harmonic continuum theory part1
HARMONIC CONTINUUM THEORY.
The New Physics and Cosmology
PART 1. The old Paradigm.
It would be fair to say that for the last hundred years, the human
race has not made any progress in the understanding of life and
the Cosmos. Even copious technology, which has greatly
improved our understanding of the particle physics that runs it
all, has remained paradox ridden and incomplete. Thus far, it is
only by the greatest bit of luck that the misled thankfully haven't
succeeded in completing a black hole of any magnitude in the
Hollywood and the film industry has ceaselessly presented The
Teutonic eggheads of post World War II and made the Germanic
contribution to science legendary. The popular Hollywood
understanding of the mad scientific genius always has a German accent: Einstein, Von Neumann, Heisenberg, Max Plank, etc. The only problem
with this myth of supremacy is that it has led us all nowhere for
70 years and is a load of old baloney.
Einstein and the establishment agreed in the late 1930's, in
Copenhagen, that having a paradox at the heart of physics was a
good idea. Also, that the speed of light should be fixed at a
constant and that there was no ether or grainy bits in space that
would hold traveling photons up. Logically therefore the sky
should be white at night noted Olbers c.1920.
A paradox suggested the establishment. Olbers Paradox.
An entire century of human evolution has been lost by that
nonsense and denial.
Did you know that the reason why the sky isn't white at night is a
real paradox and scientific mystery? Because if Albert Einstein
and cronies have rationally decided, that there is nothing holding
the passage of light through the cosmos up (i.e. that there is no
ether), then they would also expect the sky to be completely
white at night. The dark night sky disproves Einstein's Theory of
We know the sky is black at night and that was the paradox
noted by Olbers in 1920. Something is holding up the light to
make it dark, and that whole paradox is really proof for the ether
that Einstein and the establishment wanted so badly to ignore.
Of course people will answer to Olbers that the Universe has
been measured finite, but how could we ever rationally say that
when we have never successfully measured the Dark Matter within it.
We build TV's and computers or any other black box, yet our
understanding of the vital processes at the heart of it all is
actually less than nothing. If we look closely, and we have to
(because no one wants to admit it to you), there are paradoxes
not just at the heart of physics, but at the heart of everything we
think we know about the universe.
Our logic isn't logical, [Göedel], our philosophy of arithmetic is
about nothing in particular, [Frege] and our physics is an
ignorant tragedy. [Superstring theory]. The odd thing is that the
thirty or so really crippling paradoxes are all really the very same
one, but just dressed up differently in the specialist language of
each discipline. That is, every paradox could be solved by taking
into account its interaction with the bigger picture. The very
opposite of how every scientist today has been trained to think.
Coming back to physics and cosmology, (because we have to. .
.well somebody does anyway) our particle physics today is a
gargantuan monstrosity of mathematical nonsense that will
never produce any results. It's called super-strings, and at the
heart of all the real problems of 21st century academic physics,
is the in-built failure of Einstein and his theories of relativity.
How much irrational nonsense and social engineering has been
written on the back of the problems of uncertainty posed by the
mathematical nonsense and paradoxes in physics? The
nonsense of quantum physics is being used to justify all sort of
impulsive and irrational social leaps and experiments. Whole
theories of human behavior and the occult are based upon these
foundations of sand.
Let's be clear, though, about what I'm saying. Yes, there is
plenty of scientific evidence and results to talk about particles
and show what particles can do. But current quantum physics
and super-strings is a model or a construct. It is a vehicle on
which to drive forward; it is a frame on which to hang the
experimental results. There are better frames and better
vehicles. However, what quality of vehicle are we talking about
when we talk of quantum physics? The answer has to be a
THE FAILURE OF THE QUANTUM MODEL
The background to these late 19th century theories, however, fell
apart without the tools of massive computations in turbulence
and complexity needed to precisely measure the material and its
Newton's 'unifying theory of gravity' did not hold the unity of the
universe together. Hooper predicts emergence as a
counterbalance to gravity, but believes that stars such as the
sun were the source on the basis of the results published by
Michelson and Morley in 1887 CE in Phil. Mag. December 1887.
Hooper on numerous occasions predicts true, but unfortunately,
he went with Lord Kelvin's 'smoke rings' and 'linkages' instead
of Hill's 'sphere'.
