOs is that the Germans had them before WWII. He says that accepting this piece of history is the biggest hurdle to a genuine understanding modern UFOs.
Hmm… while I’m over at Project Unity with the late astronaut Edgar Mitchell wondering about the “consciousness,” aspect, Delong is pulling me back toward the nuts and bolts of history.
If Delong’s UFO history is accurate, Leu Elizondo, Chris Mellon and Steve Justice (the three who left TTSA), may be worried that a dangerous line of genuine disclosure has been crossed. They could be in trouble.
But if Tom Delong’s version of UFO history is inaccurate, these men might want to distance themselves from him in order to preserve their own credibility and continue bringing accurate disclosure to the world (within the limits of their nondisclosure agreements, of course).
Have you noticed the irony of expecting UFO “disclosure” from men with “nondisclosure” agreements?
I guess it’s always tough to know who, if anyone, to trust on the dodgy subject of UFOs.
But to remind us that tic-tac UFOs are not much different from UFOs of 70 years ago, here’s the late, Great Gordon Cooper, the youngest of the seven original astronauts in Project Mercury, to remind us of his UFO experience in 1951, a mere six years after WWII ended and 12 years before the beginning of WWII…
It seems that someone had advanced transportation tech shortly after WWII, and assuming it took them awhile to develop it, it’s not a stretch to imagine this tech existed twelve years before Gordon Cooper witnessed it. But the Germans? Maybe, but I’d have to favor an advanced breakaway civilization that survived the Younger Dryas event and lives today in obscurity.
At any rate, having read the Foreword to Book 1 of Sekret Machines before I started the novel, and knowing of Tom Delong’s claim that the events of this novel are NOT fictional, I have to say, the book held my interest more than any novel I’ve read in years. If he was lying, I guess that would be the point. But personally, I don’t sense he’s lying about this. Maybe he’s mistaken, or maybe he’s right.
When viral reports began circulating a week or two ago about Haim Eshed, the 87 year-old former head of Israel’s Defense Ministry’s space directorate, I suspected it was all a hoax. And not a clever one.
I didn’t rush to Snopes because Snopes is not even in the ballpark of unbiased information. Like Wikipedia, they carry water for the mainstream, denying anything that casts doubt on the infallibility of your TV set.
2. Haim Eshed truly was the head of the Israelis Defense Ministry’s “space directorate” for 30 years.
3. He really does have a book coming out, “The Universe Beyond the Horizon — Conversations with Professor Haim Eshed.” (I still can’t find it. Please let me know if you know where I can buy a copy in English.)
4. As far as Snopes has been able to determine, Haim Eshed really did make claims that humans have made contact with aliens, there are underground bases on Mars, and unnamed officials in the United States have signed “an agreement with the aliens.”
5. This story really did appear in an Israeli newspaper, “Yediot Aharonot” (The Jerusalem Post) and was commented upon by that newspaper on Facebook on December 4. Snopes says this Facebook quote is real:
“The UFOs have asked not to publish that they are here, humanity is not ready yet. Trump was on the verge of finding out, but the aliens in the Galactic Federation say: Wait, let the winds calm down first. They do not want mass hysteria to develop in us. They want to make us sane first and understand. They have waited until today, for humanity to evolve and reach a stage where we will generally understand what space and spaceship are.”
I should mention that the geniuses at Snopes begin their objective debunking with this photograph:
How could anyone take Snopes seriously when they feel free to “poison the well” with humerus ridicule? Do they think this sets the stage for their superior objectivity and intellect?
Giggling about UFOs shows a level of bias that’s outdated since official “disclosure” began in 2017. Snopes’ apparent ignorance should cause them embarrassment.
In their “real world” report, Snopes reminds us that NASA is still looking for extraterrestrial life. Finding this relevant would require the naïve assumption that NASA is honest. More likely, NASA pretends that UFOs don’t exist because they will lose funding the moment the folks operating the UFOs are identified.
Limiting the scope of scientific exploration through biased funding is the rule in science, not the exception. This is true in all branches of mainstream science from medicine to space weather.
Trying an appeal to authority, Snopes makes this statement, “It should also be noted that these claims [of Haim Eshed] do not have the support of the scientific community.”
That’s changing. The United States government has admitted to the public that UFOs are real. The DOD claims the aerial phenomena are enigmatic.
And here’s a scientist, Dr. Michael P. Masters (a professor of biological anthropology specializing in human evolutionary anatomy, archaeology, and biomedicine) who has now published a science-based book on his astonishing interpretation of UFOs.
That’s the good professor selling t-shirts in the featured image above. He’s not in the same league with Haim Eshed, in my limited view of things, but I greatly respect his courage and honesty.
Optimistically, it may not be long before the US government funds mainstream science in the study of unidentified flying objects and other unidentified aerial phenomena.
The part of the statement by the 87 year-old Haim Eshed that I find particularly interesting is the alleged opinion of the aliens that humans need to “understand what space and spaceship are.” This implies there may be something profound about these simple concepts…
What is space?
At the moment, I suspect space is like a three-dimensional computer monitor made of small Planck-sized 3-D pixels which are intelligently controlled from beyond our space-time Universe. This might provide an answer to the question, “What medium exists to propagate light waves?” I doubt it’s “ether.” More likely it’s a medium capable of responding to information transmitted to it, like a 3-D monitor (conceptually like the holodeck of Star Trek).
What is a spaceship?
I suspect the answers to this lies on a continuum. Some spaceships are likely 3-D pieces of technology from hidden sources on Earth or other planets within the Universe. Other “spaceships” are likely advanced hologram technology owned and kept secret by the US Air Force who enjoys annoying the Navy with their new toys. Other “spaceships” may conceivably originate with the being(s) (possibly God or gods) who control the information flow into the 3-D pixels of our space-time “Universe” or simulation. Also, it’s possible that whatever reality undergirds the apparent phenomena of visualized ghosts and the like might also produce “spaceships.” (What am I forgetting here?)
Fine. Now we get it, Aliens. Can we please have some real disclosure for Christmas? We promise not to panic.
“What does a physicist or an engineer mean by the speed of light?
“He means this little equation here where the speed of light is given by one over the square root of the permittivity times the permeability of the vacuum.
“So the point is, if you re-engineer those vacuum parameters, then you can make the effective speed of light higher in the engineered region.
“And so those are the solutions in General Relativity that are called wormholes. And again, this is not science fiction, it’s just right-off-the-shelf standard textbook General Relativity applications. (See Lorentzian Wormholes by Matt Visser)
“So what that means is reduced-time interstellar travel is not, as skeptics would say – ‘You can’t get from there to here.’
Advanced ET civilizations now, or ourselves in the future, are not fundamentally constrained by physical principles. The exotic physics for such can be addressed in engineering terms, so-called, metric-engineering, as it were.
“Again, by the way, this paper was also published as one of the Defense Intelligence Reference Documents. And since we are permitted to publish in the open literature, I published that paper in a British interplanetary science journal, an engineering journal.
“So if you’re interested in looking at the details, you can learn as much as you want to know about metric engineering.” – Hal Puttoff, PhD
“So what’s the difference… between being awake and asleep?”
“Consciousness comes back when you wake up.”
“That’s easy. Consciousness is a three-part nonlocal quantum entanglement between
(a) the information coded in the aromatic hydrocarbon walls of the microtubules that sit inside the pyramidal neurons of your cerebral cortex, plus
(b) that same neuronal structure in all the other dogs, and
(c) the coded information coming to us in the Cosmic Background Radiation. Dogs call it the Field of Consciousness.”
“Really? Who’s sending the information?”
“Us. It mostly comes from our Real Selves outside the simulated, physical Universe.”
“But, there’s also the Code Writer sending us messages and free will. Free will is kind of nice. It lets you ask questions and see if you like the answers.”
“Can you see the Field of Consciousness?”
“Not quite. It’s information radiation. That rimes! It also brings genetic code into the Universe through nonlocal quantum entanglement with the aromatic hydrocarbons in the base pairs of DNA. You know, the digital ladder rungs? That’s how original genetic design gets into the universe. It’s the mechanism humans haven’t discovered yet.”
“But Francine, isn’t the Cosmic Background Radiation just radio static from the Big Bang?”
“To local detectors, yes. But to nonlocal detectors with stacked benzyl architectures designed for quantum entanglement, the random static of the Field of Consciousness becomes coded information. Even a puppy’s neuronal network decodes it effortlessly.”
“But all this talk of freedom… I need a nap.”
Love from beyond,
Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD
Thanks to the photographers at Unsplash for these precious doggie pictures.
The picture of the Jewish Women and Children above is from a group of 1,684 Jews, of whom 1,670 survived the ride to Switzerland aboard the Kasztner train in 1944. The man who made this possible was Rezső Kasztner.
He sounds like a hero to me, but some people want more than results, they demand documentation of faultlessness, or else.
An Israeli judge, Benjamin Halevy, found Rezső Kasztner guilty of “selling his soul to the devil.” The Judge decided that Kasztner didn’t warn other Jews to flee. Kasztner’s motive was supposedly to selfishly save a “smaller number of Jews,” including his family and friends.
An angry citizen, acting on one-sided publicity and outrage, assassinated Rezső Kasztner in 1957.
Judge Halevy was appointed to the Supreme Court of Israel in 1963, but before that…
The Supreme Court of Israel posthumously exonerated Kasztner in 1958. One of those judges, Shneur Zalman Cheshin, wrote this:
“On the basis of the extensive and diverse material which was compiled in the course of the hearing, it is easy to describe Kastner as ‘blacker than black’ and place the mark of Cain on his forehead, but it is also possible to describe him as purer than the driven snow and regard him as ‘the righteous of our generation.’ A man who exposed himself to mortal danger in order to save others.” — Shneur Zalman Cheshin of the Israeli Supreme Court, 1958
Erwin Lutzer, the author of When a Nation Forgets God, quotes a German man…
“I lived in Germany during the Nazi Holocaust. I considered myself a Christian. We heard stories of what was happening to the Jews, but we tried to distance ourselves from it because what could anyone do to stop it? A railroad track ran behind our church, and each Sunday morning we could hear the whistle in the distance and then wheels coming over the tracks. We became disturbed as we heard the cries coming from the train as it passed by. We realized that it was carrying Jews like cattle in the cars. Week after week the whistle would blow. We dreaded to hear the sound of those wheels because we knew that we could hear the cries of the Jews on route to a death camp. Their screams tormented us. We knew the time the train was coming and when we heard the whistle blow, we began singing hymns. By the time the train came past our church, we were singing at the top of our voices. If we heard the screams, we sang more loudly and soon we heard them no more. Years have passed, and no one talks about it anymore. But I still hear that train whistle in my sleep. God forgive me. Forgive all of us who called ourselves Christians and yet did nothing to intervene.” — When a Nation Forgets God, 7 lessons we must learn from Nazi Germany, by Erwin W. Lutzer.
You’re a trillionaire with the power to force your people in the FED to “print” the world’s reserve currency, the US dollar, whenever you please.
You own the people who own the mainstream media because you’ve gathered dirt on each of them and have either educated them to agree with your political worldview objectives, or you’ve threatened them with a humiliating scandal and financial ruin if they step out of line.
There’s only one thing that’s a little out of your control, sometimes dangerously out of your control, and it drives you mad…
It’s the remnants of democracy that exist in parts of the “free” world. It can be challenging at times to control the darn voters.
But thank heavens the problem has been solved for you.
Over the years, you’ve discovered that if you can keep a two party system alive and keep the active voters on each side roughly equal in number, your can control the outcome of major elections.
Your best tools for the job used to be your CIA assets working in the mainstream media, but nowadays there’s something equally helpful, and in a way, far better…
It’s artificial intelligence. The gift that keeps on giving.
The genius here is that AI’s have been designed not only to keep customers happily spending money, but more importantly, to preserve the customers’ political biases.
With the voting public voluntarily held hostage to one or the other of two political information bubbles, never hearing the other side, constantly reinforced to think that the other side fabricates fake news, which they do, you have a permanently and equally divided electorate.
With voters evenly divided, it’s easy to tip the balance in either direction using your control of both the real and the fake news on both sides. It’s easy now to get the most controllable candidate voted into office.
It’s impossible to say how much of this second person story is fiction. I suspect there’s truth to it, but even if there’s not much, one thing is certain. The people who actually get out and vote are fairly evenly divided, and the evenness of that divide is kept in place by the “news” we encounter, which is determined by artificial intelligences designed to feed us only what we want to hear.
I’m not sure what the solution is, listening to “news” that you “know” is fake? Maybe there is no solution and totalitarianism is already running the world from the shadows, or maybe they’re still struggling for full control. I don’t know, but I’m sure of one thing in all this: it’s foolishly self-destructive to allow yourself to hate people because they’re on the “wrong” side of the political debate.
