If the above relationship between charge and gravity is correct, then it would it explain why stars orbit the centre of galaxies faster than they should (they are highly charged objects) and there would be no need for the dark matter that civilian scientists believe exists but cannot find. It would also mean that we could construct craft that could easily take us to other planets and other stars. Our era of using ludicrously primitive chemical rockets would be over. It would also mean, theoretically, that other races from all those planets around all those stars could easily visit us, once they'd developed this technology.
Many people might think that if gravity is all about positive and negative charge, we'd all have anti-gravity saucer craft by now. There are good reasons why our civilians scientists would not be getting the chance to give us craft that make petrol-guzzling machines obsolete. I'll leave the details of that for now. Nevertheless, if gravity and charge are linked, then a lot of aliens should be visiting our planet. This is a powerful piece of information and since 'knowledge itself is power', to quote the brilliant scientist and diplomat Sir Francis Bacon, it's hardly surprising us ordinary folks are being kept away from it.
When it comes to reports of aliens visiting us, a lot of us will immediately think about stories such as 'the glowing light got me and then I woke up on a laboratory table and these evil looking greys were experimenting on me and they shoved something in my brain and in my eye and left me by the side of the road!' This sort of event may certainly happen; it's certainly the idea promoted in entertainment like the 'X' files, but it can't be the only way humans could interact with aliens. If aliens are visiting our planet, some of them would logically be nice individuals. Any other view smacks of hysterical paranoia.
So, logically, if all the above elements are correct, then there should be accounts of nice alien visits. Fortunately, there are and here's one to watch. Steve Boucher comes across as a genuine, peaceful, honest guy. He might be lying all the way through the interview but his non-verbal behaviour, his speech patterns and his demeanour all point to him being entirely sincere (as far as I can tell). His account is believable, fascinating and at times, very funny. Definitely recommended.
Here's the follow up interview with Q&A:
For example, our zodiac includes two key figures, the Scorpion and the Centaur Archer. The Scorpion’s sting-tail and the end of the Centaur Archer’s arrow stand over the centre of our galaxy. This is a very surprising coincidence considering the centre of our galaxy is invisible to us because of intervening dust clouds. LaViolette uses these facts, along with the geological record, ice core studies and the stories of indigenous peoples, to put forward the idea that, in around 12,000 BC, our planet was hit by such a wave from the centre of our galaxy. This wave of high energy particles pushed a vast amount of interstellar dust into our inner solar system, against the solar-wind which usually keeps out such dust. This vast amount of dust caused chaos on Earth and triggered the catastrophic end of our ice age.
It’s interesting to note that Dr LaViolette uses an idea in his book that I also put forward, years ago. The idea, to put it simply, is that the Book of Revelations is not about our future, as it says in its introduction, but is instead an account of a cataclysm in our ancient past. LaViolette points out that the events described in Revelations match exactly what would occur when a vast incursion of dust and disturbed comets entered our inner solar system and hit Earth.
I definitely recommend ‘Earth on Fire’. It is a bit over-wordy in places and I did skim a few pages here and there but overall, it’s a fascinating, well-researched and compelling theory.
First line from this year's winner (Tor Freeman):
It's interesting to see what the competition organisers are looking for nowadays. Last year's winner was a milkman's desire to win his local Tall Milkman competition. This seems, I think, to show that Cape are currently after low-key, heartwarming stories about everyday life. Both stories are also illustrated in a style that's akin to a children's book illustration, making them accessible to a larger age group.
Sample line from last year's winner (Matthew Dooley):
Articles about this announcement have appeared in most of the newspapers and the BBC. The project organisers have also produced a very good video describing their work:
The Guardian has an extensive article describing what the teams found. Unfortunately, in the article one of the team members is quoted as saying:
“What we are sure about is that this big void is there, that it is impressive, and was not expected by any kind of theory,” said Tayoubi.
In fact, the French researcher Jean-Pierre Houdin developed a solid and well-grounded theory, years ago, that predicted that there had to be hidden chambers inside the Great Pyramid.
