WADE FRAZIER : A Healed Planet

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

With these afterlife posts, I found myself rereading parts of Robert McLuhan’s Randi’s Prize, which is still the best book on the subject that I have seen. McLuhan approached the subject as an agnostic with a superficial understanding of the issues. He had heard claims of the paranormal, and particularly the issues of reincarnation, near-death experiences, and alleged reports from the other side. Scientific heavyweights such as Carl Sagan and Richard Dawkins had addressed the issues, and the story was that they had found the evidence wanting.

McLuhan took the dive and soon discovered that Sagan and Dawkins did no such thing, neither had the “skeptics,” and Sagan was organized skepticism’s leading figure while he was alive. What McLuhan found was a mountain of scientific investigation of the paranormal, going back to the 1800s and the debunkers acted like it did not exist. Even worse, Sagan and Dawkins never fairly dealt with any of the evidence, as far as McLuhan could find. The depth of their “investigations” was making a few clever comments and dismissing it all with a wave of the hand, without demonstrating that they were familiar with the evidence at all.

McLuhan found that researchers such as Susan Blackmore fared no better, with weak reasoning to dismiss the evidence, particularly the many reports of veridical evidence, from both NDEs and reincarnational memories. McLuhan gradually became appalled at the weakness, and even fraudulence, of the “skeptical” position.

My experiences with organized skepticism were unfortunately not very surprising, and I consider it a criminal enterprise today. Do they lie any worse than the mainstream media does? That is an interesting question. The media enables genocides, but so do so-called human rights organizations, so, if we make that comparison, the lies of the “skeptics” seem less deadly, although that is debatable. I have yet to see a “skeptic” question the Warren Commission’s findings. I have yet to see a “skeptic” dissent to any significant degree from the medical establishment’s positions. The “skeptics” are little more than intellectual warriors for the Establishment, and stand with all the other so-called intellectuals who have sold their souls to the prevailing winds of wealth and power. It is just another example of my journey’s primary lesson.

On that score, a pal just sent me a partial transcript from a recent Coast-to-Coast show. It dealt with the untimely deaths of scientists and doctors who dissent from mainstream medical dogma. This is nothing new. I remember when Bush and gang were spewing their WMD lies and mounting their “war on terror,” scientists in the field had untimely deaths in those years, and there were plenty of suspicious deaths. This is also older than those lists, and don’t get me started on dead free energy inventors.

Brian O’s buddy Jon Rappoport said that the secret teams working for the medical racket were more ruthless and murderous than those protecting the energy racket. Nothing would surprise me in that area, and I doubt that a “skeptic” will ever deal with these situations in anything approaching an honest and rational fashion, just like a mainstream American journalist will never call the invasion of Vietnam what it really was: a monstrous crime.

Debunking the paranormal is pretty tame stuff, compared to issues such as those.

My new essay has definitely made some waves, although not big ones. My statement on Philip Cross now leads this article on him. It has happened a few times now, in that I will encounter an alternative media organization or figure, go to their Wikipedia article, and I can count on Cross’s being the dominant editor. It really is scandalous, that a serial libeler like Cross has free reign at Wikipedia. This is a big black eye for Wikipedia, and increasingly makes it hard to take Wikipedia seriously, particularly on topics of political-economic relevance.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Briefly, before I hit the hay, my previous post on the lying skeptics and McLuhan, reading his accounts of the fraudulent debunking of the “skeptics” brings back memories of Mr. Skeptic’s criminal performances and so many other acts of abysmal integrity. Finding scholars such as Ed was like finding an oasis in the desert. So few people dare to tell the truth on these subjects, and I wonder if the assailants know what the truth even looks like, they are so far gone.

It really is wearying to have to deal with the blatant lying of Establishment mouthpieces such as Cross and Mr. Skeptic, particularly when they defame saints such as Ed and Dennis. Howard and Noam were similarly defamed by lying campaigns, and Noam has been humanity’s most towering intellectual for more than 50 years. If they can do it to Noam, who can’t they do it to?

