Let there be light....

Part One

Energy is infinite. It is only as it 'descends', taking on the guise of gross material form, that it appears otherwise. Here, in its material form, it presents as apparently discrete separate entities, like trees, animals, tables, human beings. It is here that it undergoes that process referred to in Buddhism as birth, old age, sickness, and death. Or communicated more mythologically in Hinduism by its three great gods of creation (Brahma), preservation(Vishnu) and destruction(Shiva). It is here, in our gross material forms, that we experience the illusion of energy shortage.

Imagine if I were able to somehow tap into that never-ending reservoir of infinite energy. And if I could translate that energy into something practical, something usable. I produced a little device which drew upon that reservoir of infinite energy and made its content freely available for human use. It would be a little device which could be fitted into every household and provide all their energy needs. Wouldn't that be wonderful?

Do you imagine that such a game-changing invention would be welcomed? I don't think so. Just visualise the scenario. Everybody able to provide for their own reasonable needs. Living off-grid is easy, is the norm. The population is more self-sufficient, less dependent on the system, the establishment, the state, all of those things. The individual is more able to simply get on with their life. What a nightmare this would be....

There are, of course, the energy giants, be they in oil, gas, wind, or solar. They would come up with objection upon objection to the device, which would ruin their source of great wealth and worldly influence. Institutions, be they governments or non-democratic organisations such as the EU and the UN, would be unswervingly on the side of the energy giants. Individual practical freedom is anathema to such institutions, which depend on scarifying notions such as scarcity in order to exert their control over people.

And then there would be the faux greenies, the environmental lobbies, the climate alarmists. They would hate my invention with more venom than anyone. They too rely upon scare-city for their manipulative power over people. Most of them do not wish for abundance in human life. They see the 'western way of life' as bad, wrong, sinful. They do not want human beings to have a plentiful enjoyable life at all. They demand penance for our sins; guilt to be our prime motivator. They are our modern-day fanatical puritans, with an ideology befitting a death cult. In short, they wouldn't be pressing for Greta Thunberg to be displaced as 'Time' magazine's person of the year by me with my humanity-and-the-environment-saving little device.

In truth, if I came up with such an invention, I would be ridiculed, irrational objections would flow freely, and I would probably be 'disappeared', as all-too often happens to people who have become inconvenient.

Part Two

Anybody serious about solving the 'energy crisis' would see that the current direction is hopeless. If I wanted to improve things for human beings, I would go for a total moratorium on wind farms, solar panels, all the other inefficient useless garbage hyped to be ameliorating the planet. Instead, all that money would go into seriously researching the many ideas, devices, and proto-devices that individuals have been coming up with for decades. People searching for low-cost or free energy systems: real solutions. There are plenty of them out there, but they never get a look-in - for reasons that are obvious. It just ain't gonna happen

Looking at things from a different angle, however, from a rather deeper viewpoint of life-as-consciousness, we may suggest that what human beings have got, in terms of energy options, is actually entirely appropriate. In fact it could be no other way. The messy, imperfect, finite, resources at our disposal are perfectly congruent with the state of being of the vast majority of human beings, which too is messy, imperfect, and finite. It is not metaphysically possible for such a species to embrace a dimension of energy which is vastly superior in all respects.

Put bluntly: the species as a whole ain't ready for it.

The same, I reluctantly feel, is the case with individual health. Take cancer. From the bits and pieces I have dipped into, I am confident that there exist far more effective and less painful cures for cancer than those currently on offer. 'Chop it out, burn it out, or poison it' is the motto for the practice in orthodox medicine. It is crude and brutal; sometimes it works, to the extent of giving the sufferer a satisfactorily prolonged span of life, but that is it. In the UK, it was made illegal in 1939 to make any claim for cancer cure outside of chemo, radio, and surgery. To this day, people are occasionally prosecuted for making claims. The official rubric is that the law exists in order to protect unwitting victims from charlatans, but that's not the main thing. It's a closed shop, a self-created monopoly, on 'cure' and on the physics and metaphysics of human life.