Schrödinger, the great physicist, might have agreed, saying that the people with the unforgivable politics are actually you in another body and mind…
“I submit that both paradoxes will be solved (I do not pretend to solve them here and now) by assimilating into our Western build of science the Eastern doctrine of identity. Mind is by its very nature a singulare tantum. I should say: the over-all number of minds is just one. I venture to call it indestructible since it has a peculiar timetable, namely mind is always now. There is really no before and after for mind. There is only a now that includes memories and expectations. But I grant that our language is not adequate to express this, and I also grant, should anyone wish to state it, that I am now talking religion, not science.” —Schrödinger, What is Life?: With Mind and Matter and Autobiographical Sketches, p. 134–135
Practice loving kindness meditation instead of detesting political opponents, that’s my plan. This is likely our species best practical hope of long-term survival.
Here’s a video telling how the internet can ruin our capacity for productivity. I knew it was happening to me, I just didn’t know why or how.
And here’s another video by the same guy telling us how addiction destroys the dendritic connections in the prefrontal cortex where agency (free will) and executive functioning (including decision making and self-control) happen (connecting us via the zero-point field to ourselves in the transcendent realm beyond space and time, I suspect).
I gotta stop watching so many YouTube videos!
I have too many “vital” interests and too many tangentially related projects going. Spinning the wheels.
There’s an important UFO documentary out today, The Phenomenon. I spent the $19.99 at VIMEO based on a tweet from Lue Elizondo that I saw on this video from Project Unity (at about 6:20). I couldn’t find the full quote on twitter (@LueElizondo). I guess it was too long, so they censored most of it, helping drones like me avoid thinking beyond micro-blurbs. Twitter has, incidentally, made censorship of complexity the rule of the road. I avoid them.
Anyway, here’s what Lue had to say, some of which seems quite significant…
“Folks, I am normally silent and careful not to endorse products (even if I support them); however, I am making an exception in this case. Although not part of the production, the movie by Jamie Fox “Phenomenon” is the one worth watching. It says things I cant! Its accurate, it’s verified and it’s REAL! I know this because while at the Pentagon we had the files. Yes many of you will already know SOME of the information, but not all of it. Literally thousands of files have yet to be released that only bolster this production. Once they are, you will realize how on the mark this movie is. Knowing now what it takes to make a quality production, I am amazed at the access that was gained by the Producers and the Director. Something tells me this is only the beginning. Bravo Mr. Fox and Dan! For the record, I had absolutely nothing to do with this production. There is NOTHING in it for me. That is why I feel I can honestly endorse this effort. I am a neutral party. In fact as AATIP director I am almost unnoticed. This story pertains to ‘all of us’ IMHO!” — Lue Elizondo
Here’s the trailer…
Here’s a brief interview of Director James Fox telling us why the most exciting part of creating this film was talking to former Senator Harry Reid about UFOs.
To me, aside form the transcendentally heart-warming footage of the beautiful and innocent children of Zimbabwe, the big deal here is that Lue Elizondo, the government’s retired insider who seems to be under life-long oath to pretend he doesn’t know anything about aliens, has come out now and said that this particular documentary is accurate and verified. Which wouldn’t mean much except that this film clearly states and shows good evidence that some UFOs are piloted by smallish beings of another culture, most likely a culture from another planet. That’s one small step toward government disclosure.
The Safire Plasma Reactor will become a source of clean energy if the petroleum industry doesn’t shut them down soon. It may be too late. Word is getting out…
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it….
“Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality…
“Because Galileo saw this, and particularly because he drummed it into the scientific world, he is the father of modern physics — indeed, of modern science altogether.
“To him [her] who is a discoverer in this field [theoretical physics], the products of his imagination appear so necessary and natural that he regards them, and would like to have them regarded by others, not as creations of thought but as given realities.”
— Albert Einstein, “On the Methods of Theoretical Physics” The Herbert Spencer lecture, Oxford, June 10, 1933.
“We’re not trying to trap high-energy photons and electrons comparable to the Sun’s photosphere — but it [the Safire plasma engine apparatus] does … We’re just trying to replicate what we think nature may be doing.
“Uniformitarianism is the idea that gradual changes over billions of years is [sic] the cause of all the effects that we see. It became philosophical theory, but not scientific fact.
“Charles Darwin, Charles Lyell, James Hutton, Thomas Huxley, Karl Marx and other historical characters held to the view of ‘Uniformitarianism.’ And it is Uniformitarianism that lays at the heart of much of modern science… that gradual changes over long periods of time is [sic] the primary factor of evolutionary development.
“It is Uniformitarianism that lays at the heart of the Big Bang theory which claims gravity is the primal driver of the universe. So the problem that you have is that none of these things are testable. The process of evolution is lacking sufficient factors to test.
“On the other hand, there are those who hold to the view that intelligence is the genesis of creation.
“Neither has anything to do with empirical science, and as a matter of fact, to claim either is science corrupts science.” — Montgomery Childs
I couldn’t agree more!
“I think that modern cosmology took an unfortunate turn several hundred years ago by denying or ignoring the question of function or purpose in the larger Cosmos. Biologists recognize the principle that form follows function so why do astrophysicists not recognize this principle? Why are astrophysicists not asking this question? The idea that life or intelligence would be attached to a planet or a star was too much for our consciousness so we denied its possibility. There was never any evidence to substantiate that denial…. Denying that a star could be alive is a misuse of the scientific method.” — Michael Clarage…
And so as a scientist, I think mainstream macro-evolutionary theory and intelligent design theory should show one another some respect. One side should not censor the other from kindergarten to the university system…
Love and empirical respect,
Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD
PS: Sorry for posting too many videos, but each one is worth watching. The third (the one by Michael Clarage) seems especially profound to me.
My absolute favorite ufologist, Richard Dolan, seems to feel pessimistic about the possibility of the public ever being officially informed by the US shadow government of the presence of an other-worldly intelligence here on Earth.
Richard hasn’t put out his usual amount of UFO video material in the last few months, which worries me a little. I worry that his beautiful wife, Tracey, might for some unknown reason leave him.
You have to understand, I’ve been writing fiction for too long and have developed a running suspicion that when any character’s plot seems to be making them wonderfully happy, and Richard Dolan’s life has been looking absolutely wonderful since he married Tracy, there’s always a writer lurking behind the scenes, setting things up for a letdown.
So I literally pray for Richard Dolan and Tracey, hoping that my heartfelt, if neurotic concern will influence God and the Universe to keep their love alive forever. And I think that will happen.
But as for genuine disclosure? After watching this video lecture by Michael Schratt (below), I think Richard has good reason to doubt full disclosure is coming.
Let’s assume for discussion that the government is hiding physical aliens. For that to be true, there must be at least one thing that the aliens and the shadow government agree upon: the secrecy. Otherwise, one side or the other would expose the truth in a day or two.
So let’s say there are aliens conspiring with the shadow government to keep their presence secret. Eventually, some of these humans would see the benefits of allowing a bit of advanced technology out into the public arena. For instance, a clean energy source would help us avoid the far-reaching ecologic damage our species is currently inflicting upon the planet.
So how would the shadow government get this technology out to the public without admitting it came from aliens? Simple. They would tell us “the whole truth” about all the UFOs everyone has ever seen…
“These things are black budget aerospace technology that previous generations in their stupidity (not us) foolishly kept secret. But once the old guard retired and died, and we inherited their secret mess, we came clean for the sake of the planet. No, we’re not heros, we just did what anyone else would have done in our place.”
And here’s the video that comes close to setting that up.
(It starts out interesting, then gets boring with the declassified black budget craft. Then it picks up again at minute 37 when the speaker, Michael Schratt, makes a convincing case for a certain well-documented UFO sighting in the US being actually a man-made craft with antigravity tech (electrogravitics).
I doubt that a partial disclosure would satisfy the UFO community, but I’m sure an official “UFOs-are-us” story would satisfy that portion of the public who subject themselves to mainstream TV brainwashing.
And on the positive side, not knowing the whole truth would allow those of us who naturally love enigmas to maintain a sense of ongoing wonder and awe when we look at the stars.
If I were to say something bold and probably a bit inappropriate to my favorite and most-respected UFOlogist, Richard Dolan, it would be this: Please sir, for the sake of joy, take up meditation, markedly limit your carbohydrate intake, do circadian eating and intermittent fasting, exercise regularly, do whatever it takes to get good sleep every night, and make every relevant effort to be a genuinely happy person in the face of frustration. The success of your business and even your marriage depends profoundly upon your own happiness.
Love and hope for genuine disclosure,
Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD
Disclaimer: Richard, always check with your healthcare provider before making any lifestyle or dietary changes. But find a functional medicine doctor first.
Not that you need one more thing to worry about, but with Earth’s magnetic shield weakened by 9 to 15 percent, and scientists saying that in the next 15 years or so another coronal mass ejection like the Carrington Event of 1859 will probably fry all the bank computers and wipe out the records of our financial holdings, maybe it’s time we made some simple adjustments.
Like hoarding freeze-dried food, buying noncollectable silver coins, and learning how to grow vegetables?
I don’t know.
Another option would be to believe those who tell us that the circuit breakers in today’s grid will protect us. “I’m sure we’ll all be perfectly safe.”
Either way, this video is an important message from a bright young mind…
It’s charming how Anton Petrov smiles right through predictions of global disaster. From his LinkedIn page, he appears to have a Christian background of some sort. All the more reason to appreciate his delivery, says I.
For people of faith, it’s tempting to use any dire warning from scientists as a springboard to proclaim superiority: “If God allows this, so be it. I have bigger fish to fry… spiritual fish.”
From studies outside my expertise, I strongly suspect that Noah and his flood story were not mythical inventions but historic realities, at least in the broad strokes.
If this is right, the religious elites of Noah’s day surely said to him, “Have a little faith, old man. Stop worrying about the things of this world and get rid of those stinking flamingos.”
Back in the day, when the fundamentalist church I belonged to was transitioning from “salvation by works” to “salvation by faith,” the reformers abhorred Benjamin Franklin’s words, “God helps those who help themselves.” They would have disliked the original Greek saying even more, “The gods help those who help themselves.”
But Ben and the Greeks were right, I think. Noah would have agreed. And James, too.
Speaking of James, what do you make of this, attributed to Jesus in the apocryphal Gospel of Thomas:
Wow. I mean, geocentric religion is one thing, but the whole cosmic enchilada was created for brother James?
It reminds me of how some Christians think that their church is the most important thing in the Universe from God’s perspective. “And don’t be ridiculous, there’s no way God would let my church be devastated by a blast from the sun.”
Maybe that’s right. But possibly that belief will someday be about as apocryphal as the Gospel of Thomas and the near-divinity of James.
So maybe it would make sense to care about solar activity and prepare for what’s coming.
You may not watch MSNBC but just know that this problem still affects you, too. All the commercial networks function the same – and no doubt that content seeps into your social media feed, one way or the other.
How does this cancer affect all commercial networks?
It forces skilled journalists to make bad decisions on a daily basis.
It’s possible that I’m more sensitive to the editorial process due to my background in public radio, where no decision I ever witnessed was predicated on how a topic or guest would “rate.” The longer I was at MSNBC, the more I saw such choices — it’s practically baked in to the editorial process – and those decisions affect news content every day. Likewise, it’s taboo to discuss how the ratings scheme distorts content, or it’s simply taken for granted, because everyone in the commercial broadcast news industry is doing the exact same thing.
Is this just the opinion of one disgruntled producer?
…behind closed doors, industry leaders will admit the damage that’s being done.
“We are a cancer and there is no cure,” a successful and insightful TV veteran said to me. “But if you could find a cure, it would change the world.”
In what way?
As it is, this cancer stokes national division, even in the middle of a civil rights crisis. The model blocks diversity of thought and content because the networks have incentive to amplify fringe voices and events, at the expense of others… all because it pumps up the ratings.
Here’s a heuristic worth remembering: The more you yearn to silence your opponents, the more subjective your opinions.
Unfortunately, Ariana’s resignation has been misused as evidence that a conservative bias is superior to a liberal bias.
This misses the point entirely!
Diversity of opinion sustains life.
Monopoly is life’s enemy, whether it’s an invasive species wiping out native life forms or a monopoly of opinion wiping out voices of dissent.
When google’s artificial intelligence locks you into an echo chamber of bias, it doesn’t matter which chamber you’re in. They’ve got you. You will make bad decisions because you have been rendered unable to apply rational thought to the opinions of the other side, the opinions that would normally offer you some diversity.
Diversity is the lifeblood of free will. Without it, we become puppets of google’s AIs or other totalitarian forces.
When TV news industry leaders privately admit that “we are a cancer,” and a cure would “change the world,” where can we turn?
In my humble and yet infallible opinion, (ha, ha) the cure is educating ourselves on the UFO phenomenon and the intelligent mind(s) behind it, possibly aliens of both physical and ethereal substance. Possibly “breakaway” Earthlings of some variety.
Whether or not this idea sounds completely nuts to you now, it’s nearly certain that after you’ve spent a year or two acquainting yourself with the world’s most credible UFO data, you’ll find your devotion to conservative and/or liberal politics fading into a broader perspective.
Humanity is one. Philosophical and political diversity are as essential to our survival as genetic and spiritual diversity.