Dr Laviolette is qualified and experienced as a physicist and engineer and shows it with his in-depth descriptions in the book of sub-quantum kinetics, an alternative theoretical description of the fundamental behaviour of reality. On the science direct website, there is an article by Laviolette describing this theory, entitled 'The Cosmic Ether: Introduction to Subquantum Kinetics'. The abstract reads:Read More...
This, I think, is a big problem with people; if you talk to someone about something that's outside their comfort zone, their 'sphere of expectation', more likely than not, they'll think you're mad. Bertrand Russell was wise in saying; “do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” Unfortunately, it won't stop you getting locked up.
I'm therefore keen to explore non-physical phenomena scientifically. As part of this exploration, here's a very strange experience I had a few years ago. Read More...
2) The Annunaki were on Earth in ancient times for mining purposes.
3) The Annunaki created a hybrid human, a mixture of themselves and Homo Habilis, four-hundred-thousand years ago, so that they had a worker available to do the back-breaking mining activity.
I was very sceptical about those three ideas for rational reasons. Firstly, I concluded that point 1 wasn't true, as there was no evidence at that time of an eccentric, long-orbit planet around our solar system. I was also very sceptical of point 2 and 3, because I felt that a race from another planet would find the mining and transport of raw metals to another planet far too costly in terms of resources for the activity to be worthwhile.
But this scepticism may have been misplaced. Recently, several scientific developments seem to have boosted Sitchin’s theory. There has been the discovery that a planet around our sun may be a reality, thanks to the studies of orbital anomalies in the Kuiper Belt, the large region of comets on the edge of our solar system. There has also been the genetic discovery that the changes in genes required to turn Homo Habilis into Homo Sapiens are so extensive, specialised and mutually dependent that it’s almost impossible that they could have occurred purely through natural selection. Thirdly, just last week, a scientific report was published describing the discovery of Homo Sapiens bones in an ancient mine in Morocco, bones that have been reliably dated to 300,000 BC, two-hundred-thousand years before Homo Sapiens was supposed to have developed in Africa.
All the above three scientific discoveries are ground-breaking and seem strong enough to force the scientific establishment to rewrite their understanding of major subjects. What’s more, all three discoveries support Sitchin’s theories about the Annunaki. If these ‘gods’ did create a hybrid annunaki-habilis person, Homo Sapiens, four-hundred-thousand years ago, then it would explain both the bizarre acceleration of genetic changes from Habilis to Sapiens and the presence of Homo Sapiens in a mine, three-hundred-thousand years ago.
Because of these developments, I put aside my earlier misgivings and read Sitchin’s book. I’m very pleased I did because it’s an excellent scholarly study. Sitchin’s decision to learn cuneiform as a way to really find out what the Sumerians were saying is exemplary. The book is also very readable and engaging. His ideas may still sound crazy but at the moment, from a scientific point of view, Sitchin’s theory is actually the most plausible theory for our current state on this planet. An ancient, technically advanced race colonising Earth half a million years ago, then hybridising Homo Habilis to create a worker-slave, is actually the most plausible explanation of why Homo Sapiens is here, how our civilisation arrived, appearing from literally nothing in 4,000BC, and where we need to look for answers and further understanding of ourselves and our past. I therefore heartily recommend the book.
The star of the book is definitely the Mitchell-Hedges quartz, rock-crystal skull. Not only is the skull the most well-known skull, the book includes a report on analysis of the skull by the Hewlett Packard laboratories. The staff there used their skills in fabricating pure quartz crystals for electronic devices to analyse the skull's construction and internal make-up. Their report makes it clear that the skull isn't just a carved piece of rock; its piezo-electric properties, prismatic properties, purity and crystal patterning clearly belong to something created by a very advanced culture. And yet, it was found in an ancient Mayan pyramid. Read More...
Huxley tellingly stated towards the end of the interview that the ideal result for the controllers is that the masses they control don't know they're enslaved or that they even like their servitude and enslavement. This is not such a far-fetched situation. Tragically, many slaves in history have rejected freedom and returned to slavery because slavery guarantees food and lodging; freedom doesn't. For those that contest that we are still free, it's worth noting that even the mainstream press now accept that our emails are read, our internet browsing is collated and examined, we are identified automatically on CCTV, our social networking profiles are psychologically analysed, our smartphones movements are tracked, we can be detained without access to a lawyer for a month, we can be legally watched without evidence being required. The list is long. Some say that this keeps us safe but from what? Fear is a great controller, as Goering himself once pointed out. Read More...
