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

lab.

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

Relativity.

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

unicycle.

 

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

behaviour.

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. [1927]. 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 [1900] 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

0-14-022470-X.

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

'asymptotic freedom.'

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

(1983))

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

Stoothoff]

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

slow execution.

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

useful.

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 [1938] 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

[1997] 'prime number code', Ray Tomes [1992] 'Tomes harmonic

theory on redshift], Frank Searle [1999], Townsend Brown [1935],

'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

planet.

 

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

confessions away.

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

simplistic observation.

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

no avail.

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

hold..

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

wall.

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

snooker ball.

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

complex.

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

darkness.

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

scams.

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

espoused.

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

slow Darwinism.

Now we have to depend on NASA and the petrol engine to save

the day.

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.

 
 
 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Transhumanism and the Galaxy

The Falkirk Triangle

The New Star Party vision 30 years ago - still cutting edge ?