It really is kind of mind-boggling, when I step back and look at it. Some of the greatest humans on Earth were mercilessly attacked with lies so obvious that a child can see through them, but the lies prevail in the media and at venues such as Wikipedia. It gives me no great pleasure to see my journey’s primary lesson demonstrated ad naseum, as it just means that those needles are indeed hard to find.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

The Michael entity is composed of Kings and Warriors. Michael is called a mid-causal entity. Seth has also been called one, and as Seth is what is called a “speaker,” he may be a Sage-Artisan entity, but I am guessing. More than once, as I recall, Seth had his “big brother” come through, whose joy creates universes. I won’t even guess what plane that entity comes from. Michael stated that no entity was infallible, with all the answers, and that the next plane of his evolution, the akashic, was as much a mystery to him as the astral plane is to us.

Both Michael and Seth stressed that each personality (Michael calls it a “fragment”) still exists and has its own integrity, even though they comprise the Michael entity, for instance. Individuality is never really lost. Each atom has its own “personality” that is never lost. But it also becomes part of those higher-plane entities in ways that we just can’t imagine while we live in physical reality.

Michael stated the Tao’s (godhead’s) message: we are all one, which is the Infinite Spirit’s message. Seth said that there are no divisions of the self, which is the same idea.

Even if it is all hogwash (which I don’t believe), those are quite the ideas to chew on. As with Seth’s reading my mind when we met, as a gift to an eager student who was genuine with him, Jane’s Seth and Michael “performed” in ways that established their independent reality, and how they were not some figment of the imaginations of the participants or the channel play-acting. Michael did it early on, and he did it to remove the doubt of the participants that they were just making it up with their Ouija boards. When Michael said he would do it, it was one evening in a home with its windows closed. Suddenly, the room got about 20 degrees colder, and a wind swirled through the home, scattering papers in the air. Michael only needed to do that once. Jane’s Seth underwent a bunch of psychic “tests” by Jane and her husband Robert (see The Seth Material, for instance). They didn’t do it to challenge Seth, but to explore the issue. Our motivation is everything.

Michael’s statement on the meaning of existence, of the created becoming the creator, I doubt can be improved on.

After dealing with such lofty ideas and entities, to get a little more earthly, our pets pass over, and if we remember them well, they will be waiting for us when we pass over. Otherwise, they go back to their soul group (Michael calls it “Cat Central” for cats, for instance). Pets get to closely observe what ensouled beings are like, as it is their next stage of evolution. In that heavenly Roads world, there are not pets, per se, but something more like a friendship.

Everybody who passes over has an astral plane “residence,” and can be visited by anybody, and it is far different from life here. Jesus probably has a million conversations going on at once, as does Buddha, Lao Tzu, Krishna, Ra, etc. I have seen reports in which Christians sought out Abraham and Moses, to discover that such people did not exist, as they were mythological characters. A lot of the Old Testament is comprised of tall tales, which Seth said smacks of fairy tales, which was why modern peoples often did not have much use for them. But there can be truth in all tales. Even Noam said that you can learn more about humanity in fiction than through scientific study.

If an effort like mine, to help manifest something like heaven on Earth, is successful, where are all the mass murderers and the like going to ply their trade? A common theme that I have seen since the beginning of my spiritual studies is that Earth has had enough of hosting an ignorant and unenlightened humanity, which has done enough damage, driven enough species to extinction, and threatens to make Earth uninhabitable. As Michael has stated, if humanity goes extinct by its own hand, that is not unusual and is still a risk, and in several probable Earths, humanity destroyed itself in World War II. Even in the scenarios where humanity exterminates itself while taking most of the ecosphere with us, probable Earths will survive.

But Earth, while showing plenty of class in hosting our primitive species, has had enough, and this is a theme I have seen for many years from various sources, and told to me by another public channel that I had sessions with. Earth has put out the message that those who can’t come into the light in their next lifetime or so are going to be moved to a new planet, which has been readied to keep hosting the kill-or-be-killed game, the I-win-you-lose game, and the rest of such games. Humanity is going to be split because of this, which will cause great pain and suffering, but it is either that or start over in a new lifeform, which would be a greater hardship to our souls.

My understanding is that there is a kind of “competition” happening right now, like has not been waged before on Earth. Both the light and darkness are heavily “recruiting” right now. Those of the light, for the obvious reason of love, and the dark wants to have as many join its ranks as possible, to keep their games alive. They want their hells well-stocked with chumps and cannon fodder.

What my friend saw was mind-blowing, and I believe that members of a faction of the GCs that don’t want to try to live on Mars put on that show. They have some technological advantages, you might say. But where a person’s heart is is all-important, and all of the technology in the world will not save somebody from going to the hell regions if they live a life of abusing others.