Without the insight of 'compression' from emergence and
accountability for particle recombination and formation, he did
fail to produce unity, but, to date, he has been the most
advanced particle physicist that the 20th Century has ever seen.
Hennessey's Harmonic Continuum Theory of 2004, however, first
collated in 1991 takes a different approach to scaling and
internal processes within ether. Hooper places emphasis on an
analogy of a Kelvin vortex ring atom that is surrounded by an
elliptical cloud of ether, as he had allegedly seen Michelson-
Morley publish about Earth's ether envelope in 1887.
His unifying force that formed the inside of the vortex was
Newton's gravity, which he called a centripetal force.
If I were using his terminology to explain my theory to him, I
would have stated the exact opposite of his findings.
It should have been the chaos force that caused the particles
His 'centrifugal' force was the work of chaos on the atom at time
2 that threw energy out into turbulence.
It is emergence that drives the atomic compaction that we
discern as 'gravity' and that would make Hooper wrong about the
way that he interpreted atomic gravity and also about the
arrangement of his ideas about physical extremes as perceived
by Newton. e.g. spectra.
This pressure compresses the ether into bigger particles and
pockets that resonate their etheric substrate at time1 with the
activity of transverse waves. This causes electron shells or
'Quantum numbers'. Rather than a fixed number of quantum
shells, however, there are relatively variable empirical results for
the distances between the energy states of these internal waves.
This and other motions and spins and relative displacements
have caused the paradox of non-locality observed by
Heisenberg. . and also by recent physicists who, using
more precise technology were able to manufacture, destroy and
enable whole series of arbitrary particles in a 'particle zoo'.
These particles e.g. charm Quarks, Hadrons, Mesons, Gluons etc
became every difficult to classify or utilize.
The chosen classification system for the smaller scale atomic
components was made counterproductive by the RGB colour
scheme, which is non-intuitive.
The Red Green Blue or RGB colour scheme used to classify
'quarks' does not easily and accurately predict symmetry within
complementary colours and was therefore difficult to analogize
with before attempting to interpret the quark results.
The other difficulty with Quantum Electrodynamics was that it
was not possible to contain and restrict particle sizes within the
theory model. The scaling issue would have required some 'glue'
or 'charm' to keep it all stuck together. This has been practiced
in QED and QCD [Quantum Chromo dynamics] using the laws of
Boolean Algebra which as you may see from the Mathematical
discourse in this work do not all add up.
The law of adding things together A and B to get B and A
produces a set containing A and B for the purposes of calling A
and B a particle class. i.e. commutation e.g. or Abelian sets. Non-
Abelian grouping in gauge theories will produce no rational
standard of relativity whatsoever unless either; the laws of
association or distribution are applied. No other Boolean Rules
provide any rational alternative. i.e. Sum, Product, Absorption.
Also, although Planck's Constant is directly related to frequency
of emissions and even though it is also chained to the
Einsteinian light speed it is insufficient in accounting for all the
basic factors involved in the energy exchange.
'.. unlike the halfpenny, however, the value of the quantum is not
fixed, but is related to the frequency of radiation which, by its
emission or absorption, causes the change in energy..'
[Brown GI, 'Introduction to Physical Chemistry SI Edition', pub.
Longmans 1975, ISBN 0-582-32121-X, page 105.]
Planck  in not measuring the rates of emergence of newly
introduced created material had omitted a second construct out
of his equation. Hooper of 1903, had, in fact, a more
sophisticated grasp of the problems within physics that were to
continue for the next 100 years.
The relative turbulences observed within particle interaction e.g.
'Jet particles' '.. a system of particles produced during particle
reactions at high energies. The jets are interpreted as fragments
of elementary objects such as quarks and gluons.'
Fritzsch H, 'Quarks, the stuff of matter' pub. Pelican 1982. ISBN
The various theories of the weak and strong electromagnetic
interactions and their 'invariant symmetry transformations
whose effects vary from point to point in space time' [Fritzsch,
1982 p.217.] are called Gauge Theories.
The field theory as it operates and diminishes by power law
between quarks has been noted in terms of degrees of
Hooper in 1903 p.221. had already noted the value of Kepler's
Third law in this respect using a holistic planetary analogy.
'.. Whewell on this matter in his Inductive Sciences states that
'Kepler assumed that a certain force or virtue resided in the sun
by which all bodies all bodies within his influence were carried
round him. He illustrated the nature of the force in various ways,
comparing it to light, and to the magnetic power that it
resembles in the circumstances of operating at a distance, and
also of exercising a feebler influence as the distance increases.