The interview includes an absolute gem of a comment from John:
"If people can't control their own emotions, then they have to start trying to control other people's behaviour."
I very much agree with John's point that a culture of not wishing to upset people becomes a dangerous form of censorship. I talked about free speech in a previous blog post and emphasised how important it is for people to be able to say virtually anything because without that freedom, we are very close to a society with many of the features of 1984.
For those readers that think upsetting someone is always bad, here is a scenario: You find out that your best friend's wife is having an affair. If you tell your best friend, he will be very upset but many people would agree that you should tell him regardless because he will eventually, after gaining a greater understanding of what is going on in his life, appreciate what you've done even though it has brought him a period of misery. Upsetting one or more people because you care about them and that you believe they need to know that news can be applied to many other matters, of greater and lesser importance. It might not make you very popular but if you instead put popularity before moral duty, that places you in the realm of sociopathic narcissists and/or cowards. It's the unpopular, difficult but caring actions that help move us forward as a species. Long may they continue.
‘I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to my death your right to say it’.
In other words, we must value free speech more than eradicating unpleasant comments. Free speech doesn’t just refer to the right of people to say popular things, it is a right for people to say whatever they want to say. Some jewish and secular people in the U.K. may be offended by Livingstone’s comments but he is stating a well-documented historical fact; Hitler did do a deal in the early 1930’s that helped Zionists settle in Israel. Whatever the implications are of this event, it did happen.
Timothy Good has explained in many books, there is an enormous amount of evidence all around our planet of human encounters with UFOs. It's certainly true that many of those encounters have little physical evidence and rely for a large part on eye-witness testimony. Such reports can therefore be dismissed as too thin for serious analysis, but there are also a very large number of reports that have many respectable witnesses and a host of supporting evidence, for example the UFO encounter in Rendlesham Forest. It is also clear that military forces around the world are grabbing as much of the physical evidence as they can and censoring reports before they reach the mainstream media. This is especially true of the United States military who have soldiers in more than 150 countries around the world (considering there are only officially 196 countries in total, this is a huge slice). If we also consider the simple fact that most Western media outlets will not publish anything that is marked classified, for sensible reasons, It is hardly surprising that if the U.S. military decides to put a lid on the UFO phenomena, it would become a fringe and murky subject. Read More...
1) Assume that UFOs are real devices but are not defying the laws of physics, that they are functioning machines, albeit advanced ones.
2) Collate observations on UFOs, especially observations carried out by skilled personnel, such as military observers and engineers.
3) Use the collated information to identify patterns of behaviour by the UFOs, their emissions (radiation etc), their weight (ground imprints) and any and all factual evidence that can be used to deduce the mode of their operation.
By doing this, Paul Hill came up with fascinating and scientifically sound possibilities as to how the UFOs operate and whether or not it is feasible for those craft to have come from planets around other stars. Read More...
Box 202, 61 Victoria Road, Surbiton, Surrey, KT6 4JX, United Kingdom
The email option is still available but I think a physical address has the benefits of being a) fun, especially if people send hand-written correspondence (to which I will definitely reply), b) popular with anyone who's become unhappy with the increasing lack of digital privacy in our modern world, and c) possibly more reliable. Spam and junk filters can play havoc with one-off electronic messages.
Fortunately, there are some people who are interested in the field of UFOs, mind over matter, spirits and other officially 'crank' topics, who do have a solid scientific understanding. One of them is Dr Tom Valone. Below is a talk he gave at the X-Conference a few years back on the subject of advanced propulsion systems, UFOs and what their flight behaviour (as far as can be observed) may be telling us about what is possible in terms of interstellar transportation.