A common theme in these dark studies is that the dark pathers at the GC level think that they can avoid the consequences of their actions. For instance, when Greer and team came down with unusual and advanced forms of cancer immediately after their Congressional hearings, it was the GCs at play, or maybe even some lower levels of the game. Similar technologies shortened Brian’s life, and I may have had some of their mind-scrambling toys used on me, which was no fun. Greer has stated that those cancers were implanted on them by using psychotronic equipment, but what the operators don’t know is that using the equipment like that also ensures that the operators suffer similar consequences. Such people are considered disposable, and are kept in the dark as to what they are really involved with. People have to go down the dark path quite a ways before the kingpins bring them into the game as witting members who know what is happening, or at least more than the expendable stooges do, who do a lot of the dirty work.

I have also heard that some of the GCs’ toys can access the astral plane, but obviously only the lowest part of the astral plane, so they interact with some unsavory beings, let us say. That orientation is also why they interact with negative ETs, for instance.

Nobody can escape the consequences of their actions, as reaping what we sow is the entire point of being here. The consequences are manifested in our consciousness, which is all that we take with us when we leave. So, the dark pather GCs, who think that they can have somebody else pay their karma for them, are as deluded as they come, and will end up in the hell regions when they pass over (which is their “heaven”), and may be there for quite some “time” before they realize their folly. Everybody’s destiny is to return to the Tao, into the arms of “God,” and the return is always glorious. All roads lead home, from the highest to lowest.

With this post, I will wind down this human afterlife thread for now. I have a busy month ahead of me, so will be relatively quiet on the posting front.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I have written about how I recently contacted the relative few who comported themselves honorably during my first stint with Dennis, and not one of them wanted to interact with me. I strongly suspect that not one of them even wants to understand the bigger picture of what they were involved with. All I really wanted to do was tell them of our adventures of what happened after their involvement ended, give them inside info on the days that they were involved with us, but may have not been privy to, and help them see the bigger picture of what they were involved with. What a fabulous undertaking. Nobody was interested, and those are people who were involved, and often pretty deeply.

If nothing else, it just shows how lonely this journey is, as Brian noted. Almost nobody understands, or even wants to.

For many years, part of me wanted to look up people from my life, whom I fell out of touch with over the years, and hear about their life and give them a little of my odyssey, but I have finally come to accept that none of them will want to hear about any of it, and if they did, their minds would quickly be blown. It has taken me many years to finally accept that. I may still foolishly look up one or two. We’ll see.

If free energy arrives in my lifetime, they may show some interest, but not because of what the Fifth Epoch portends, although some of them may get a glimpse. It will only be because I am famous and maybe they can get something from me or bask in the reflected glow of that celebrity (“I knew him when…”). It won’t be for the reasons why my fellow travelers and I did what we did. It won’t even be close.

A few times, I did look up people like the above, and I really wanted to just thank them and give them a glimpse of what they were involved with, and it was usually so disappointing. Their perspectives were not far removed from my mother’s. I can’t even throw my line in with people who know me, who saw what I went through, who were even involved, knew how honest and talented I was, and some even knew my pedigree. I doubt that anybody from my personal life has read Ed’s bio, and that is the tame stuff. I doubt that anybody from my personal life has read my big essay all the way through (except for maybe one, who became a pupil), and probably nobody ever will, unless I become rich and famous. Hunting for needles in haystacks, indeed.

Best,

Wade

[Harmony]

Dear Wade,

I would love to see a movie that dipicted a world full of hope and abundance where spirit grew equally along with the advancement of new achievments.

Futuristic movies mostly convey a devolved society and infrastucture that isn't attractive.

For you it may seem you have outgrown most people, but your work may hopefully inspire people long into the future.🌸🕊

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Thanks Harmony:

Yes, Hollywood is great at depicting dystopias. The Fifth Epoch would indeed be amazing to bring to the screen. Yes, in the Fifth Epoch, I see the spiritual/ethical level mirroring the technological one, like that heavenly Roads world. For 99.99% of humanity, however, it will be the arrival of abundance that will catalyze the increase in their awareness, similar to how slavery was a hallowed institution until machines began replacing people. The increased energy levels and technology came first, and the rise of conscience as an aftereffect.