Another image to which he referred suggested a much more
conceivable kind of mechanical action by which the celestial
motions might be produced, viz, a current of fluid matter
circulating round the sun, and carrying the planets with it like a
boat in a stream.' Whewell adds: 'A vortex fluid constantly
whirling round the sun, kept in this whirling motion by the sun
itself, and carrying the planets round the sun by its revolution,
as a whirlpool carries straws, could be readily understood, and
though it appears to have been held by Kepler that this current
and Vortex were immaterial, he ascribes to it the power of
overcoming the inertia of bodies, and of putting them and
keeping them in motion,' [Hooper, 1902, p.221-222.]
Kepler's Third Law as stated by Hooper p.37 and 33 'gives the
relation between the (orbit, or) periodic time of a planet and its
distance from its star as: the squares of the periodic times of
planets are proportional to the cubes of their mean distance. i.e.
p.38 .. if we have the periodic time (orbit) of any two planets, and
the mean distance of either, we can find out the mean distance of
the other by simple proportion.'
In the bubble chambers of the creative particle physicists,
however, the Jet and Charm particles gradually eroding the
tenacity of quantum numbering were producing an assortment of
'Flavour' particles locked into 'infrared slavery' with no particular
reason to be going or staying. In the absence of the local and
temporal emergence gradient figures for that year as some sort
of constant to put into Planck's equation - an additional burden
on the already [a priori] etherically burdened speed of light that
would additionally impact on existing matter - they were going to
need 'Glueballs' [Fritzsch H] and 'Spaceballs' [Brooks M] to keep
it hanging together.
In Cosmology, there would also be cosmic bleeding to account
for where large tracts of our cosmic bubble would leech through
an opaque membrane by osmosis - as opposed to the singularity
of transfer created by a black hole.
Andrew Pickering in his 'Constructing Quarks - a sociological
history of particle physics', pub 1986. Edinburgh University
Press. ISBN 0-85224-535-1 page 413 refers .. 'Twentieth-century
science has a grand and impressive story to tell. Anyone framing
a view of the world has to take account of what it has to say ... it
is a non-trivial fact about the world that we can understand it and
that mathematics provides the perfect language for physical
science: that, in a word, science is possible at all. (Polkinghorne
Such assertions about science are commonplace in our culture.
In many circles they are taken to be incontestable. But the
history of HEP (high-energy physics) suggests that they are
mistaken. It is unproblematic that scientists produce accounts of
the world that they find comprehensible: given their cultural
resources, only singular incompetence could have prevented
members of the HEP community producing an understandable
version of reality at any point in their history. And, given their
extensive training in sophisticated mathematical techniques, the
preponderance of mathematics in particle physicists' accounts
of reality is no more hard to explain than the fondness of ethnic
groups for their native language.'
This problem also extends into logic where the brick wall of the
arbitrary has held up successful evolution in computing e.g.
Turing's Recursion and Gödel's incompleteness of logic
paradoxes. W.V Quine argues that 'the traditional concept of
linguistic meaning should be rooted out of respectable, scientific
thinking and enquiry ..' Theories of meaning: after the use theory
p.50. (Copeland BJ and Stoothoff RH - criticising.)
It was easy to see their point of view in this work.
'Radically translating' to my own analogy ...
e.g. Mr Quene goes to Africa deep in the jungle - does something
very very bad to the chiefs daughter - 'gouranga', but Mr Quene
asserts that he is always, absolutely going to be safe and sound
every single time he does that on the basis that although he
cannot understand a word they are saying that he cannot
interpret their intentions towards him and their ultimate meaning
to his life. i.e. 'these observations will never narrow down the
range of possible translations to just one.' [Copeland and
Beyond a doubt then, unless Mr Quene is tooled up with superior
firepower in the American Traditions of Charlton Weston - AND
he can get to the 'Forbidden Zone' in time in possession of a
mean looking monkey suit he isn't going to leave that village
alive - even if the natives cannot agree what the order of
precedence should be for the expiation of their ritual methods of
W V Quine, however, in his book 'The Philosophy of Logic edn.2
pub. 1970, Harvard University Press, ISBN 0-674-66563-5 on page
69, also displays a rather worrying occupation with the magical
properties of 'new maths' - namely 'Boolean Algebra' though he
doesn't name the rules of; sum, product, absorption as useless
or the rules of; commutation, association and distribution as
With the rules of semantics broken by the useless Boolean rules
and also endorsed by Logicians it would become difficult to
imagine how anybody could make any sense of their particle
physics results whatsoever.