During the talk, Dr Valone touches on a physics matter that has intrigued me for many years. He explains that the perceived ability of some unidentified flying craft to execute high-speed, right-angle turns indicates that their designers have developed technology that reduces or negates inertial mass. Dr Valone points out in his talk that it may be possible to reduce inertial mass by creating a very-high-voltage electromagnetic environment. Traditionally, inertial mass and gravitational mass for an object are assumed to always stay the same - this is known as the Equivalence Principle - but this assumption may be flawed. In certain exotic systems, involving high voltages, the inertial mass, possibly created by the object's interaction with the vacuum energy field, could be reduced.
Interestingly, I explored this possibility in an article a few years ago but not with regard to UFOs. Instead, I postulated that stars, being high-voltage, high-pressure, high-temperature plasma balls, may have a much lower inertial mass than their gravitational mass. This would explain why stars orbit the centres of their galaxies much faster than they should, a phenomenon that has caused mainstream physics to conclude that the universe is full of dark matter. I'll try and mention this interesting idea to Dr Valone; he may find it fascinating! :-)
Isn't it fascinating? What is that device? I have no idea but it does seem to possess an ability to hover and move through the air without any need for wings or rockets or a jet engine or propellers even a gas bag. In a sense, it's the best UFO I've ever seen footage evidence for because it is completely alien. No one would come up with such a flying device. This sort of encounter I think shows why it's so hard to be a responsible science-fiction writer, because there seems to be advanced stuff out there that makes no sense at all, so how can one write believably about it? I think I'll stick to writing stories about people in metal boxes; it's so much easier.
The progress of the researchers has a familiar ring. As has often been the case when enthusiasts have tried to discover the secrets of the Giza site, one person has almost always obstructed their efforts. Zahi Hawass, the head of Egyptian Antiquities in Cairo at that time, first stated categorically that there were no underground chambers at the Giza site, even though the researchers had found and photographed underground chambers. He then barred the entrance to the temple concerned. He followed that up by taking a film crew down those same passages but made no effort to explore further. This tactic of Hawass's, of rubbishing theories and then blocking access to the site so that no one can explore further, has occurred multiple times. For example, after Jean-Pierre Houdin developed a sound theory of an inner ramp within the Great Pyramid, he went to Giza and discovered a collapsed corner of the pyramid wall, high up, exactly where an inner ramp could have weakened the pyramid's outer shell. Houdin had a quick look and then rapidly found the site barred to any access. Since that time, no one has been allowed to explore that collapsed corner. Similar events may happen again. Hawass is currently not the head of Egyptian Antiquities, possibly having been sacked (again), but it is possible he may be reinstated, which has also happened before.
I'll keep plugging away whenever possible. In the meantime, do enjoy the above documentary.
The new BBC article references an earlier article which is also very useful, as that article describes the general effect of industrial detergents on our skin. The explanation supports my conclusion that the skin of my hands went clammy when exposed to SLS and other potent industrial chemicals and pollutants.
I do hope people with mouth ulcers and clammy hands hear about this evidence and try themselves to rid their homes of SLS products; those maladies are no fun to have and they can really ruin your day. Funnily enough, there has been a down-side for me after changing to an SLS-free life. Nowadays, because my hands are generally dry in the home, I have to lick my fingers before holding my guitar plectrum. Because I spent so many years playing guitar with damp hands, I can't get used to playing with dry hands and I have to 'wet them' myself to play properly. Isn't life strange!
Sadly, the documentary also reports that attempts in New Zealand to highlight this new evidence have been deliberately ignored and suppressed, to the point of authorities banning further excavation and classifying scientific discoveries. Yet again, it would seem that certain white males in power in the Western World are making very sure that a flawed version of our history is enforced. As Orwell once said; 'He who controls the present writes the past'.
It's available from all good bookshops and is a delight. Buy it, read it from cover to cover, laugh and be fascinated. After that, give it to someone you love, while downplaying the fact that you've actually read it first, all the way through, and pretend instead that you always had them in mind when you bought the book [Note: To do this effectively, do not read it in the bath].
Sceptical viewers may conclude that the story is a fake and that Dean is severely distorting the story to support his agenda, or simply lying. Personally, I can see is no evidence that he is lying. Also, there is a terrible danger in assuming someone is lying to you, just to suit your own belief system; it's called paranoia. I find Dean's experience very interesting; it doesn't prove anything but it's a fascinating story nevertheless.