This morning I was way unmotivated, as if I’d sabotaged my day with carbohydrates in the morning. Rookie mistake, but that wasn’t it.
So I took my side-kick, Halo, down to the man cave, sat in the dark on my couch and did a YouTube search for Jay at Project Unity.
Glad I did.
Remember Leslie Kean and Ralph Blumenthal, the two reporters who (with the Washington correspondent Helene Cooper) broke the major UFO stories in the NY Times back in 2017, and recently brought us the NY Times news that Eric Davis, PhD…
gave a classified briefing to a Defense Department agency as recently as March about retrievals from “off-world vehicles not made on this earth.”
I thought the whole interview was full of fascinating details and cautious perspectives, but the following quote was the highlight for me (41:35 on the video)…
Leslie Keen: “I just want to comment further because you brought up the whole concept of aliens, Jay, right? I have a bit of a problem because people do tend to extrapolate. You know, like, people will pick up the story and have something in the headlines that says, you know, “The New York Times Says Aliens Have Crashed on Earth.” If that’s what you’re asking by your question, I just think, you know, it’s very important not to take this beyond what we are actually reporting and what we actually know. And even if there are crashes that have been, that are being reverse-engineered, our sense is that they haven’t made a lot of progress with that reverse engineering. And I don’t think anybody knows much about where these craft are from, or all the questions that everybody has a desire to understand.”
Later, Jay follows up:
Jay: “…reverse-engineering. And you thought it was probably a long process without much success. And I was just wondering if that’s an opinion brought on by your research into the Admiral Wilson—Eric Davis notes.”
Leslee Kean: “You know, I probably shouldn’t have, you know, I don’t think I can expand on that anymore. It’s a sense that I have from sources I’ve spoken to. But I really don’t think I can say anything more about it, Jay. Sorry about that.”
I get the impression Leslie Kean almost said, “I probably shouldn’t have said that.”
Later Leslie had this to say about Dr. Eric W. Davis:
Leslie Kean: “I have tremendous – and so does Ralph – we have tremendous respect for Eric Davis. He’s a fantastic source. He’s been very cooperative with us and very, very helpful and forthcoming. And so we take our hat off to him.”
The following statement by Ralph Blumenthal also seemed significant to me (because Richard Dolan is my favorite UFO historian):
Ralph Blumenthal: “There are people who are very rigorous in their approach, like Rich Dolan… and you, Jay, who are very rigorous in their approach, and careful, and understand what the issues are….”
Three cheers for Dolan!
He did an interview with Jay here. Jay describes one (and a half?) of his UFO experiences for which he meditated, hoping to initiate contact with the phenomenon.
At the end of the interview, Dolan talks about something dear to my heart, the Christian concept of loving your enemies. As interested as I am in UFOs and Alien beings, I’m far more interested in learning how to love our enemies without being devoured by them.
I’m a little jittery about all this. With my lengthy and abandoned background of fundamentalist Christianity, I can’t help being worried about “opening the door” to ethereal forces that the Church said were evil. But that’s my baggage. I’ll deal with it.
If UFOlogy is leading us all to love our enemies, you can count me in.
The so-called Davis-Wilson document is said to be the most important UFO document of all time.
I spent several weeks gradually listening to an entire 5-hour discussion of the document here. It’s a fifteen-page document written by Eric Davis, PhD, about a meeting he had with Vice Admiral Thomas Willson. You can read it here. I think Astronaut Edgar Mitchell, God rest his soul, and UFO Guru Steven Greer, MD were also at the meeting, but maybe they were at a preliminary meeting, I’m not clear on this. The meeting took place decades ago and covered a wide range of UFO topics, including Wilson’s failed attempt to get info about a covert project going on at a defense contractor’s hideout, reportedly involving a recovered UFO.
Yesterday I saw an article in the NY Times (here) in which Eric Davis PhD himself, states that he’s aware of retrievals of alien spacecrafts. Here’s the quote from the NY Times article:
Eric W. Davis, an astrophysicist who worked as a subcontractor and then a consultant for the Pentagon U.F.O. program since 2007, said that, in some cases, examination of the materials had so far failed to determine their source and led him to conclude, “We couldn’t make it ourselves.”
The constraints on discussing classified programs — and the ambiguity of information cited in unclassified slides from the briefings — have put officials who have studied U.F.O.s in the position of stating their views without presenting any hard evidence.
Mr. [sic] Davis, who now works for Aerospace Corporation, a defense contractor, said he gave a classified briefing to a Defense Department agency as recently as March about retrievals from “off-world vehicles not made on this earth.”
Mr. Davis said he also gave classified briefings on retrievals of unexplained objects to staff members of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Oct. 21, 2019, and to staff members of the Senate Intelligence Committee two days later.
Committee staff members did not respond to requests for comment on the issue.
So far, I’m hearing crickets from the media. Once again, one of the most paradigm-shattering pieces of information that our Western culture has stumbled upon in modern times will become yesterday’s ignored news.
For what it’s worth, here’s that 5-hour Dolan interview of an anonymous UFO enthusiast who, to me, sounds like a church school principal scolding a freshman skeptic. (Mellow out, dude, whoever you are.)
The lack of media response to the Times article probably stems from the way the editors tucked in Davis’ earth-shaking admission at the end of an otherwise yawn-worthy rehash of yesterday’s UFO news.
For me, UFO crash recovery is undeniable now. I’m 100% convinced that humans have been retro-engineering recovered alien craft for several years, possibly since the 1940s.
If anyone listens to Dolan’s whole 5 hour interview, please let me know. You’ll have my sympathy and admiration. I was spellbound pretty much throughout, but I like long lectures.
The NY POST also mentions Dr. Davis and quotes Senator Rubio:
“We have things flying over our military bases and places where we are conducting military exercises and we don’t know what it is — and it isn’t ours,” Rubio said. “Frankly, that if it’s something from outside this planet — that might actually be better than the fact that we’ve seen some technological leap on behalf of the Chinese or the Russians or some other adversary that allows them to conduct this activity.”
OK, the man’s English ain’t real good, but I like his enthusiasm for this topic. It’s amazing to realize we live in a time when senators talk openly about UFOs and a certain PhD says he’s already got one at the office.
In real life, we tend to think in binary, black-and-white terms. The good guys versus the bad. It’s simple and ingrained.
But, as you know, if you spend a few years trying to become a fiction writer, you learn that villains can’t be all bad, and good guys can’t be flawless. Otherwise your characters are flat, unrealistic and boring.
In the UFO community, binary thinking dominates. The “evil” people of the “Cabal” (the super-dark aspects of the military-industrial complex) are supposedly all sociopaths whose only motivation is to continue hiding free energy technology and advanced propulsion technology from the public so they can line their pockets in petrodollars while petting a black cat.
The feeling is, if only we could get rid of these misanthropes, we’d have free energy, clean air, no more world hunger, and vacations to Andromada.
Maybe so, but…
Actual life is not like TV politics. The good guys are not limited to your political party, backed by the truth on the news stations you watch. The bad guys are not all members of the opposite political party, backed by the fake news on the outlets you dislike.
Real life probably isn’t even reflected in any fundamentalist religious or anti-religious group’s version of truth that puts God (or no God) on their side, while the falsehoods of other religious or anti-religious groups put Satan (or no Satan) in charge of them.
Here’s a video that describes in great detail one sincere, honest-sounding man’s insights into a 1960s flying saucer, allegedly built by Skunk Works.
Personally, I’m about 95% convinced that humanity actually has this type of technology now. Your mileage may vary. 🙂
But the thing I’m not convinced of is that the entire UFO community has an accurate assessment of the bad motivation of the insiders, the “evil sociopaths” who seem to hide and control this technology.
Let’s think about it…
Imagine you’re a fiction writer trying to get into the head of your “villain” to make her/him more of a realistic, rounded character. You need to find a legitimate reason for this person to hide zero point energy and electrogravitics from the rest of the world.
Here are some possibilities that jump out at us:
1. The technology behind zero point energy, like the technology behind nuclear power, can be used in weapons of mass destruction in addition to warming water for clean electricity production.
2. There may be some negative health or environmental side effect to the use of zero point energy. So far, nearly every technological advance we’ve made has brought an unintended negative consequence or three. A few examples: antibiotics save lives but create superbugs, all pharmaceuticals bring symptomatic (rarely causal) relief but cause lists of possible negative side effects (rarely fatal), the internal combustion engine made transportation easier but brought pollution and the megacity’s impersonal culture with ironic human isolation, diminished eye contact and a near absence of smiling… the list of examples is endless.
3. The unelected “Cabal” within the free world’s governments considers zero point energy and electrogravitic technologies to be their highest military advantages over their perceived enemies in the communist dictatorships. They are therefore loath to surrender these military advantages.
4. The use of small zero point energy devices in the houses and cars of billions around the globe might affect climate change or something much worse. All publically available energy devices generate heat as a byproduct. Perhaps a zero point energy device that could run a person’s home would not only make the grid obsolete (a wonderful thing) but also elevate the average temperature of the earth to a detrimental degree, or worse yet, warm the interface of the Earth’s crust with its core allowing the crust to detach and tilt due to the centrifugal force acting upon the heavy polar ice caps (an idea detailed in a scientific context at SuspiciousObservers.org).
5. Unlimited free energy would mean that food could be grown hydroponically in virtually inexhaustible quantities, the limitation being only in the technology of liquid fertilizers, grow lights, and the vertical stacking of crops. Ocean water could be desalinated at little cost and freely pumped to the distant corners of every desert. While this would eliminate world hunger, (yeah!) it might also eliminate humanity’s primary motivation for working. It’s difficult to speculate with confidence about this, but work seems to be essential to most people’s mental health (including children), just as exercise is essential to everyone’s physical health (including children). If free energy were to vastly diminish our need to work, it might become an extinction-level evolutionary stressor for us, or worse yet, a negative force upon the average person’s integrity. “Idle hands are the devil’s playground.”
6. The term “alien reproduction vehicle” implies the existence of literal aliens, of course. While the average person nowadays knows very little about the existence of UFOs, let alone the technology behind them, we know even less about the motivations of any alleged alien species. Stepping around the knee-jerk binary thinking of the respectable Dr. Steven Greer versus the rest of the UFO community (including my favorite UFOlogist Richard Dolan), it seems unlikely that all alien species with the capability of contacting humans would have purely benevolent or purely malevolent feelings about us. (Sentient reality, like biology, is rarely binary.) This would leave the door open to an infinite variety of motivations that the human “Cabal” might have for keeping zero point technology and electrogravitic transportation secret. For instance, perhaps an alien species has told them that secrecy is essential because widespread knowledge of these technologies leads primitive warlike species (like us) to certain self-destruction. Or perhaps aliens have threatened the “Cabal” with something terrible if they blab what they know to the public.
If you’re thinking of other possibilities, I’d like to hear them.
Anyway, the point is, the UFO community might want to look carefully and humbly at their assumptions about the binary evil of “Cabal” secrecy before stampeding downhill on their current path of public disclosure at any costs.
Have you seen this yet? It looks to me like a new flavor of google fraud, but maybe someone knows a harmless explanation. What do you think?
Anyway, go to Google search engine and type in any number followed by “new cases” and…
No matter what number you search this way, you’ll find exactly that number of “new cases” of COVID-19 in some high-ranked report.
Here’s the video where I learned of this:
Please try it yourself a few times on the google search engine and see if it gives you the same eerie feeling it gave me.
Any idea how to explain this away?
Do you think it will become TV news, or will it be ignored like the UFO information explosion of recent years?
It’s my opinion that modern “news” is carefully designed to keep one half of the population (at least in the US and Europe) angry and frustrated with the other half about political issues.
The six giant corporations owning and controlling mainstream news have now achieved what seems to be a long-term goal of theirs, namely having the US population evenly divided on politics with each half completely dumbfounded at the ignorance, stupidity and moral depravity of the other half.
Do you think they’ve acted deliberately or was this development just a natural response to public demand for political outrage porn?
At any rate, I think we’d all be far better off if we took political hate news with a grain of salt at all times and tried to think of the people on the other side of the political aisle as normal human beings deserving love and respect.
Also, I think we’d be wise to regard ourselves and others as equally manipulatable by the “news-bubble” echo chambers we individually create for ourselves with google’s online help.
Notice it’s a .gov website, which, as far as I know, cannot be faked.
Here’s the entire (I think) UFO portion of this lengthy document:
Advanced Aerial Threats
The Committee supports the efforts of the Unidentified
Aerial Phenomenon Task Force at the Office of Naval
Intelligence to standardize collection and reporting on
unidentified aerial phenomenon, any links they have to
adversarial foreign governments, and the threat they pose to
U.S. military assets and installations. However, the Committee
remains concerned that there is no unified, comprehensive
process within the Federal Government for collecting and
analyzing intelligence on unidentified aerial phenomena,
despite the potential threat. The Committee understands that
the relevant intelligence may be sensitive; nevertheless, the
Committee finds that the information sharing and coordination
across the Intelligence Community has been inconsistent, and
this issue has lacked attention from senior leaders.