In comparison, the amount of Rolls Royce genius that has been
repetitively ignored for at least the past hundred years by the
establishment, has been criminal. We had Maxwell and Faraday and Kelvin in the 19th Century, Tesla and Brown in the early 20th Century and De Palma in the 1990's. Also, a whole gaggle of others; all these people knew how physics really worked and how to tap
into the really free energy of the cosmos in addition to
interplanetary space travel. Of course, this was all against the
wishes of the Einsteinian theorists and the oil companies.
But, if you thought that the problem was a modern one, well have
I got news for you. Having developed and rediscovered Tesla's
Theory of Environmental Energy  and how free energy
works, I studied the principles of philosophy of science, and
developed a new scientific world-view. I found ways to argue in
philosophy that could educate modern scientific thinkers away
from the paradoxes by using the same jargon that they use, but
in a different way.
I was trying to get them to adopt a 'holistic' approach. Boy, what
a waste of ten years that was. The cosmos runs on harmony,
resonance, musical scales, and the mathematics of wave theory
and 'eightness'. It is definitely not a coincidence that the Chinese
I CHING symbolism is made up like it is, ancient mankind
allegedly flew ships through the sky called Vimanas. It is exactly
the same symbolism used inside every modern computer chip
renamed as Boolean Arithmetic.
So, there is the look of real antiquity about this truth, but it gets
worse. Having been an avid follower of the Chaos Theory
(coming out of the Santa Fe Institute), I noticed that one of the
fundamental natural laws that seemed to underpin the cosmos
(that nobody wanted to talk about), was 'emergence'.
That 'order emerges out of chaos' was being proved on the
Santa Fe computers, and some conspiracy buffs will tell you that
it is also part of the motto of a very high Masonic degree. This
was the one connection no scientist was trained to ever want,
yet it was the key to understanding everything: unity, Tesla,
time-travel, anti-gravity, possibly even the soul and eternal life.
It was the very cornerstone of reality.
More shocks lay ahead for me, however. Taking a rummage
through a dusty old cupboard in the Edinburgh Theosophical
Society one day, I found this bundle of yellowed paper (dated
1920) with instructions to destroy in the event of the owner's
death. It was an esoteric secret school Illuminati Degree. I
opened up the bundle with glee, but discovered to my horror
(well, it was for my ego), that in those pages was the theory that I
thought I had invented; the theory of 'emergence,' 'threeness'
and harmony, based on Hindu and Sanskrit writings dating back
10,000 BC. [as; 'Logos, Outpourings and Vehicles'. Vol 1 Secret
Doctrine, Blavatsky, HP, 1875, Madras]
As we all know, there is nothing new about real truth, but the
Illuminati Schools have been teaching the reality of science, free
energy and emergence to people for millennia. The Platonic and
Aristotelian school's harmonic math briefly emerged into art
schools during the renaissance, but it never made it into science
and technology. If it had, we could all have been flying antigravity machines in the 16th century---much like the technical designs of the Vimanas of the ancient Hindus, which were preserved in caves written on palm leaves. Presumably, after some cataclysmic Earth change thousands of years BC, that may have sunk what we think of as Atlantis and given the Sphinx 12000 year old water erosion..
The same theories written in Sanskrit have been re-invented time
and time again by bright human scholars. The recent spate of
really, (obviously) good theorists have come to grief looking for
peer acceptance and publication. People like; Peter Plichta
 'prime number code', Ray Tomes  'Tomes harmonic
theory on redshift], Frank Searle , Townsend Brown ,
'bifield-Brown effect', and myself have tried till we're blue in the
face to get scientists to see sense and save the world with
sanity, as did Lord Kelvin in 1903 with his atomic vortex theory
and other late 19th Century contemporaries such as; Boyle [Gas
Laws], Hooper's etheric field theory of 1903.
Thankfully an American book deal obtained through the Internet
from the spirit of free enterprise published a version of my 'free
energy' paper in a 'conspiracist anthology' called 'The Universal
Seduction .com' in 2003 AD.