Dear Mr Orwell,
It was very kind of you to tell your publishers to send me a copy of your book. It arrived as I was in the middle of a piece of work that required much reading and consulting of references; and since poor eyesight makes it necessary for me to ration my reading, I had to wait a long time before being able to embark on ‘Nineteen eight-four’.
I haven't included psychology experiments showing 'psi' effects, such as work done by Daryl Bem, Robert Jahn and others; I think they're better off in their own list. I also haven't included experiments about cognitive bias, although there are lots of interesting ones for that subject (e.g. anchoring bias, halo effect, priming, framing etc). My favourite cognitive bias example at the moment is the 'UP TO 50% OFF' sale signs we see here in Britain all the time. Many people will see these signs and expect items inside to be 30% off or 40%. In fact, the sign does not state this at all. In fact, what the sign says is exactly the same as saying; 'NO MORE THAN 50% OFF.' Imagine what the customer would think if he or she saw a sign like that stuck on the shop window? Read More...
The amazing thing is that while all the cards were eventually identified with great confidence, no one noticed that there was anything out of ordinary in the deck. People saw a black four of hearts with red hearts. In other words, their expectations about what playing cards should look like determined what they actually saw. When the researchers increased the amount of time that the cards were displayed, some people eventually began to notice that something was amiss, but they did not know exactly what was wrong. One person, while directly gazing at a red six of spades, said; “That’s the six of spades but there’s something wrong with it - the black spade has a red border.”
As the display time increased even more, people became more confused and hesitant. Eventually, most people saw what was before their eyes. But even when the cards were displayed for forty times the length of time needed to recognise normal playing cards, about 10 percent of the color-reversed playing were never correctly identified by any of the people! Read More...
In this youtube video, which I found on the interesting website www.topdocumentaryfilms.com, VICE host Shane Smith interviews Snowden and talks about what can be done to stop someone hacking your smartphone and recording everything you do, including what you say and where you go. Snowden gives some very interesting advice on the matter, along with comments on the broader matter of civil liberties.
I thought I'd add a few thoughts on the 'how not to be monitored by secret groups' topic. As I've got a computer science degree, plus professional experience, I do have some useful knowledge on the matter. Firstly, Snowden is absolutely right that if your smartphone is hacked, you'll have a very hard time discovering the fact. To be honest, if you are concerned about being snooped on, the only safe smartphone is no smartphone. Use random pay-phones if possible. Use old phones that are barely sufficient for calls and messages, as it'll be harder for snoopers to install useful eavesdropping software. These are the only safe-ish options. I've blogged before about the potential power of smartphones to hypnotise people while they sleep (which sounds outlandish but is perfectly feasible) and so I'm a big fan of minimum or no smartphone usage for anyone worried that they are being 'got at'.
When it comes to laptops, it is still very difficult to spot hacking and eavesdropping but there are ways to check if it's occurring. If you're connected to the internet via a router or switch, watch the packet activity light on the router. If it's chattering away when you've turned everything off to do with the internet, something funny is going on. Unplug the power to the laptop and work off its battery. If the battery is going down surprisingly quickly when all you're doing is typing an article, it's possible the laptop is sending information about you wirelessly while hiding that fact from your desktop status icons. (Clandestine groups may have hacked your laptop but they still need power to run their apps). Shut your laptop down when you're not using it; this shortens the time available to secret groups to hack your computer. You can also check your system logs to see if your computer was booted up when you weren't around. Turn on your firewall and turn off bluetooth, if possible. These acts don't guarantee that you won't be hacked (far from it!) but they do make it harder for anyone who's trying. Ultimately, assume that everything you put on your laptop or smartphone will be monitored. If you end up in a situation where you do need to hide information, store it in your head and pass it on verbally by whispering into someone's ear in a nightclub; that should be relatively safe. :-)
One final note. A lot of people respond to Snowden's revelations with 'I don't care if they're watching us, I've got nothing to hide!' For those people, I would say; 'you have nothing to hide from moral people but what if those people turned into Nazis or get taken over by Nazis?' The French Underground was rightly admired for their work in the Second World War. They'd have had a terrible time doing anything if France had introduced comprehensive surveillance before the War, for any reason. Snowden calls this problem 'turnkey tyranny' and he's right. For anyone not concerned about this threat, I'd check out the latest news from the U.S. Presidential elections…
There are one or two errors in the book. For example, Radin comments that there isn't any solid research on NDE's or Near Death Experiences and that we have to rely on anecdotal stories. This isn't correct; Dr Pim Van Lommel carried out a fascinating study of NDE's in his cardiac ward, which he describes in his book Consciousness Beyond Life, which I've previously reviewed. I'm not criticising Dr Radin, as it's highly likely Dr Van Lommel's book came out after my edition of 'The Noetic Universe', but I thought it was worth mentioning.