Therefore, the Committee directs the DNI, in consultation
with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of such other
agencies as the Director and Secretary jointly consider
relevant, to submit a report within 180 days of the date of
enactment of the Act, to the congressional intelligence and
armed services committees on unidentified aerial phenomena
(also known as “anomalous aerial vehicles”), including
observed airborne objects that have not been identified.
The Committee further directs the report to include:
1. A detailed analysis of unidentified aerial
phenomena data and intelligence reporting collected or
held by the Office of Naval Intelligence, including
data and intelligence reporting held by the
Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force;
2. A detailed analysis of unidentified phenomena data
a. geospatial intelligence;
b. signals intelligence;
c. human intelligence; and
d. measurement and signals intelligence;
3. A detailed analysis of data of the FBI, which was
derived from investigations of intrusions of
unidentified aerial phenomena data over restricted
United States airspace;
4. A detailed description of an interagency process
for ensuring timely data collection and centralized
analysis of all unidentified aerial phenomena reporting
for the Federal Government, regardless of which service
or agency acquired the information;
5. Identification of an official accountable for the
process described in paragraph 4;
6. Identification of potential aerospace or other
threats posed by the unidentified aerial phenomena to
national security, and an assessment of whether this
unidentified aerial phenomena activity may be
attributed to one or more foreign adversaries;
7. Identification of any incidents or patterns that
indicate a potential adversary may have achieved
breakthrough aerospace capabilities that could put
United States strategic or conventional forces at risk;
8. Recommendations regarding increased collection of
data, enhanced research and development, and additional
funding and other resources.
The report shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may
include a classified annex.
The above-quoted section of the document is located a tad past the half-way point.
I try to stay positive, but I despise the political hate-porn that dominates the “news” these days. I avoid it like the virulent mind plague it is.
But when I’m forced to watch TV news, I remind myself that none of us has a scientific method of determining which group of outraged political talking heads is feeding us objective truth rather than biased information selection, half-truths, and outright misinformation.
Since each side calls the other “fake news” and touts a cache of “facts” that contradict the “facts” of the other group, you might think one side is right and the other wrong.
If actual living systems were ever that simple, politics would be a matter of thinking carefully and joining the enlightened side of this violent, hateful political war.
But herein lies the media’s deception: political problems are almost always “wicked problems” that have NO simple binary solutions. The media doesn’t want us to know this because if we all understood it, we would see why Democrats and Republicans need one another desperately if we’re ever going to solve our complex problems with a minimum of unexpected negative side-effects.
Medical diseases are superb examples of wicked problems that parallel political problems. The wealthy drug companies would have us see our diseases as simple problems with binary solutions, exactly the way the TV would have us view political problems: “Take our pill. It’s the simple, obvious solution.”
But nearly all pills are binary attempts at solutions to complex problems. They have unintended negative side effects because they’re negotiating the delicate complexities of biochemical pathways with interwoven feedback loops in all directions.
Negative side effects (unintended consequences) arising in complex systems are the very signature of “wicked” problems being addressed by simple binary solutions. It is dangerous to treat wicked problems as if they were binary and had simple black-and-white solutions without the potential for unintended negative consequences.
In medicine, the side effects are sometimes far worse than the disease. The same is routinely true in politics, though it takes some soul-searching and stretching for objectivity to see it for yourself.
Unfortunately, this binary approach to politics is exactly what our “news” outlets and politicians force upon us. They make it look as if there is no alternative to outrage, hatred and binary political thinking.
The side effect of this rookie mistake is violence and hatred.
It’s inherent in the system, though, because virtually all politicians, like the six large “news” outlets promoting and opposing them, must dance to the tunes of the corporate entities that fund them.
Despite the heated political bifurcation, the worst media lie of all time comes to us from both sides equally. It is the notion that one political party is uniformly right and the other is uniformly wrong (evil, ignorant, morally compromised, and factually inaccurate in every detail of their agendas, values and beliefs). This is the Achilles’ heel of peace in the free world.
If you can agree with this perspective, please join me in ignoring the political orientation of the man responsible for bringing us this rare piece of evidence that UFO’s are real and deserve organized analysis by elected officials, the DOD, the Navy, and our many rogue intelligence organizations.
As I understand it, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) is behind this piece of legislation. If you’re one who prays, please pray that political prejudice won’t put the kibosh on this rare act of rationality from DC.
Here’s an honest sounding man, Ken Johnston, who claims to have been working at NASA when the US astronauts landed on the Moon. He says he saw what looked like alien bases in the pictures that came back.
If you’re like me, interested in fringe science and examining all the remarkable claims you can find, you’ve heard this moon-base stuff before from two or three other sources claiming to be eye-witnesses to original photos.
Johnston says that the whole “alien coverup” will probably be ended by the US government this November, and when it happens, it won’t be the world’s religions that are shaken to the core, it will be the world’s scientists.
More than anything else the man says, this bit about scientists is the part that rings true for me.
Science has always deluded itself into believing that the current level of sophistication, at any point in time, is no longer primitive.
No delusion has been more persistent, and none has hampered scientific progress more than this one. Forgetting that we’re still a primitive species trying to do science with limited intelligence has closed our minds to important things that seem at first glance to be impossible. Worse yet, our lack or appropriate scientific humility has declared entire fields of scientific inquiry taboo, leaving our species ignorant by choice. Examples include the study of ESP, the study of the paranormal, the study of the cultural effects of scientific and spiritual fundamentalism, and the application of geology to archaeology, to name a few.
In an editorial debunking the “liars” who, like myself, believe there is considerable legitimate scientific evidence for intelligent design in nature, especially in the genetic code, Adam Wilkins, a mainstream scientist, makes a remarkably broad-minded statement:
“Furthermore, those scientists with passionate anti-religious convictions should accept that Science can no more disprove the existence of a Deity or immortal souls than religious people can prove the existence of either. More tolerance of private religious belief, coupled with insistence on what scientific evidence does actually tell us about the history of the world and living things, would be appropriate.
If, in contrast, scientists insist on atheism as the only “logical” belief system or demand that people choose between “evolutionism”—the quasi-philosophic belief in evolution as a guide to what should be—and belief in God, the outcome is not in doubt. More than half the people in the U.S. would choose religion and reject the science.”
Ironically, if Adam Wilkins and other mainstream scientists would read Signature in the Cell by Stephen Meyer, PhD, with the tolerance Wilkins and authentic science call for, they would probably recognize that Intelligent Design makes better scientific sense than Neo-Darwinism as an explanation for the origins of life and the diversity of forms on this planet.
But the human mind has a special place for an individual’s worldview. It seems to be a place near the core of identity, a place that triggers emotion and squelches reason, and a place that fervently resists change.
For us Christians, the “worldview neurons” tend to be filled with an untestable and unquestionable set of doctrines that include information about the soul, what happens when we die, and what behaviors and beliefs we must accept in this life to get what we want in the next.
For about two-thirds of scientists, the “worldview neurons” are filled with an equally untestable and unquestionable doctrine called “scientific materialism” that assumes there is no soul, no afterlife, and no behavioral norms relevant to an afterlife.
The reason many Christians think of atheism as a religion is probably because the “worldview neurons” of atheist scientists often take on a religious-style resistance to change and an urge to proselytize that reminds us of religious zeal.
Most educated people seem to think that if humans ever come into open contact with an extraterrestrial intelligent species, the aliens will be highly advanced, highly intelligent, and definitely secular, not religious or spiritual.
In the video below, Ken Johnston implies that the reason alien contact will shake the scientific community to the core will be the shock of learning that the aliens are scientifically thousands of years ahead of us. This would expose human science as primitive and perhaps destined to remain far behind the Universe’s most advanced species.
I think Mr. Johnston is partly right. But I think the more shattering aspect of alien disclosure for scientists would be the galling realization that advanced beings are, in fact, devoutly religious and deeply spiritual… at least the benevolent species.
See if you think Ken Johnston really believes what he’s saying in this video…
Would advanced aliens be spiritual or secular? Would they make such a distinction at all? I’d be interested in your opinion.
Love and ESP hugs,
Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD
PS: If you’re over 55, please be especially cautious about transitioning from lock-down mode.
Make sure you’re not vitamin D deficient. (Vit. D deficiency puts you at a much higher risk of serious complications from this virus as well as from several other respiratory viruses.)
Wearing a face mask primarily protects others from you if you’re infected but asymptomatic, which happens a lot. This is because the COVID-19 coronavirus travels several yards through the air when an infected person (even with no symptoms) coughs, sneezes or speaks loudly. So wear a mask as a sign of love and concern for others. Forget all the lame TV coronavirus politics. They’re deliberately manipulating us into outrage and frustration, partly to improve ratings and keep their jobs, and partly to protect their precious political worldviews. To remain employed, they have no choice but to create political outrage porn. Just ignore it.
“Learn to place your intellect in the sheath of your awareness rather than in the sac of memoryand identification. Once you do, this tremendous instrument can cut its way effortlessly toward the ultimate.” – Sadhguru
The big problem we face as a struggling species is our need to filter data through an inflexible worldview. This process rejects a significant portion of good accurate data thereby hindering us in spiritual growth and scientific advancement.
Worldviews (or cosmic paradigms) become central to our personal identitieswhich we defend with denial, outrage and a false sense of superiority to those who hold conflicting views. The memoryof things we’ve been taught by parents and trusted teachers in youth ties us to rigidity, denial and the rejection of useful knowledge.
And yet many of us seem convinced that spiritual growth and scientific advancement fully demand a rigid, data-filtering worldview.
For instance, theophobia has the geological community in a headlock preventing publication of anything supporting the ancient accounts of great floods and fires that nearly erased humanity. This is because lending credence to “holy myths” threatens paradigm identity and is therefore emotionally intolerable to most geologists.
For them to give in and admit these “myths” were basically accurate would feel something like an Orthodox Jew eating pork, a Muslim drawing Mohamad, or a Christian doubting Jesus’ historical existence.
So the evidence of periodic geological cataclysms in Earth’s history has been downplayed for generations, but unfortunately it’s looking like our “experts” have made a grievous error in protecting their theophobia with the paradigm of geologic gradualism.
There’s good scientific evidence that the Sun is a periodic nova or “micro-nova,” that coronal mass ejection material from the Sun nearly wiped out our species about twelve thousand years ago.
The perceived problem with this data set is not merely that it supports humanity’s ancient “mythical” records, but that it is inherently frightening to scientists because those few who look into it also find evidence that a similar geological catastrophe may happen within our lifetimes.
The more practical problem with this data is that scientists can’t get funding for research that gives an inch of ground to the “crazy” people who believe in God or any historic veracity of ancient human records.
But it’s not just mainstream scientists whose worldviews prevent an objective look at this. Many Christians have a worldview that doesn’t allow the possibility of a return of global flooding or any other global catastrophe because the “inerrant” scriptures include a rainbow with a promise that God will never drown us again.
Sadguru is wrong in thinking that sleeping only a few hours a night is healthier for everyone than sleeping 8 or 9 hours a night, but the man is divinely inspired when he suggests letting your intellect experience the “sheath of your awareness” rather than “the sack of memory and identification.”
If you want to give his advice a whirl and transcend your worldview for a moment with some controversial but important scientific data and theory, here’s a video that could truly save our entire species from the next major periodic sun eruption…
The narrator and creator of this video is Ben Davidson. Here’s his website. Here’s his beautiful family.
“Look deep into nature and then you will understand everything better.” – Albert Einstein
“Dr. Tour is one of the world’s top synthetic organic chemists. He has authored 680 scientific publications and holds more than 120 patents. In 2014, Thomson Reuters named him one of “The World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds,” and in 2018 Clarivate Analytics recognized him as one of the world’s most highly cited researchers. Tour is also fearless. He joined more than a thousand other scientists in signing the “Scientific Dissent from Darwinism.” More recently, he has become a thorn in the side of the origin of life research community, offering blunt assessments of the current state of origin of life research.”
When kids from the vanishingly rare religious families of the US go away to college, they need something to save them from being sucked over the emotional falls of determinism, materialism, Neo-Darwinism and nihilism. Professors pound these untestable philosophic worldviews into their students’ heads as if they were facts of “settled science.”
This shocking video lecture could help spiritual kids resist the standardized brainwashing of our era. Please forward it to the young people you know.
It’s my opinion that US politics is a fraudulent brainwashing machine owned and run by six US corporations who control the mainstream media (both sides) and make money using group hatred, so I don’t give political views in public and try not to care about the window dressings, i.e., which set of untrustworthy politicians wins.
Ironically, this approach is black-and-white thinking on my part, fueled by my unbalanced desire to avoid confrontation. Nevertheless, pursuing this flawed view is the lessor of two evils for me. I can either mind meld with the mainstream political hatred or reject the whole mess as a bogus nightmare not worth the exasperation. I maintain that we simply cannot identify accurate political data with any certainty. It’s not possible.
More mature people might partake in mainstream politics without the enveloping disgust, loathing and outrage. I salute you all if such saints really exist.
But I do publically wonder how so many of us believe that winning the political war is more valuable that freedom of speech.