Many of us today are beguiled by the technological advances of
genetics and computers, maybe even satisfied that the pace of
medicine is just about holding back the tide of new super bugs.
Many of us are happy to listen to the great mathematician,
Stephen Hawkings, speculating badly that the unity will come to
physics in twenty years. We all know that's a pretty safe thing to
say because we may have been hit by Earth changes before
then, and any cronies perpetuating the science conspiracy, will
have passed over before then, anyway.
The reality of the matter, though, is that the crop of modern
science gurus like Hawkings and Dawkins do not give us the
truth. Whether they know the truth and are hiding it from us is
another story. If they were hiding this, they would be criminals
of civilization - stifling the young minds that could save our
However, maybe the basis of the matter is that they are merely
victims of bad peer and non-rigorous peer review.
The new theorists like Plichta, Tomes, Brown, and myself who
have come forward, can argue the most profound and real
scientific arguments, using the highest form of scientific
language and analysis and are willing to be proved wrong. We
satisfy all the criteria for good science: simplicity and prediction,
which is more than can be said for refuted theories like the 'big
bang' and super-strings.
Where, oh where, did we hear that reality is so difficult that it
needs incredible hyper-dimensional mathematics, and ivy towers
to even have the time and inclination to contemplate the
complexities? It is just not true that reality is intuitively complex.
Thousands of scientists, millions of hours, billions of dollars
have been spent, yet no results, no progress has been
forthcoming---just a beckoning Dark Age and a good mortgage.
Those big black holes in our current scientific understanding are
starting to be filled by dark gods and black magic.
A dark age of barbarism and insanity is only a few scientific
Publicly, we may yet see some scientific scholars in the magical
robes of alchemy and they might cite Newton as their paragon of
magic and gravity. He was also an alchemist and Rosicrucian,
but certainly not one to have published all of the truth or to have
been permitted to do so.
The idea of the 'force of gravity' I shall later contend is a
The other problem with making change is that science is really a
masculine preserve and that left-brained emperor is hardly going
to concede that he is not the proprietor of reason. But that's
another problem, that of proving things like UFOs and free
energy to so-called skeptics is a nonsensical pursuit.
The ONE rational contradiction needed to any skeptical premise
of imagination has been furnished one thousand times and all to
One could present pseudo-skeptics with a 'falsification' or proof
and they would not change their point of view. In science, the
very cornerstone doctrine of reasoning (again by a Germanic
philosopher scientist called Karl Popper), would logically
concede that you only need one proof and then the skeptic must
concede the possibility that their skepticism doesn't universally
All over the world, proofs are being presented and nobody wants
to learn of it. Perhaps in secret, the world's top Masonic
scientists could save the world with free energy, using some of
the most ancient knowledge on this planet. Perhaps those
scientists who tried to make this difference, but died young,
(like Bruce De Palma in 1992 AD) will one day be acknowledged
as heroes. Let us hope that there is still a tiny fraction of time left
for the masses on this planet to know truth. Let us also pray that
this 'Alien Master Plan' to cull the ignorant, helpless and
poisoned in mind and body fails. In any event, the secret of timetravel,
dimensional-travel and all the free energy you can use
may be simply garnered with the spin of a magnetic disk. But be
forewarned, every attempt carries an alienating death warning.
If you want to scientifically test the basis of telepathy, harmony
of the spheres and the very nature of the cosmos, get two
acoustic guitars, tune them up and set them so that they face
each other. Strum one guitar and you will notice that the other
guitar starts to resonate in harmony.
If you want to understand how it is that free energy is only a
phone call away, think of a hydroelectric dam. The universe is
full of ether and subatomic particles all buzzing about and
bubbling out all over the place. They are very chaotic and it is a
natural law that out of that swirling vortex, order emerges. Just
like the red spot on the planet Jupiter.
The planetary super storm on Jupiter has a red eye that looks
solid and stable. In fact, the particles of the cosmos are all like
eyes in the energy storms of the cosmos. All of that activity
exerts its own pressure on the fabric of the cosmos, and like the
waters of a hydroelectric dam, they have a pressure against the
When we spin an electromagnetic plate to get free energy as;
Faraday, 1890, De Palma, Brown and numerous others have
done, it is like opening up a sluice in the dam and the weight of
energy pours through, driving our turbine.
If you have ever wondered what it would be like to solve the
most difficult paradox ever known to the minds of the world's
greatest physicists, let's give it a try and see how easy this is.