At the end of 'The Noetic Universe', Radin talks enthusiastically about the growing interest in psi by ordinary people and is hopeful that its solid scientific basis which eventually cause psi to be accepted by the scientific establishment. He feels that the inertia, cognitive dissonance and an inability of senior scientists to change their mindset has been holding it back up to now. Unfortunately, after studying the subject for many years, I don't think this is the case. Radin wisely describes the huge benefits to human-kind if we develop our latent or semi-latent psi abilities but he misses a key point; any group that has already developed its psi-abilities will have a huge advantage over everyone else, enabling it to generate great power and wealth. That group would be likely to then work very hard to make darn sure that no one else developed such psi abilities, in particular remote viewing (a skill discussed in Radin's book). I've explored this scenario in my psi earth articles. It would be great if Radin is right and I am wrong - I would like very much like that his hopes to come true - but with our current social structures, which I've described in my article 'why psychopaths and secret clans rule us all', I think the latter is more likely to be true. Hey ho.
Overall, I do recommend 'The Noetic Universe' for anyone who wishes to read a thorough, scientific, clear description of the evidence that our minds do affect reality. If you want something that covers that area but is more fun, covers a wider territory and has less graphs, I heartily recommend my book 'How science shows that almost everything important we've been told is wrong.' Yep, it's a blatant plug but give me a break; this is my website. ;-)
The more important the topic, the more erroneous the official explanation.
This trend seems to be true with regard to how reality comes into being, the origins of the humans race, the origins of civilisation, the reason behind our major wars, how our leaders are chosen, major tragedies and others. This doesn't mean that all conspiracy theories are true - some of them are pure fancy - but it does make the old adage knowledge is power ring true. In many ways, it is logically inevitable that ourselves - the masses - are being lied to by at least some of the groups in power. We are clearly on a very violent planet where psychopaths hold great power, enough to obliterate nearly all of us (the events of 2016 would, I think, have made this clear). These groups and individuals, by their very nature, want as much power and control as they can get. It is therefore inevitable that they would do their best to make sure that the people they control have as little empowering information as possible.
A very interesting video documentary on youtube seems to agree with this view. It is called 'Everything is a rich man's trick'. It's three-and-a-half hours long, which is way too long for a youtube documentary and it could definitely have benefitted from being shortened or split into two or three smaller documentaries. I very much enjoyed the first two hours and found some of the material eye-opening, even for someone like me who's read/viewed a lot of material on the subject. I wasn't totally convinced by all the ideas/theories put forward, there are clearly at least a few factual mistakes in the documentary and the last hour becomes quite erratic and polemical but it is still an impressive piece of research.
The documentary focuses on the connection between the Nazis and wealthy industrialists in the U.S. and the JFK assassination. Some of its content reinforces the idea I discussed in my last blog post that top-down hierarchies can inevitably help secret societies gain control of major institutions, companies and the military. Some of the content is simply jaw-dropping.
Unfortunately, the presenter's call for revolution at the end of the documentary is, I think, naive. Revolutions are very risky endeavours, can involve huge bloodshed and often don't bring improvements to a country as they can be hijacked by very shadowy characters. A far better plan is to systematically improve a country's institutions, such as was done in post-war Britain. The demise of that wonderful programme is another story but I'll blog about that later; one (or four) grand conspiracies is probably enough for one day! :-)