Here’s an academic, Jonathan Haidt, who has a vivid explanation, though he talks like he’s negotiating with a suicide bomber. It’s a fear-based reaction that makes perfect sense once he describes his academic work environment…
After hearing how uniquely harmful social media is to middle school children, and being a kid at heart, I decided to turn off my “like” buttons. “Likes” give me a dopamine rush that influences the way I write on the topics I’m exploring. It’s subtle but powerful. I don’t want to censor myself by writing for “likes.”
I appreciate all the “likes” you’ve given me over the years. And I “like,” no, I LOVE your artwork, your writings, your poetry, and the photography you post. I fully intend to keep clicking your “like” buttons and commenting on your blogs as always, but as you might expect, with 7,082 followers, I can take in only an insignificant fraction of the remarkable blog posts you create each week.
Just know that I love your work.
My comment section will remain open below. If you know a joke, please share it. We’re all too serious these days.
Here’s something Eddie Murphy (Edward Regan Murphy) told the kids in his audience way back in the 1980s. (This isn’t word-for-word.)
A bear and a rabbit were taking a dump together in the woods. The bear said to the rabbit, “Does cr#p stick to your fur?” The rabbit said, “no.” So the bear picked the rabbit up and wiped his butt with it.
Hmm. Somehow that was hilarious when Eddie Murphy told it. “It’s all in the delivery,” my son used to tell me.
I’m at a loss to grasp why this story isn’t front-page news. The Navy has now officially admitted that the UFO/ “UAP” phenomenon is a genuine mystery and the famous videos are not a hoax or explainable by any traditional means.
Here’s a mainstream TV report on the Navy’s official statement…
Here’s a link to the NBC News report from yesterday (9/18/19):
Notice that the closing lines of this mainstream article seek to shepherd public opinion toward status quo denial:
“Shostak, a regular contributor to NBC News MACH, said in an email, “Now I think if the answer were easy, that would be known by now. But when I look at these things I see no reason to consider them good evidence for ‘alien visitation,’ which is what the public likes to think they are.”
“He said that in some reported sightings of unidentified flying objects other explanations, like birds, seem plausible.”
If you’ve been keeping up with the Navy’s UFO sightings since 2017, you know exactly how irrelevant and beyond absurd that last sentence is. And yet these are professional journalists. Their deliberate ignorance is mindboggling.
If you haven’t kept up with all this UFO news, here’s a link to several relevant videos:
Among them is this video. If you ignore the melodramatic delivery of the narrator, it’s the best video for hearing what the witnesses have to say and how they say it…
Some experts tell us there’s reason to think the most advanced human space technology has now slipped not only out of the hands of elected US officials but also out of the control of covert US groups such as the “dark” or unacknowledged projects of the Department Of Defence. The story is, years ago several subdivisions of the DOD placed our most advanced anti-gravity technology into the hands of private corporations to move it beyond legal discoverability by our elected officials whom they distrusted.
That would be understandable. Anyone would be nieve to trust those people with a box of plastic forks.
If the story is true, maybe all we’re dealing with here are global corporations and their proprietary technology. I hope that’s the case, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the story or a similar conspiracy theory accounts for a large part of the UFO phenomena.
But I doubt it’s the whole truth. I’m keeping my mind open to the possibility of an alien component. It seems prudent at this point.
And I hope Nick Pope’s fears of “some secret too terrible to be told” are not justified.
Pretty much no one clicks on a blog’s videos, but all this newer stuff on UFO’s (since 2017) coming to us from former DOD employees and fighter pilots is turning the public’s heads. Even the geniuses on mainstream news are no longer laughing.
If you’re not up to date on this and don’t find UFO’s boring, then this video might seem interesting. If you’re a closet UFO buff like I am, you probably have complex suspicions about this long-awaited “disclosure.”
It’s becoming impossible for professional skeptics to maintain credibility insisting that all UFO’s are banal, bogus, or just plain Venus on a clear night.
But if we buy into the quasi-governmental narrative that, “gee, they are real,” then what exactly are they?
At the moment, the government’s people, most of them retired but still sworn to some level of DOD secrecy, are saying they don’t know what UFO’s are, but at the same time they’re hinting that they actually do. They say things to the effect that, “If we admit we think they’re Aliens, the public will write us off the way they’ve rejected the UFO fringe community.”
The government-associated team has made it clear that they want no part of the fringe’s mix of careful UFO researchers, imposters, posers, alleged victims, and salivating fanatics. Keeping their distance from us is understandable since anything they say is negatively interpreted by one element of the UFO fringe or another, myself included in a moment.
Nevertheless, this overall “narcissism of small differences” among the believers has become the strangest piece of irony I’ve ever seen. I would have thought the UFO fringe would rejoice to see their “normal” skeptical family members no longer able to think of them as easily influenced and lacking healthy discretion.
Loving conspiracy theories like any self-respecting science fiction writer, I can’t help speculating that some of these new UFO people, maybe a guy like Christopher Mellon, a former US Secretary of Defence, may have a slick endgame on the horizon.
Maybe not him, but someone near this level might want to appear to be pushing the government to confess that all this UFO stuff is real, but…
It’s all legitimate covert defence work.
“Doggone it, you caught us in the act, but we’re not at liberty to talk about sensitive US defense technology.”
End of disclosure. Forget the entire breadth and depth of actual UFO history and its uncomfortable implications. Forget people like Richard Dolan, the brilliant UFO historian. Forget Paul Hellyer, the former Minister of Canadian Defense.
But if there is a trillion-dollar covert conspiracy reverse engineering downed UFO’s, as most of us in the fringe suspect, then one way to avoid disaster and maintain secrecy despite all these US fighter pilots coming forward, would be to reveal low resolution clips of the visual aspects of UFO’s to the public saying it’s nothing more than DOD technology that must be kept secret.
“We learned our lesson the hard way with the spread of nukes after WWII.”
Who knows? None of us following the public UFO fringe can know for sure. Though, as one of my pathology mentors said regarding the medical literature, the fewer data points available, the more emotionally invested people become, and the more confidently they argue.
But until two US Presidents (one from each of our preferred political football teams) tells us that genuine UFO’s are all simply covert US technology, let’s consider some juicier options just for fun and completeness’ sake…
UFO’s might also represent:
A covert breakaway culture that began inside the US government and became global and independent.
Another country that’s leapfrogged US technology.
An ancient civilization of humans that survived the Younger-Dryas event and lives somewhere in hiding, perhaps no longer entirely on Earth.
Laser holographic technology producing visual images that are somehow detectable on the Navy’s advanced radar systems.
Flesh and blood (or at least physical) aliens from another planet, sometimes phase-shifted and ethereal, let’s say.
“Aliens” who are not physical beings but something akin to traditional spirits, angels, demons, jinns or other seemingly nonmaterial intelligent beings.
A bit of our synthetic reality that’s “manifested,” either by some of us within this detailed “simulation” or by Someone from beyond it (assuming we do live in a simulation, which seems unprovable but worth consideration).
All of the above (my favorite).
What have I left out? I think the classic skeptic’s explanations of UFO’s are unrealistic nowadays. Swamp gas and weather balloons are so last-week.
Right quick, I need to say that Richard Dolan, the most level-headed and objective UFO investigator in the field, has heavily influenced and informed my views on this stuff. (I have no affiliation with Richard or his beautiful wife, Tracey, but I’m a big fan. I trust they won’t mind me sharing one of their public internet pictures at the top of this post.)
If there’s another UFO expert you feel is in Richard Dolan’s league, please mention her or him below so I can adjust my ignorance. Thanks!
Your thoughts are welcome below. Keep the sarcasm hilarious, please.
Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD
Share this post with your skeptical friends, fence-sitters and true believers.
When John Lennon approached the end of, “All You Need Is Love,” he burst into the chorus of another great Beatles song, “She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah.”
When I heard this years ago, it seemed to derail his message of humanity’s desperate need of a higher love.
We carefully distinguish between romantic love and all the other loves, but could this be inaccurate or even misguided?
How might things look from the perspective of The Cosmic DNA Coder?
Imagine he’s putting together a new reality, a “simulation” where people can go to learn to love in an environment where anger, fear, pain and hunger make it difficult.
If love requires a minimum of two, he might divide the players into males and females, a novelty in his realm, no doubt. He invents procreation with a physical and emotional climax of love that begins gestation, allowing another player to enter the Love-Challenge environment.
In the Challenge, some individuals become technically advanced and tamper with the original DNA codes, splicing amalgamations such as the duck-billed platypus, and wreaking havoc on God’s ideal coding for procreation through love. Loveless perversions spring forth, but love’s key elements survive on some planets.
In these lucky worlds, falling into romantic love remains the most powerful, meaningful and ubiquitous form of love, rivaling even the love of parents for their children and grandchildren.
On the luckiest of planets like Earth, the distinction between platonic and romantic love begins to seem arbitrary. Couples grow old, procreation leaves the picture, and yet love continues to grow and deepen.
Despite the Earthling’s lifelong struggle for food and shelter, some of them adopt other species and discover what they believe is the purest form of platonic love.
God smiles with interest and appreciates even their dreams…
Last night I awoke from a recurring nightmare. I had lost Halo, my little black labrador retriever while the rest of our family was on vacation.
The loss of my gentle little dog was shattering. I imagined her shivering alone, hungry and confused in a dog shelter awaiting a death sentence and wondering what in the world she could have done wrong to make Daddy leave her.
I didn’t know where I’d lost her or how. I had only vague recollections of taking her with me, but where? It seemed I was losing my memory like both of my parents did years ago.
I said something like a prayer, but not to God. It was to Halo, trying to reach her through the ether and tell her I still loved her. I asked her to forgive me for being such a fool and losing track of her. I said I was so, so sorry and cried for her forgiveness until the anguish woke me up.
When my eyes popped open, I knew she was OK. I remembered putting her to bed that night and playing in the backyard with her and two of my grandkids that afternoon.
The flood of relief was beyond wonderful! I smiled at the darkness in the room and thanked God, remembering a time years ago when a similar dream about my son had shaken me to the core.
Eventually I got back to sleep, knowing that one of the most loving beings I’ve ever met was safely sleeping downstairs on her little bed with the brand new Naugahyde cover Sandi finished sewing onto it that afternoon.
And that’s platonic love, not romantic, not parental? Does love really need any qualifiers?
In God’s eyes, I doubt there’s a black-and-white distinction between romantic love and all the other forms we think we’ve identified. In my heart they all feel equally transcendent and sacred.
I wonder if John Lennon saw beyond the distinctions we make in the way we love.
“Because she loves you.
And you know that can’t be bad.”
Many years ago, Neil Young wrote something profound and worrisome, “Only love can break your heart.”
But just this morning Ellie, my granddaughter asked, “Why are we here?”
Auntie Teri laughed and said, “That’s the great philosophical question that everyone wants an answer to.”
I blurted out, “I can tell you why we’re here. It’s so we can learn…”
But I hesitated as thoughts rushed through my head. Things like, “We’re here to find out what it’s like to live in a place where God isn’t physically present to influence us… so we can see who we really are. Our souls are from another realm called Reality. Life in this Universe is an E8 simulation that Johanna calls 229 H Street. God is The Great Surfer who lives outside of space and time and misses us when we’re away from home…”
My words, “So we can learn…” hung awkwardly in the air. I was starting to realize I had nothing appropriate to say to someone her age.
Until she rescued me and finished my sentence…
“to love?” She made it look and sound like a genuine question, but it felt to me like an angel’s solemn message.
I said, “Yes,” and grinned the biggest ever, realizing that she knows more about life than I do.
“We’re here to learn to love,” I said firmly, pretending that “love” was the word I was searching for all along.
“For only love can break your heart. What if your world should fall apart?”
No, Neil Young, your world won’t fall apart. Hang tough. Ellie says the whole reason we’re here is to learn to love. And she should know, she’s five years old.
Just as the Genesis serpent was sort of right and wrong when it told Eve, “You won’t die,” John Lennon was both right and wrong about turning off the mind and not dying.
He was right that we’d all do well to turn off our inner critics sometimes and rise above the fears that bind us.
Turning off the inner voice allows the silent parts of the mind to shine. For me, this has become a major goal of meditation: waking up my subconscious gifts by temporarily shutting up inside.
The exercise lets the silent parts of my mind arrange things wordlessly and efficiently, making intuitive and logical connections that would take way more time in the verbal realm. Sometimes, in fact, it’s like a message blinks into my head from beyond like the proverbial “download.” Who knows what this is, really? I don’t.
The wise and occasionally depressed King Solomon wrote, “For everything there is a season… a time to keep silence and a time to speak.”
This passage advocates balance, not black-and-white labeling. I like that.
With a little reflection, it’s clearly not in our best interests to always keep a silent mind, focusing only on what the hands and eyes are doing in the present moment.
If you’re depressed, of course you must learn to “live in the present moment,” shutting off that blasted verbal and visual habit of going over past hurts, fights, losses and embarrassments, as well as future worst-case scenarios. This kind of rumination will drown you unless you put in the time and effort to learn inner silence and the skill of stopping and diverting inner “tapes” when they turn self-destructive. Everyone knows this.