Scientists cannot figure out whether a particle is a particle or a
wave. As far as they are concerned, it cannot be both.
It is both, however. But, the real question is: What is a particle?
Is it a billiard ball or do we need a more holistic explanation that
says that every particle is part of something much bigger?
That insight would actually help solve the paradox and stop silly
physicists from saying that particles are telepathic. There is little
danger that scientists - who are trained reductionists, will make
that connection, though. Particles really emerge like notes out of
the endlessly playing chaotic symphony.
The chaotic vortex of small and big particles that make up the
cosmos is constant, like an orchestra playing an eternal
symphony. But, it is an orchestra that we cannot technically see,
thus far. Out of this orchestral symphony, ordered notes
continually emerge, like the red spot of Jupiter:- order emerging
out of chaos, waves of particles - like waves of music.
Particles are waves and it is only a paradox [i.e. the collapsing
wave/quantum paradox] if we think that a particle is a finished
article, something that is a completely isolated end product, like
a snooker ball. A reductionist scientist today only sees the
The reality is that a particle is like a musical note that is
continually being played by a violinist, and it can change and
become something else under the right conditions.
Nicola Tesla also saw this, and his Theory of Environmental
Energy was confiscated by the U.S. government. Our snooker
ball could become a tennis ball.
Outrageous idea, but really very organic and sensible. All of
today's experimental results in physics have foundations in
'threeness', e.g. RGB Quarks, and 'eightness', e.g. 'Pauli
Exclusion' and have the arithmetic of harmony. But that never
seems to lead to a simpler understanding of the Cosmos. We
seem to keep getting sillier with our mathematics, never down to
basic harmony and chaos. It's always something bizarre and
The scientific mindset of reductionism strips away all the
necessary complexities and leads us away from holistic
systems; it gives us snooker balls and little disintegrated
components that we can pick up with tweezers. Of course, this
has led to paradoxes everywhere simply because things are
actually so interconnected. Observed processes under
reductionism are yielding contradictions because of their
interdependence on more remote systems beyond the field of
view of the reductionist's blinkers.
The contradiction is that reductionism never made a simple job
out of particle physics. Our very understanding of time and the
cosmos is, in reality, nonsense. Science fiction programs like
Star Trek serve to reinforce the idea that we have to get past the
impossible 'faster than light barrier' to traverse the cosmos.
"If you're at warp Factor 10, you can't go any faster", and as
chief engineer Scott said to Captain Kirk "you cannot change
the laws of physics" at least as far as current science is
concerned. This is all baloney as well. An understanding of the
time, matter and gravity concepts (on the lips of abductees and
'Black Ops' scientists like Dr. Michael Wolf and the basics of the
Secret Science) show us that gravity, time and mass are all one
and the same. In all likelihood, it is easier to travel through time
and dimensions by spinning a magnetic disk, than it is to travel
between distant galaxies with never to be found 'dilithium
crystals' of Star Trek.
One of the main features of interstellar travel (that was
seemingly disclosed by ET's), is that they pull their destination
to themselves. This doesn't sound like Star Trek does it? This is
how it probably works: by taking their ships out of gravity (and
therefore time) and the physical conditions of this dimension (by
getting on a high mountain top of free energy), their destination
seems to swirl closer towards them because distant things look
closer together, i.e. city blocks look very close together from
Earth's orbit. Then, they then drop more easily onto their
destination, with the minimum of physical adjustment, but using
the maximum of free energy.
Right now on this planet - and make no mistake about it - what
passes for science is a perpetuated conspiracy of ignorance.
Everywhere on the Internet, the glories of technology are being
propounded; even the completion of the Human Genome Project
wasn't an act of analytical genius. It was simply a case of
funding enough monkeys, typewriters and petri dishes.
Science itself has turned into an irrefutable priesthood with
popes like Hawking at its head---doctrines that cannot be
overturned and reality that cannot be published. As the 21st
Century progresses, more and more minds are being led into
Scholastic education at universities, schools and colleges
discourage individual brilliance and teach people to become
conduits of vast amounts of data. [Outcomes Based Education].
Unfortunately, most of that data is junk. Philosophy departments
are either closed down or converted into schools of atheism or
nihilism with Spartan ethics and elitist overtones. Everywhere,
the skills of analysis are being discouraged and disowned, while
the plans of the social engineers (that steer the new generations
to their doom) take shape.