Part Three

Buried amongst the pile of pre-election words and manifestos is something about Boris Johnson intending to put a decent load of dosh into research about nuclear fusion. The idea is that this might turn out to be an efficient and effective, reliable and clean, source of energy for humanity in the future. I was heartened to read this; it is a step in the right direction. Although nuclear fusion would still entail the mobilisation of large multinational interests, it would be an immense improvement on what the 'green lobby' continues to push onto the public, in one of the greatest deceptions in our lifetime.

'Efficient and effective; reliable and clean': wind is none of these. There is no way that wind turbines can power the human planet: they simply do not produce enough energy. And when the wind fails to blow, they won't even heat a kettle. While humanity may need to eke out its existence within the waveband of the imperfect, the finite and the decaying, it does not automatically 'deserve' to be pushed to the veritable bottom of the pile with this trash, this fraudulent deception.

In more conspiratorial moments, it is tempting to see the promotion of wind as a deliberate attempt to maintain humanity in a state of scarcity - a state which engenders fear and insecurity, and which makes people easy to manipulate. Wind's hopelessness is one of its greatest attractions to those who enjoy power over others.

As for wind being 'green', 'clean', 'environmentally friendly': more total bullshit. Check out the production of some of the components to a typical turbine: areas laid to polluted waste in China, for example. And are they friendly to wildlife, something which most eco-folk hold dear to their heart, I believe? In the video linked below, Tom Harris discusses estimates from the Spanish Ornithological Society. In a 2013 study, they estimated that the number of bats and birds killed annually by turbines in Spain (they like windfarms in Spain) exceeds six million. Yes, you are reading this properly. Over six million.

Now, I accept that casualties from wind turbines are unverified and unverifiable, and this figure could be way off, or unrepresentative; the detractors will come up with their excuses and objections. But the numbers will almost certainly be way above wind industry estimates. And while birds generally get chopped up by the rotating blades, bats tend to get caught in the low pressure area created behind the blades, and as a result of the pressure difference, their lungs explode.

This is all horrendous, yet wind farms are incessantly promoted as 'good' for the environment. You rarely hear about this, do you? Funny, that. And you never come across television and mainstream eco-celebrities protesting about this. They will merrily lend their voice to some safe or trendy eco-concern. But when it comes to a point of view outside the politically righteous box, they will utter not a peep. Concerned not to lose their reputation and their job, I suppose. Fair-weather eco folk. Understandable but unimpressive. They most likely have one eye on what happened to the recently-deceased David Bellamy after he dismissed global warming as nonsense. Expressing personal opinion was not a good career move. That's the choice sometimes: your truth or your money. Take your pick.

Further links: William (Bill) Bengston's work on healing through energy is fascinating, should this area be of any interest. His book 'The Energy Cure' is an easy and good read, and there are plenty of videos out there.

For a relatively reasonable and good-natured presentation on energy for lighting and heating the house, you could check out Tom Harris here:    http://bit.ly/2tj7E0Z

Keep warm and bright, and all best wishes for 2020 and beyond!            

Learning from the Nazis

Part One: Who Were the Germans?

It's a funny thing, really. How little we know, or think to wonder, or are encouraged to discover. Take the Germans in the 1930s. There are, I suppose, reports and studies out there somewhere. But next-to nothing is said in the context of our everyday knowledge.

I'm not talking about the chiefs, the big boys: Hitler, Goebbels, Goring, and the rest. There's libraries full of work on them. Neither am I talking about the political manoeuvres which took place in 1930s Germany, leading to the establishment of the totalitarian state. No. I'm talking about the actual Germans, real people, ordinary people. Herr Manfred, the baker from Leipzig. Frau Monika from somewhere in the Ruhr - housewife and part-time secretary. Who were they? What was their life? How did they come to be who they came to be? How did they come to be part of Hitler's thing? Maybe we don't hear about it because the truth is all too revealing; too uncomfortable, too close to the bone.

I have not known very many Germans during my life. Even while teaching English language, I met few German students. Plenty from neighbouring countries: Poland, the Czech Republic and places further east. Numerous students from Latin America, especially Brazil. A steady stream of Japanese, South Korean, and increasingly Chinese. Maybe Germans learnt English well enough during their state education, and had no need to visit England to get the language.