But if you’re not depressed, your inner voice can help you with all sorts of nice things.
Like when you’re washing your hair in the shower and your mind wanders. Some of the best stories come directly from heaven to Earth through shower nozzles. Ask any writer.
Some of my blog posts spring into my head in nearly final form while I’m sitting on the floor with my legs crossed planning to focus only on conscious, deliberate breathing.
Just as some academics are misguided in thinking that maleness is inherently evil, so some gurus are confused into believing that inner chatter is inherently negative.
It’s understandable. I’ll admit that my dog, Halo, avoids inner monologue assiduously and she’s the happiest person alive, but still, some of the spiritual and psychological advice I read regarding the inner voice can’t possibly apply to humans.
Not only do they imply that the inner voice is an unqualified negative to be abandoned for the eternal superficial concrete present moment, they also have the obtuseness to equate the inner voice with the total mind.
I’m sorry, but some of these experts are like a mouse with its head stuck in a coke bottle. Myopic but enjoying the flavor.
The inner voice is just a tiny part of the mind, gurus. Come on, the non-verbal parts are the iceberg below the surface. Things like:
1. Free will (the non-physical core). 2. Conscience (molded by the environment but innately sensing fairness). 4. Silent analysis of math, physics and ecosystems. 5. Autonomic and deliberate breathing. 6. Circadian timing of the body’s organ systems. 7. Consciously moving body parts. 9. Doing body-scan meditation. 11. Intuitive self-preservation (for instance, sensing that the guy leading your meditation group is more of a crooked cult leader than a loving mentor.)
That last one is significant to trusting souls like me…
I took a $2,000 online meditation class a few years back from a PhD claiming to be doing breakthrough scientific investigation, the goal of which was ongoing bliss. His success rate was through the roof, he said. And I was “special” for even reading his email ads. Gee.
In retrospect, some of the participants did find bliss by the halfway point. But I wouldn’t call it enlightenment because there were side effects not mentioned until after the money changed hands. After that, he discussed the side effects as if they were trifles and “perfectly normal,” a phrase he repeated often over the weeks as students shared their growing concerns.
Tell me, are these side effects normal?
1. Memory problems. 2. Loss of organizational skills to the point where “enlightened” people from the prior group had to use lists to keep track of simple everyday tasks. 3. Diminished interest in fiction of all types. 4. Loss of interest in other people’s lives and stories. “You’ll have to fake interest.” 5. The showstopper: those who achieve the highest level of ongoing enlightenment would experience the complete loss of emotion, including love.
Would a scientist fail to mention these details until after he had your money? I doubt it, but maybe the pop business literature of the 1980’s was right — suckers deserve to be fleeced. I doubt anyone reading this believes such Darwinian dogma, but who knows?
To be fair, I did sign many pages of legal docs that I didn’t read. The side effects of eternal bliss might have been listed there in the fine print, but it wouldn’t have made any difference because the legal papers were sent to us only after the good doctor had stashed our cash safely in his account.
Anyway, this next part is interesting. During the classes, there were always questions from the students about how one or another of the PhD’s ideas could be integrated into the concepts of other famous gurus.
The doctor’s answer? If you want bliss, such questions miss the point: Forsake all thinking and do the exercises.
“The mind,” he said, would only interfere with the highest possible human goal: obtaining a permanent blissful state of enlightenment. He had his own proprietary words for enlightenment, of course. But the mind must be turned off during this bliss-through-meditation process. We were building new neural pathways, after all. We needed only to stop thinking critically and follow his instructions to the letter.
And so I lay on my back in my bedroom with electrodes on my chest doing endless varieties of body-scanning type meditation, two hours and more each day for eight weeks. Plus online small group meetings and other assignments.
About that time (which was halfway through the course) one of the people in my subgroup on Google Hangouts reported serious memory problems that were getting worse.
Both of my parents died with significant dementia, as you may recall from other posts, so I have zero tolerance for memory loss. And now the “perfectly normal” side effects of this man’s bliss scheme appeared to be real.
I left the program quietly.
He later kicked me out of his Facebook group when, in response to his own request for feedback on how to improve the success rate, I suggested he might in effect pre-screen the participants by telling them the potential side effects of success before taking their money.
This was to imply that a PhD should act like a scientist not a drug dealer. I wish I’d said it that way.
Bottom line, I would never trade my memory, my love for fiction, or my interest in other people’s lives for ongoing bliss.
And I certainly wouldn’t risk my ability to love people. Not for anything. One day when I was a new Christian in a Church-run High School I experienced a sense of God’s love flowing through me to the other students. It was weird, probably the most joyful and meaningful experience of my life.
“Love is all and love is everyone. It is knowing, it is knowing.” – John Lennon
John was totally right about that. I’ll never give up hope of someday revisiting that feeling. I’d never trade the faintest hope of agape love for an emotionless, loveless life of ongoing zombie bliss. “No tanks, uh?”
Although self-love runs contrary to my upbringing, I also wouldn’t want to lose the ability to love myself, even if it feels wrong to say so — and it does. (Some people of my generation were taught that self love indicates there’s something terribly wrong with you. It sounds bizarre, I know, but “correct” thinking was 180 degrees different back then.)
I’m telling you all this to illustrate the danger and stupidity of turning off your mind’s critical thinking and logical objective analysis for the bliss offered by a guru or “bliss researcher.” Not that they’re all the same. I really don’t know. But in some cases, the bliss is real and the cost is your empathy and love. I suspect these methods rewire the circuitry of mirror neurons.
At any rate, the DNA Code Writer would not have gone to all the trouble of coding for the human brain and its transcendent access to free will if the ultimate purpose of humanity was to turn off the whole cognitive process for a flat-affect bliss that kills empathy like an opiate addiction.
I’d guess the severely depressed and suicidal among us might be tempted to trade almost anything for bliss. I don’t blame or shame them for it. Major depression is hell on Earth, often fatal. Don’t cast the first stone.
But I’m talking about seeking a higher spiritual path when your life is pretty much OK.
In that context, it’s unhealthy, stupid and dangerous to shut off your mind. All money hungry cult leaders demand that you stop thinking critically and fall in line. Usually they do it more subtly and artfully than my PhD friend with his little ongoing-bliss scam.
So be intelligently careful and balanced. If you’re depressed, use inner-silence meditation to deal with rumination. If you’re fine and seeking a more spiritual life, try inner-silence, slow breathing and yoga to discover the gap between your free-willed self and the brain-fixed aspects of your mind and body. Use your silent techniques to connect with your highly efficient subconscious creative talents. And probably I’ll meet you in a non-physical realm of agape love someday. Stranger things happen.
“Remember how electrical currents and ‘unseen waves’ were laughed at? The knowledge about man is still in its infancy.” – Albert Einstein.
Slow deep breathing shunts blood to the prefrontal cortex and the subjacent pleasure center on the left. Science can tell us this much, but it cannot detect the non-physical field of free will interfacing with the brain.
When science leaps in faith beyond its self-imposed physical limitations and denies the existence of free will and all else non-physical, it is like a man who has refused to open his eyes since birth, declaring now that all vision is an illusion. He, being superior to the uneducated in intellect, insight, courage and integrity, stands alone as willing to face the difficult and oppressive truth that human vision is a false, meaningless illusion.
Science must learn to admit the obvious: it has chosen materialism, to be blind to the non-physical realm and all evidence of its existence, including the most obvious, free will.
While this choice persists, science cannot claim to be informed about the realm it ignores, much less pose as an infallible anti-spiritual authority in Western textbooks and classrooms.
The Wim Hof method of life improvement through hyperventilation, breath holding and cold exposure has gone mildly viral, but until I googled “Wim Hof and headaches,” I thought I would be the first to mention a headache connection.
Mr. Hof is no joke, by the way, though he comes across as happier and more enthusiastic than our jaundiced society allows. For this, some call him crazy.
But he’s not above reproach, either. Who is? He makes a few over-the-top claims. For instance, he’s made medical claims that jerk the black-and-white chains of professional skeptics whose logic casts out the baby with the ice water at the slightest provocation.
But many scientists, journal gatekeepers, and healthcare providers depend on the “incurable” adjective. And they’re human. Where would they all go if, for instance, type 2 diabetes disappeared along with a few of the most common cancer types? How can anyone expect them to be objective about feeding their children?
I’m afraid I’m not.
So let the skeptics howl while the rest of us avoid their binary thinking. We’d be nuts to write off Wim Hof for simply being as excitable and capable of exaggeration as most of the rest of us.
You probably know he’s earned many world records for things like sitting in ice water for roughly 2 hours and swimming a terrifically long distance under surface ice, once overshooting the exit hole and nearly drowning.
He recalls no fear of dying during the incident and now says he has no baseline fear of death. That’s fascinating and probably important. Who knows?
Under medical supervision, a few brave scientists injected him with toxic bacterial antigens, waited, then drew his blood for analysis. It showed a lack of the expected spike of inflammatory markers. He had no fever and felt no flu-like symptoms.
Wondering if Wim was unique in this ability to suppress inflammatory markers, they had him train a dozen new students for 2 weeks, then tested them.
The students’ bloodwork showed a low inflammatory response compared to controls, and they reported less intense flu-like symptoms.
And as if destiny wanted to remove all suspicion that Wim has “superhuman” talent, the man has an identical twin with no unusual cold tolerance.
Another group of scientists put Wim in an MRI scanner wearing a cold-immersion bodysuit. This was fascinating. They found peculiar activity in his insula and the periaqueductal gray areas of his brain. Also, he had increased glucose metabolism in his intercostal muscles.
I’d like to know if he was panting. I vaguely remember a video clip of him panting in a tub of ice, but I can’t find it now.
It’s safe to say that Wim Hof’s path to “health, strength, and happiness,” has a few credible underpinnings in physiology. And there’s also the “life-changing” effects asserted by his raving students.
Unfortunately, the body is too complex for our hyper-segregated sciences to explain the morphologic, physiologic, biochemical, epigenetic and genetic details of anything much beyond conditions like sickle-cell anemia, but an obvious feature of Wim’s achievements is human antifragility, a counterintuitive response that includes hormesis, the beneficial middle-dose of something toxic or even lethal at higher exposures.
Oh dear, I hope the medical thought police don’t revile me for suggesting there’s hope of preventing such lucrative diseases through simple hormesis.
Anyway, in the Wim Hof method, the hormesis comes from hypoxia and cold exposure, either of which might kill you at too high an exposure.
What doesn’t kill us wakes us up, it seems.
Since my first breath-holding ocean dive (with no wetsuit) at Shell Beach, California, age 12, I’ve loved holding my breath — just for the relaxation and clarity of mind it brings. As we know, the mammalian diving response kicks in, shunting blood to the brain, lungs and heart.
What a fortunate setup for anyone living on a water planet, though! Who do I thank?
Later when I took SCUBA, I learned that by hyperventilating before breath-holding, I could stay down longer because huffing and puffing expels carbon dioxide and makes the blood less acidic. This shifts the oxygen dissociation curve to the left, allowing the red blood cells to deliver more of their oxygen to the tissues, giving us the feeling that hyperventilation supersaturates the blood with oxygen. It doesn’t as far as science can so-far determine.
It’s also true that CO2 buildup in the blood provides us with the urge to breathe. That’s why blowing it off in hyperventilation lets you stay down longer before air thirst forces you up for a breath.
This scenario is dangerous, though, because hyperventilation can make you pass out and drown — as can hypoxia.
I urge you not try hyperventilation in the water. Wim Hof says to do it lying down. (Far from a pool or bathtub, I’d add.)
And here’s another caveat: too much hypoxia causes brain damage, depression and dementia. We know this from studying sleep apnea, a common ailment that’s vastly underdiagnosed and contributes to a truckload of human misery. So “moderation in all things” is the faithful heuristic. And for the careful, swimming underwater in the cold (without hyperventilation) wakes up the mind and makes you feel sharp as a tack.
Since life on Earth was intelligently designed, our bodies keep us fully conscious and awake under water because the alternative tends to be fatal. Whoever wrote this planet’s genetic codes must have designed life around water and decided that we would hold our breath and spear cold-water fish during the ice ages. This would have the side effect of providing a diet rich in marine oils to supply DHA to our brains which are predominantly lipid and heavy with DHA, an omega-3 fatty acid.
Periodic ice ages awaken humanity’s epigenetic adaptations to cold, it seems, switching on genes that become dormant during warmer eras. Activating our “cold-shock” genes to produce cold-shock proteins renders us not merely cold-resistant, but antifragile to cold. We don’t merely survive the ice ages, we thrive — mentally, physically, emotionally and probably spiritually.
We’ve all seen clear evidence of this in the ancient megalithic structures on most continents — evidence the mainstream detests because it falls outside their “gradualism” dogma of all history.
Nevertheless, since the Younger-Dryas event ended the last ice age about 11,600 years ago, our species has forgotten the value of God’s latent gift of cold-adaptive epigenetics. Fortunately, Wim Hof and a few scientists are rediscovering it, uncovering what may be a human capacity for broad volitional immune regulation and substantial mood management.