Like deja vu, we have seen these plans unfold before during the
industrial revolution and 'dark Satanic mills' of England. There,
in vile working conditions, the slaves of capitalism were chained
to the production and assembly lines, no one ever knowing how
it all worked. It's the same in the 21st Century. The capital of
truth and information falls into 'total compartmentalization',
without anyone ever knowing the whole truth.
Today, science is used against the masses; it has become the
slave of politics and multi-nationals. To avoid introducing a tax
on industrial carbon emissions in the 1990's CE, one group of
scientists, working for the UK Thatcher Government,
pronounced that there was no such thing as global warming.
To save money on cattle feed production, scientists pronounced
it safe to lower the sterilization temperatures of the feed process
this, as a prelude to the CJD epidemic of 'Mad Cow Disease'.
Now the Nazi theories of eugenics once again come to the fore
publicly, as the newly cracked genetic codes of the population
offer multinationals more ways to tax and exploit the population
through insurance, health, education and social engineering
Unfortunately, the same shortsighted science that gave us bad
disconnected physics, will be applied to the science of genetics.
With what results? Everything will be taken out of context, and at
some point, someone will invent a new paradox to explain why
seemingly ordinary genes can make extraordinary people and
why seemingly extraordinary genes make ordinary people.
Scientists like Hawkings continue to promote Darwin, probably
knowing it's all a lie. E.g. Schiffler's Horns Paradox in Hawkings
field of mathematical topology is actually the absolute
mathematical proof of universal chaos and non-linearity yet
chaos concepts in Hawkings universe are neither professed or
Richard Dawkins' book, 'Climbing Mount Improbable,' tells us
of the slow painstaking climb involved in the evolution of the
complex organ of the eye and how the human race acquired it
after millions of years of painstaking evolution.
His Cambridge compatriot biologist, Brian Goodwin, however,
tells us that the eye is an organ which can spontaneously evolve
or devolve at will (in a flash in an instant), and has models to
prove that. In other words, the eye emerges spontaneously to fill
the need; it doesn't take millions of years of improbability and
Now we have to depend on NASA and the petrol engine to save
But! Sorry folks, there isn't enough petrol around to get all 6
billion people off this planet.
As we have already discovered, the technologies and scientific
theories to save the human race have been around and taught
secretly here for millennia in Gnostic schools. E.g. Fibonacci
chaos art in the renaissance art schools by e.g. Da Vinci.
If science cannot mend its ways and serve truth, we should at
least have the knowledge that science, as a philosophical
practice is dead. As a tool of rational inquiry, it is redundant. In
its place, a new order is born, not of the scientist, but of the
technologist. For it is technology that will control, deaden and
manipulate the originality and truths of the future. E.g. Aldous
Huxley's 'Brave New World' with clone factories. Technology and
the technologists will simply become the controlling tentacles of
the governments and multinational corporations supplying
consumers in laissez faire and wasteful planned obsolescence
in their products.
Ironically, perhaps it will be the survivors, the peoples of the
future, who will begin again by making their own measurements
of the monoliths of antiquity, the eons old ziggurats. But a better
scenario than that would be a setting where we were not so
habitually programmed to sit in front of the television day after
day, etc. Instead, we would realize that nature itself is an
encyclopedia of wisdom from which to draw analogies that will
solve many problems.
The power of analogy can help us model the unknown. For example,
It can give us a real clarity on eternity and dimensions. In the heavy
dark masses of matter and time that we wade through (temporarily
divorced from the eternal wellspring of energies and youth), we are
like deep-sea divers at the bottom of a weighty gravity ocean. Our
life force comes in packets of food, like bottled oxygen; our
movements are slow and cumbersome, our outlook, murky.
If we run out of food or oxygen, we run out of life force.
However, by analogy, eternity, dry land without the cumbersome
diving suit of our physical body, must have sunshine, oxygen
and life force aplenty, without restriction. The power of analogy
can save the world; it can solve problems and break down
communication barriers, yet it is not a taught discipline.
The population is not being allowed to analyze or analogize, or
basically, to think. The 'science conspiracy' has wasted the
potential of generations of young able minds by enacting in their
own self interest, and from within their own comfort zone, their
entrenched carelessness and lack of vision. Worse than that, it
has exposed the human race to the possibility of extinction.