I went to Germany recently, just briefly, to Cologne for a wedding. I have had a few German friends in passing over the years. My experience of Germans that I have seen and known has been overwhelmingly positive. They have been courteous, friendly, decent, and generally 'civilised' people. I find much to admire in them, and see their historical culture as outstandingly rich, having contributed much to what is best in western civilisation. So it is curious to know all this, and realise that the grandparents and great grandparents of today's Germans were German youth, quite possibly Hitler youth, in the 1930s.

Does this not strike you as curious? Should we not know a little about what was, and is, going on? Was it just a wayward generation of sadists and psychopaths, human butchers who have once more been succeeded by 'normal' people? I think not.

The truth is more uncomfortable. Put simply, the Germans were had. They were had by an ideology, a primarily racial ideology, which was superimposed upon people with plenty to feel miffed about in the hardships they had suffered as a result of their treatment by various other European national authorities following the First World War. They were had. And in exactly the same way people are still being had today. Ordinary folk. Exactly the same way.

Part Two: Don't Panic

Deception is the name of the game, with subsequent manipulation through playing upon people's emotions. It takes place primarily through the medium of belief systems, of ideology. This is the archontic principle at work, if you want to think in that way. To employ Gnostic terminology, infection by ideology leads the individual or the mass group deeper and deeper into error, until this eventually morphs into something else: 'evil' it may be called; or we could equally talk of 'madness'.

In the case of the Germans, the ideological virus revolved around the racial superiority of the Aryan peoples. Today's mass manipulators may be less physically brutal, but their influence is scarcely less brutalising. And today's manipulation seems to take two main forms: climate alarmism and politically correct 'thinking'.

Climate. Let's take a whistle-stop tour of the process of ideation through recent time.

Notion one: climate change. Can't argue with that one. Flux is the way that things work in this universe, so climate change is a no-brainer. Climate changes, always has done, always will.

A few minute's homework reveals that sometimes it changes slowly, sometimes quickly, dramatically, even. So when older people declare with fear and apprehension that "We don't get winters like we used to", this is not a statement about fossil fuels - they have been conditioned to think so, though - but a statement about inevitability, and one with which one can sit totally at ease.

Notion two: global warming induced by human activity. A bit of basic Buddhist philosophy comes in handy here. Everything is connected, we are told; everything affects everything else. Hence, another no-brainer: human activity will affect the climate. So will the activity of slugs. As for the 'warming' bit, there is most likely some degree of warming effect. Most people who have studied it properly will agree on this. But by how much, I suggest, is impossible to know.

'Climate change' and 'global warming' clearly failed to freak out enough people. Then someone came up with a solution: 'climate emergency'. Reason now goes out the window. The aim becomes to panic and terrify enough people, especially impressionable young people, to allow the archons full access to their confused minds. Hysteria would become the norm, as people completely lost their mind.

'Emergency' is a word that I would use for big earthquakes and severe heart attacks. This is the kind of infarction that the pushers of climate emergency are trying to induce. Suddenly everyone is declaring climate emergency; most of these people know next-to-nothing about the reality of the situation.

There is a video clip somewhere of Ursula von der Leyen. You may or may not know who she is. You should do. She is the new European Commissioner, and one of the most powerful and influential people in Europe. One of her first acts was to preside over a meeting where 'climate emergency' is declared  for Europe. She can be seen gleefully announcing the results of the vote.

If you watch some climate emergency fanatics, they have indeed been rendered mad. They speak, not from their own mind, but from somewhere else. They have been subjected to such an emotional onslaught that they have collapsed as rational beings altogether. They have been taken over by an idea, by a delusion. A delusion that tells them that the situation is so grave, so serious, so urgent, that whatever is needed to remedy it has to be done, even if that means destroying democracy, running other people's lives for them, and so on.

Part Three: Careful What You Say

And then we have the virus of political correctness. This works by latching onto well-meaning but vague and unexamined feelings of fairness, equality, and justice, then twisting them mercilessly until they become the exact opposite of what the person having these ideas thinks they are. It homes in on various groups of people, which are called 'minorities', and which need special attention because they are always getting exploited.

This virus is essentially a thought-control virus. Through its proper application, anybody who happens to disagree with you can be publicly humiliated, silenced, or otherwise dealt with. This virus has been known to ruin families, livelihoods, reputations. It is especially used these days to get people who you disagree with thrown off major social media platforms.