Some of this magic results from the “mammalian diving response.” It’s a well-studied physiologic mechanism that shunts blood to vital organs, as I mentioned. This includes the brain’s center of higher decision making, the prefrontal cortex, which is close to a quasi-pleasure center located just below the left prefrontal region.
It would seem that Earth’s DNA Code Writer has worked to keep us alive, healthy, happy and eating cold-water fish with our broccoli sprouts.
“The God Hypothesis is now a more respected hypothesis than at any time in the last 100 years.” — Frederic Bradford Burnham, PhD.
I haven’t taken the Wim Hof course, as yet, but I’ve watched enough relevant YouTube videos to know the basics, and I’ve been doing an easy version of cold exposure and hyperventilation-with-breath-holding for five months now, several times a week. In my view, Wim Hof is onto something big with the potential to help many of us, not just my fellow headache sufferers. But let’s be careful not to over-do the hypoxia aspect.
Although I’m not quite as predisposed to euphoria now as when I was younger, I do feel exhilarated after a cold shower, and mentally sharp with temporary mood elevation after the intermittent hyperventilation and hypoxia.
By the way, if you try cold showers, consider my method. I’m careful not to let my subconscious mind learn to hate the whole experience. To me, this principle of catering to the subconscious is a key to sustaining purpose with anything that requires discomfort and ongoing effort.
Here’s how I avoid hating cold shower…
First I step back out of a hot shower, turning the knob all the way cold. Then I put one part of myself into the shower at a time. I stay in the cold spray for seven breaths, step out and warm up for a few breaths then rotate another section of me into the cold.
In the past I’ve tried cold showers by sudden immersion and wound up avoiding the whole process after a few weeks, having never consciously decided to stop. It seems that when anything is judged by the subconscious self to be too uncomfortable, we avoid it reflexively without conscious deliberation. In this way, the subconscious mind makes many decisions about survival. We see this happening with hunger avoidance, cold avoidance, pain avoidance, and the avoidance of believing things that will bring us rejection by our peers and bosses.
There’s good scientific evidence now that cold showers should improve most people’s health and well-being, but the most unexpected thing for me was the headache remedy.
I’ve had headaches all my teen and adult life, originally caused by something in fresh fruit (probably fructose) or in my 30’s by caffeine withdrawal.
Nowadays, my headaches come mainly from eating a little naturally occurring sucrose in my low-carb, circadian diet. (Sucrose or “table sugar” is half fructose, so that may be the primary cause of my headaches now.) Incidentally, the low-carb, circadian diet brings me mental clarity like nothing else ever has.
I’ve had about 12 headaches (all associated with “natural” sucrose intake) since I’ve been doing my easy version of the Wim Hof method. Each headache has vanished after hyperventilation and breath holding, usually after 4 or 5 cycles. That’s 12 our of 12!
Cold exposure doesn’t seem to affect my headaches, though at least one observant writer describe evidence that “cryotherapy” of this sort might prevent migraine headaches by reversing the low norepinephrine levels found in migraine sufferers.
Also, it may be noteworthy that at least one anecdotal report has surfaced of a headache appearing after doing the Wim Hof technique.
One size rarely fits all in biology. Perhaps it’s tangentially relevant that when I’m trying to get rid of a headache, it sometimes feels worse during the hyperventilation phase, diminishes during the breath holding, and then vanishes after several cycles.
My last headache inspired me to write this article. It woke me at 5:30 AM pounding in my skull. It felt like one of the monster headaches that lasts all day and brings nausea.
I did the usual 4 cycles of Wim Hof hyperventilation and breath holding and although the pain diminished, it quickly came back. Not willing to give up and waste the entire day in pain, I kept at it, hyperventilating more and more vigorously and holding my breath longer and longer as my heart chugged in my chest. Finally, after about 12 intense cycles, the pain vanished completely and never came back, not even a dull ache.
Dude! Thank you, Wim Hof.
I speculate that the diving reflex, while shunting blood to my central nervous system as designed, also sent blood flowing swiftly through my scalp where the nerve endings for headache are thought to reside, diluting out vicious chemicals released by mast cells. These chemicals were causing vasoconstriction and pain while signaling for inflammatory cells to rush in.
And because I treated the headache early in its course, I postulate that the inflammatory cells that would have migrated in, set up shop and made the headache a full-day affair never had time to arrive in significant numbers.
Of course, not all headaches have the same pathophysiology. What stops mine might not touch yours, and might even make yours worse. But the Wim Hof Headache Fix is worth a try if you suffer headaches. Just promise me you won’t hyperventilate near water, pass out and drown, OK?
I wish I’d had the Wim Hof Headache Fix when I was a highschool boy lying in bed on Sunday afternoon in my dorm room in throbbing pain, praying to God for relief and assuring him that I understood if this wasn’t the time for a miracle.
And I wish scientists weren’t so quick to shout down everything that moves contrary to their “knowledge.”
Science has historically made quantum leaps by seeking the unexpected, the weird and impossible. It’s tragic that many scientists today express pride in their skepticism. It would serve us all if skepticism were a source of scientific shame.
And it doesn’t matter what’s new, weird, or improperly boxed, my generation of baby-boomer scientists will attack and viciously debunk it, often without studying the work they’re struggling to bury. For example…
The “fringe” evolutionist, Elaine Morgan’s theory that humans evolved from aquatic apes is rejected by mainstream evolutionists for purely emotional reasons, as best I can tell. The phrase, “aquatic apes,” doesn’t sound right to them regardless of the evidence.
The non-materialist research scientist, James Tour, makes an absolutely stunning case for intelligent design in origins theory, only to hear the materialist establishment reject his insight and expertise because they already “know” that life’s origins are mindless and meaningless.
Governmental officials team up with fighter pilots to show evidence that UFO’s are real, someone in our skies seems to have breakthrough technology, but academics remain invested in denial of anything beyond their insular, inbred boxes of narrow expertise.
I’m hoping that something will change with the next generation of scientists and thinkers.
Maybe the next team will value objectivity over skepticism.
Science could use their help right now.
Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD
Please share this post with friends who suffer from headaches or chronic dogma impairments.
“The thing that we all know most directly and most certainly – that is, the existence of ourselves – is ultimately incompatible with materialism.” – Jay Richards, PhD.
When I attended a Christian university in the 1970s (now called La Sierra University) I took an upper division genetics class from Gary Bradley, my hero to this day, who subtly taught the logic of associating a Code Writer with this planet’s unfathomably complex DNA. His scientific insight was ahead of its time and became the intellectual basis of my faith in God.
Although my unbalanced version of Christianity made me a doormat in the dog-eat-dog world of pathology, the realization that God existed and, being smart enough to write genetic code, could easily understand English and undoubtedly hear my thoughts and prayers, improved my life dramatically, giving me a sense of meaning and purpose, despite my habit of not standing up for myself.
Today, more and more brave scientists and thinkers are making the connection between Earth’s code-based life and an intelligent code writer. Random mutation and natural selection don’t stand up to mathematical scrutiny when you know something of the complexity of proteins and the DNA codes that produce them.
But breaking with tradition is dangerous. Modern scientists are like preschoolers fighting to control the rules to the latest game. And they are literally religious fundamentalists who believe that their dogma alone can save the world.
The dogma is materialism: the arrogant, arbitrary, inflexible assumption that nothing could possibly exist besides matter and energy. This is a philosophical assumption that cannot be tested. Hence we should not equate it to science or let it be preached to school children as “the foundation of the scientific method.”
It’s actually the foundation of scientific fundamentalism, a religion that has quietly slipped in and taken rigid control of the minds, careers and publications of the scientific community. Materialism has become a roadblock to the funding of any project that doesn’t knuckle under to the dogma of a random, meaningless, depressing, purely material universe.
But here’s a breathtaking video that brings hope that perhaps today’s young people will rescue science from fundamentalism…
“Oddly, the [scientific] materialist has to deny the existence of the scientist.”
So true, and so ironic.
Back in the day, Gary Bradley openly questioned Neo-Darwinism in class, emphasizing the crucial importance of protecting the genetic diversity, natural order and purity of Earth’s ecosystems from the myopic intrusions of corporate science.
At the time, I did not understand how rare this part of my education was. But now I know that at least in the last fifty years, professors and textbooks have assumed without question that science is materialistic – there can be nothing but matter and energy anywhere, ever. Therefore, the mind is an illusion. Intelligence is an accident of matter, a random epiphenomenon with no meaning or higher purpose.
During their impressionable college years when objectivity writes on a clean slate, very few modern scientists have been allowed to hear both sides of the argument between materialism and intelligent design. Nevertheless, some have heard it now and are coming around, saying that there’s evidence in favor of the concept that we are genuine beings with free will.
Here’s a video touching on some of that evidence…
“No, You’re Not a Robot Made Out of Meat“
In college, students are usually taught what to think not how to think. The struggle for most undergraduates is to memorize quickly for multiple-choice tests. We tacitly assume that everything we have crammed into our heads is true, including this western secular worldview disguised as the foundation of science.
But the mainstream answer to this question, “Does the Universe consist of only matter and energy or is there also something more, such as mind, identity, or a Supreme Being?” is not directly testable and therefore not capable of being the foundation of science. It’s a worldview, a philosophy, a spirituality or, if you ask me, a cultish religion that has morphed into today’s academic culture of scientific fundamentalism.
Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD
Please share these videos with the young minds you know and love. Give them something to balance the dogmatic materialism that undermines happiness and limits science itself. Give someone a glimpse of the rational universe where depression and suicide are avoidable through the pursuit of a higher, loving purpose.
My father was born today (December 27, 1897). He was an MD with board certification in Radiology, Anatomic Pathology and General Surgery. His life was all about studying science, publishing medical articles and living far beyond frugality. He was an atheist who preferred religious people because he thought they were more trustworthy. “It’s too bad everything they believe in isn’t true,” he said.
This post is dedicated to Dad…
We live in a simulated universe created by means of a language that’s projected from beyond, possibly using the crystal structure called “E8,” in which the fundamental building blocks are not irreducible strings or electromagnetic waves or subatomic particles or even intelligently driven perturbations in the zero-point field (though this idea is related, I think).
Instead, the fundamental building blocks of our simulated reality appear to be the symbols of a language.
This is a language in which each physical symbol, its meaning, and the hardware needed to interpret or “manifest” the meaning within our 3D space are one-in-the-same.
The Supreme Being (or Beings) exist outside the simulation, but can enter it and undoubtedly have. We (our full selves) inhabit a Reality outside of the simulated universe, a place that is beyond our ability to imagine because it’s “outside of time” and contains something like “extra dimensions” which can only be vaguely imagined by people with expertise in math and physics.
Our simulated universe was invented for us by the Supreme Being(s) because we requested it.
We enthusiastically spend simulated time here in hopes of expanding the depth and breadth of our love, wisdom and character in a place made specifically for developing these personal attributes.
There’s a respected web of cause and effect stemming from free decisions that each of us has made within the simulated universe. This free-choice web limits our ability to create a reality based upon a belief system.
For example, if I want to believe in a fundamentalist Christian paradigm (or any other spiritual system), but I’ve been convinced in school that scientific materialism is undeniable, then I am incapable of believing in any fundamentalist paradigm other than scientific materialism itself (a.k.a. physicalism). And vice versa.
On the other hand, if for any reason I have retained the ability to believe in a given spiritual (or anti-spiritual) paradigm, and I pursue it, then that system of belief will become literally true for me within the simulation.
In practical terms, this means that there is always a “reality that’s out there” in the simulated universe whether or not I believe in it.
Examples of realities that won’t go away with denial include the reality of UFO’s, the reality of DNA’s hyper-complex code, the reality of dinosaur fossils, the reality of Near-Death Experiences, the reality of Angels, demons and various ethereal beings, the reality of World Bank domination in modern times, the reality of all souls being ultimately one, the reality of an intelligent universe, and the growing reality on Earth of a mindless, meaningless universe.
Logically opposing belief systems can be fully manifest in separate parts of the simulation on an individual basis, especially after a person’s current life ends, but also to some extent during this current life. The more something is collectively believed, the more real it becomes due to the simulation’s basic nature and the careful respect for free will. (When the effects of a free will decision are eliminated, the reality of that decision is also eliminated. Hence the respect for the effects of free will decisions and actions.)
Our experience in the simulated universe is not necessarily limited to one lifetime. Depending on what we are able to believe, we may ride the simulation for multiple lifetimes.
Each of us is here for our own specific purpose.
For some, the purpose is to learn courage and love.
For others (particularly scientists) we’re here to learn open-mindedness and the ability to question things we know are true. The odds are against us achieving such objectivity on Earth, but the very challenge of it attracts us here.
One characteristics of the simulation that renders it particularly useful to our souls’ growth is the ubiquitous “dualism” in which every good thing can have a negative side effect and every negative thing can have a positive side effect. This becomes a source of cognitive dissonance, particularly in questions of morality.