Since you probably can't deal with them through rational means, this is extremely effective. If you can manage to sling an ad hominem insult at a person ending in '...ist' or '....phobe' you've likely got them wrapped up. You can even call them a Nazi.  Whether they really are one of these '....ist' or '....phobe' people is not relevant: there will be enough people out there who have been infected by the same virus, or are too afraid to speak up in case they are likewise accused, that the tactic is likely to succeed.

Like climate emergency, political correctness can manifest as a kind of madness. People under its dark spell become demented, incapable of proper thinking. Recently I had the misfortune to watch ten minutes of an 'interview' by Andrew Marr of Boris Johnson. It wasn't an interview at all, but consisted of an uncontrollably livid Marr interrupting and shouting down Johnson whenever he tried to answer a question. It was unwise behaviour for a person who has already experienced a stroke, I thought. Anyhow….

At one point Marr brought up a quotation that the Prime Minister had made, many years ago I suppose, in which he commented on how the Koran is not necessarily the book of peace that some people make it out to be. Marr then demonstrated the mad deception of political correctness by insinuating that therefore Johnson was being Islamophobic. Commenting on, or criticising, the Koran is not Islamophobia, which is a prejudice, a preconceived bias, against Islam. No, it's simply an opinion. But this is how it works, the confusion, the conflation. It's how you try to get the Prime Minister to appear as a nasty intolerant bigot. It's how the madness aims to shut up critics, and usher in a state far worse than anything conceived in '1984'.

As an aside: Quoting what somebody has said, probably years ago, to condemn them, is a low trick, one that we shouldn't fall for. Anybody worth their salt has said many things in their life, and if they are a normal fallible human being these things are not always consistent. You can do it with almost everybody. I wouldn't normally stoop so low, but hey it's winter and dark, so here goes....

Let's quote Andrew Marr back at himself. Here's what he had to say, quoted in David Sedgwick's book on the BBC: "And the final answer, frankly, is the vigorous use of state power to coerce and repress ….. I firmly believe that repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good. Stamp hard on certain 'natural beliefs' for long enough and you can almost kill them off."

Nice guy, that Andrew.

Part Four: Don't be Fooled

So what have we seen on this little ramble through the madness and deception of human beings? Well, that's what we have seen. Humans are susceptible to being had, to being deceived, especially through the medium of ideologies and belief systems. Through these they are rendered crazy, they are like putty in the hands of the unscrupulous. This is true in modern times just as it was in 1930s Germany. The methods are the same. It's a large part of how the world 'works' (or malfunctions).

There is one more thing. I am reminded of what Don Juan says to Carlos Castaneda about the flyers, his mind-warping equivalent of the archons, the agents of deception. "The predators' mind is baroque, contradictory, morose, filled with the fear of being discovered any minute now." And this is the nub - or at least one nub. Nazi ideology, climate panic, political correctness: they are all built on lies, untruths, or occasional half-truths at best. They are not real; they are fabricated deceptions, and their makers live in constant fear of being found out. That's why they're so keen to police the internet, it's touch-and-go for them.

And a lie requires extraordinary energy to be maintained. Just imagine how much effort goes into keeping these deceptions alive, every day, it's completely relentless. In the worlds of politics, bureaucracies international, national, and local, the media, the schools. It needs constant input of energy, to keep the lies going. An untruth is an untruth, and it cannot sustain itself forever against the fragments of intelligence remaining among human beings. In the end it cannot win, it cannot win....

Photos: Top: Weekly market at Freiburg, Germany, 1930 (alamy stock photo)
             Centre: Glasgow in 20 years time according to modern theories
             Bottom: Ursula von der Leye                

And a couple of video clips to go along with the writing. First up, Naomi Seibt. Unlike St Greta, she is a smart girl, a good model for young people in her independent and intelligent thinking. We could do with a few more young people like Naomi. Second is another great presentation from Tony Heller. Here he demonstrates one way in which data fraud, misleading and manipulating people under the guise of 'science', takes place.
 
www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8dXpe1Pp6Q

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8455KEDitpU