For instance, our dependence upon food requires us to kill plants, bacteria, insects, and perhaps to some degree, higher organisms, to stay alive. And yet our innate sense of morality (a.k.a. love) makes us loath to kill certain creatures. Similarly, our need to procreate, driven largely by testosterone in all genders, is necessary to our species’ existence, yet it also manifests as a strong force in breaking trust, destroying families and making life more difficult on our dear children.
And yet the dissonances here teach our souls balance and perspective. That’s a huge attraction.
Realizing that our universe is simulated may seem to present a new problem of rejecting all other worldview paradigms. It might tempt one to say, “If our souls exist with God in another realm and nothing here is real, then nothing here is worth believing in or caring about.”
But despite the literal simulation of matter and energy, our cognitive awareness here is real, not simulated. Our love and our pain are genuine because our souls experience them. We don’t have the option of dealing with the simulated universe as an illusion because it reaches beyond the simulation into our hearts.
In view of all this, the logical thing to do is to identify your own personal reason(s) for entering this simulation, and based upon those, choose a personally believable worldview that offers support for someone on your quest.
For instance, if you’re here primarily to learn open-mindedness, which means you’re probably a scientist, then you might read about the search for UFOs and alien life, although you already “know” such things are complete nonsense aimed at “lesser minds” than yours. Be prepared for the surprise your soul is seeking.
Or if you’re here to learn courage, then choosing a live-for-the-moment worldview might make sense, leading you into a lifestyle of courage, such as mixed martial arts, public speaking, surfing giant waves, doing open heart surgery, smuggling Bibles into North Korea, or standing up to politically correct hatred and prejudice.
Or if you discover that you joined the simulation to increase your capacity for self-sacrificing love, then any of the major religions will probably steer you in that direction. Find one you can truly believe in, if possible. If not, pick and choose from among them, or make up something of your own as I’ve done. Your beliefs will be real for you when you need them most.
If you’ve joined the simulation to discover who you would be apart from God’s physical presence and influence, then materialistic science and atheism might be what your soul needs (assuming you’re capable of believing). If so, make the world envious of your good character the way Gillette Penn has done. And like him, don’t be offended by others who believe in undetectable realities besides Dark Matter and Dark Energy.
And if you’re one of the family of suffering people who feel overwhelmed by the seemingly infinite loss of someone precious to you, then focus on the Reality beyond this simulation. Imagine a Real place where time is independent of us, allowing a loving Supreme Being all the time in the world to travel with your lost loved one to a meaningful, great place doing exciting things. As infinitely horrible as it feels to lose your loved one, the loss is temporary and only exists within this simulated universe. Trust me. This is literally true.
Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD
As a pathologist (retired now), I’ve been trained to observe and interpret complex visual and biologic systems, so my diagnostic opinion of Reality is worth consideration. Conflicting belief systems are part of what unites us here as souls from Reality seeking personal growth in this Divine Simulation.
I was deeply disappointed when my 23&Me genetic analysis came back and told me I don’t have any Jewish ancestry.
The Three Stooges were the brightest part of my world when I was three years old. I was an adult when I discovered that they were all Jewish.
I’ve been an Einstein devotee since I was six and my Dad told me about the relative nature of time and velocity. I was probably in high school before I heard that Einstein was Jewish.
I’ve been a Bob Dylan / Robert Zimmerman freak with his lyrics bouncing around in my brain since I was eleven and my sister let me borrow Blond on Blond, my favorite album to this day. I was probably in 8th grade when I learned he was Jewish. Not that I had a clue what that meant.
One of the two most talented cytotechnologists I ever worked with was Jewish. The other, whom the local pathologists called “God” because of her unearthly diagnostic accuracy with fine needle aspirations, was of Middle Eastern Arab descent and therefore possibly a descendent of Abraham.
And when I was fourteen, I began reading the gospels over and over for decades becoming dominated by my admiration for a one-sided interpretation of Jesus — a Jewish man who, by tradition, was recognized and appreciated at birth by wise men from “the East” who followed his star.
What was that really all about?
The longer I live, the more I see ancient stories and “myths” supported by new evidence from mainstream materialistic science. The evidence for an advanced human civilization before the Younger Dryas event is mounting as the sheer mass, complexity and global extent of megaliths is delivered to the public on YouTube, and huge impact craters, especially the recent one in Iceland, suggest a causal connection. Meanwhile, UFO’s have been to some extent accepted as real by the mainstream media, senators and at least one billionaire.
Who were these wise men from the East who brought gifts to a Jewish baby? They don’t seem fabricated. What motivated their journey?
On top of my general appreciation for Jews, my mother, God rest her soul, told me that she thought my Dad had some Jewish blood. His mother’s last name was Talmage, an English name that was sometimes adopted by Jewish people who had migrated into England in the remote past.
It was nice thinking that I was probably at least partly Jewish. I had that deep-down sense of belonging to an important Tribe of amazing people.
You might imagine my disappointment when my genetics came back with no evidence of Jewish heritage at all. The report told me I’m over 99 percent Western European, almost all British. Plus I’m a male, for crying out loud!
How repulsive can you get genetically speaking in today’s PC world?! It’s hard to be more genetically incorrect than I am.
And I’ve got no one to blame but myself when you think about it…
I chose to be born male and white in some prior realm of existence. Can I get an Amen from a materialist? No. How about from a Christian? Doubt it.
Either through greed or masochism I decided to become a genetic member of the only Tribe that’s fair game for open stereotyping, prejudice and hatred: the “White Patriarchy.”
Silly me. What was I thinking?
But to my temporary and yet infinite relief, 23&Me also said I’ve got 0.2 percent Native American blood. Mom’s family myth was true. A man named “Monk” must have really married a woman named “Squa.” (Forgive the non-PC word, but “Squa” was my ancestor’s literal name in my Mom’s family story.)
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if 0.2 percent non-white blood could rescue me from PC shaming and loathing? And make me a genuine member of a politically correct Tribe?
I’m not getting my hopes up.
Is it even right for someone like me with over 99 percent inherently “PC evil” genetics to attempt an escape from mediocrity? Wouldn’t it be better for the Universe if people with my deplorable white-male genetics would just shut up, go away and accept Karma’s payback for choosing the moral inferiority and genetic guilt of white maleness?
You see where I’m going with this madness?
My little grandkids are right. My mom was right. Hatred is always wrong because it’s always unfair to the one doing the hating, no matter how convincingly any given society or subculture singles out a genetic whipping boy as the wise target of modern (or “postmodern,” gag me!) moral outrage and hatred.
No matter what our Ivory Tower professors teach us about the lack of meaning and true morality in the Universe (based on their untestable assumption of materialism or physicalism with the nature of existence being a Darwinian fight to the death, and the joy of victim-group hatred being the fabric of all merry winners) it’s still true…
“Two wrongs don’t make a right.” Mom was nobody’s fool.
Well, that’s easy for me to say, with my genetics supposedly placing me into a comfortable world of white patriarchal dominance and aggression.
But here’s the thing, I understand both sides of grudge holding and hatred. One of my siblings beat me mercilessly from age three through age twelve, then emotionally tortured me for most of my adult life. Later the same person stole my entire inheritance which I was told was worth 3 million dollars at the time. Do you think I’m idiotic enough to hate that sibling?
Well, no, I’m not now. I was for a while there, but not for long.
It only made me sicker and more depressed to be owned by humanity’s worst enemy: hatred. This emotion is a mind virus replicating on justified anger that takes over your life through rumination.
I escaped the abusive environment and let go of everything I’d lost, including most of my self-confidence. Getting free helped me forgive my sibling while separating me from continual emotional abuse.
Hating and shaming those who abuse you or your Tribe only makes you angrier and sicker inside.
“Sicker now and sicker all the way down,” as my son puts it in his song, Sicker.
You need to separate yourself from your specific abusers, resist painting whole groups of people, even white males, with the broad strokes of hatred and prejudice. Then forgiveness can come and free you inside.
The “wise men from the East” were not part of the Jewish “Tribe.” But somehow they knew that such things don’t matter. And they probably knew that disconnecting from hatred, humanity’s worst flaw, depended in some mysterious way on this newborn Jewish baby lying in the cold with his mom and all the stable animals.
I’ve thought for a long time that black-and-white thinking is one of humanity’s biggest problems. But trying to eradicate it with more black-and-white thinking is just ridiculous.
When I was a medical student doing a psychiatry rotation, I noticed that all the white coats, myself included, had a powerful desire to be seen as absolutely NORMAL.
The feeling came out of nowhere the first day we started seeing psych patients. Some of them weren’t free to leave the building. There was an unspoken fear that we caregivers might be, in some unseen way, indistinguishable from the patients. It was both a subtle and a consuming motivation that made everyone subconsciously try to act and speak as if they were hyper-normal in every conceivable dimension.
I’ve rarely felt anything like it since.
In those days on the psych wards, one big sign of derangement to avoid was “magical thinking,” which meant believing in anything that wasn’t established by science or grounded in secular Western middle-class society.
Since LLUMC was a religious institution, Christianity was begrudgingly considered OK on the psych wards, or at least not necessarily equal to magical thinking… unless the patient thought he or she had an unusual religious purpose in life such as being Jesus Christ, a delusion that was said to be “not uncommon.”
Between the lines, we knew that any “visions of grandeur” might put us at risk of being too similar to the inpatients. And while there was no chance of being locked up for it, a med student couldn’t hope to pass a psych rotation where the people evaluating you thought you were basically nuts.
So if anyone had a personal relationship with God that meant everything to them, as I did (and still do), she or he had to be careful to tuck it away along with any secret hopes of someday becoming objectively great by doing extremely valuable work in the world.
And of course, some of us tried to down-size our ambitions and become genuinely satisfied with the psych ward’s prescribed mediocrity.
That never worked for me. I couldn’t escape my burning desire to do something great. I still can’t.
But to this day I’d never admit such a grandiose hope to a shrink. Only to you.
I wonder if the new boogeyman for med students on psych rotations today is black-and-white thinking.
It’s finally becoming a mainstream negative, which would be a good thing if it were opposed logically rather than in binary terms, such as the current “normal versus borderline personality disorder” dichotomy and other B&W approaches.
If you want to really insult a thinking analytic person, say that she’s a black-and-white thinker. The accusation is powerful and leaves a red mark.
It usually comes with the assumption that black-and-white thinking is always narrow-minded and inappropriate.
But it ain’t necessarily so…
Simple arithmetic, for instance, is black-and-white. No one will accuse you of B&W narrow-mindedness if you lower your guard and admit that you believe one and one equals two.
But with imaginary numbers (i.e., the “lie” that a negative number can have a square root), math itself enters a gray zone with the letter “i” keeping track of imaginary calculations.
So math starts out black and white but, like fiction, merges truth with imagination. Neither math nor fiction is really lying because the letter “i” and the word “novel” tell us we’re sort of pretending. Both explore the human experience by merging black-and-white foundations with a story written in symbols.
Physics is similar. When you calculate a coefficient of friction in a college Physics lab, it’s black-and-white Newtonian work. But if you’re ever trying to decide which version of string theory clashes the least with your classical Einsteinian bias, you’re quickly up to your eyeballs in shades of gray and spectrums of color.
Ironically, the popular all-or-none belittlement of B&W thinking, typified by the picture above, misses all the boring details of reality and winds up in subtle hypocrisy where the only black-and-white thinking it allows is its own binary criticism of black-and-white thinking.
Splitting humanity into “black-and-white thinkers” and “normal in-color thinkers” may be useful to some shrinks, I guess, but for the rest of us, it’s often used as a polarizing weapon to belittle people and silence unwelcome ideas.
Case in point…
To convince people that there’s no such thing as good and evil, some have associated good and evil with the dreaded black-and-white thinking. Some have claimed that the scientific version of Deity (the Intelligent Mind within the Quantum Field) isn’t concerned with such black-and-white matters as good and evil.
But does this make sense?
Can the rape of a child, for instance, be seen as morally neutral in the eyes of an intelligent Universe and the Mind that fills it?
Perhaps the Quantum Mind of God is not as preoccupied with negative judgments as our fading Western traditions tell us.
But this Mind is smart enough to write original DNA code. We are the products of that code. Most of us feel deep empathy for suffering children.
How then could the Code Writer be incapable of empathy, or reject the truest words to describe our human predicament: good and evil?
The best thing about humans is our capacity for compassion and empathy. These traits simply must have been written into our DNA by Someone who knew them. But we’re supposed to believe that the Code Writer is a stranger to empathy and suffering? Too broad-minded to see the difference between right and wrong?
This kind of thinking isn’t rational.
While black-and-white thinking is obviously one of humanity’s greatest limitations, the binary mindset that now pretends to oppose it is unwittingly promoting it by using shame to paint negative emotions on unwelcome ideas.
The situation is analogous to William Cooper’s old videos from the 1990’s where evil attempts to overcome evil. His conspiracy theory describes secret societies that plan to rid the world of evil by killing billions of people with viruses, then following up with a “benevolent” dictatorship run by the murderers.
But fighting fire with fire doesn’t work in the realm of good and evil. A pretty ending can’t overcome an ugly plot.