Oh boy, in outgrowing people, you don’t even realize it is happening, until you go back “home” and interact with old friends and family, and you see where they are, where they think you are, and then it becomes starkly clear. Even Dennis does not realize free energy’s Epochal significance, and it took Brian some time to really begin to get it. He would have been all over my big essay, all of it. Some pupils have also been, but that has been about it, at least that I have heard from or am aware of.

I only hope that I am a little ahead of my time, and live to see us turn the corner. If we don’t turn the corner in this century, we may not, and become another ensouled species casualty.

Thanks again.

Best,

Wade

[Krishna]

Posted by Krishna
I would estimate atleast 20%-30% of Indians in USA are not from high castes, the most important way people moved to usa is via skills and those have become more widespread.

I got this wrong. Looks like 10% of Indian's in USA are not from "high" castes

[Wade Frazier]

Thanks Krishna:

Well, I wish it was more, but I understand, which means a quarter-million people or so, I believe. Curious timing of this, as I was about to make a “downtrodden” post. I first published my Columbus essay about 20 years ago, and some of my “peers” – white American professional men – went off the deep end on writings like that. While I saw a bunch of Indian sites linking to it and discussing it, I also saw where I was accused of being guilty of propagating the “myth” of the Taino extinction, by people claiming Taino heritage. I added a discussion of the issue in 2014, and the Indian sites don’t link to that essay as much anymore. Nor do schools and universities. I am not sure if it is related, but how many might have survived was not the point of my work, but how many died.

Just today, I was reading up on it some more (1, 2, 3), but I am still pretty skeptical of much genetic or cultural survival of the natives of Española in particular. In only a few centuries, the Cherokee lost all memory of the Mississippian culture that built the mounds, and most of that forgetting was not from a genocidal onslaught, but just the collapse of the economy and culture. But, the Taino culture has supposedly stayed intact for 500 years? I doubt that much of it survived, and in reading the scientific investigations, such as mitochondrial DNA (the mother’s) and Y-chromosome (the father’s) testing, what I have seen bears out my thinking on the subject. Native men disappeared from the gene pool, and even entirely, in one study I saw, and but the Taino women became concubines and “wives” of the conquering Spanish, who were rapists extraordinaire, and the genetic survival seems largely limited to that. Indian women were the only women doing much procreating in the Caribbean for more than a century, and the Spaniards were first in line.

The Bahamas were completely depopulated by the Spanish slavers in less than five years, to “staff” the mines and plantations of Española, after more than a dozen slaving towns were set up, to scour Española. While Española is larger (30K square miles versus about 4K for the Bahamas), and mountainous, with more places to hide than the hapless Bahamans had access to, it is those early years (the first 30 years of conquest), when the Bahamas were depopulated, because it was becoming hard to find natives on Española, and the Spanish began importing Africans, that is the crux of the matter on Española, IMO. I have not seen any scientists or scholars deal with those years in a way that has convinced me. They provide evidence from generations and even centuries later, and call me skeptical.

I certainly did not want to be put in the position of being skeptical of Taino survival, and that was not the point of my essay. I helped kill a family myth on my so-called native heritage in recent years, and none of these cultural and genetic identity issues will help manifest the Fifth Epoch in the slightest, which is the point of my work. We are all behaviorally modern humans, and that is just about the only important distinction, or lack thereof, worth discussing. The rest really is noise, and it will all become meaningless in the Fifth Epoch, as nations and races vanish.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I was just reading Carl Sauer’s The Early Spanish Main, which is still the definitive work on the first generation after the New World’s “discovery,” and the centerpiece is the fate of Española. Sauer chronicled the catastrophic decline of the native population, which was well documented, may well have begun at more than 1 million, was lamented as it happened, and the extinction of the natives was predicted. The Spaniards controlled the entire island, after they “pacified” it with prodigious slaughters of the natives.

Between 1505 and 1508 was the Spanish economic peak of early Española, when 15 towns were in operation, to secure native labor, and the overriding concern was always gold, keeping with the primitive Spanish notion of economics. The population of Santo Domingo reached about 10,000 people in those days. Seville, the heart of the Spanish empire, had around 60,000 people, and London had 50,000, at the time.

The Bahamas' pre-“discovery” population was probably between 40,000-50,000 people and when it was completely depopulated in a few years, the numbers were about 40,000 natives captured and sent to Española. The other islands were soon invaded and conquered, and the rapist of Puerto Rico, Ponce de Leon, in the words of Sauer, “tried it once too often on the tougher natives of Florida.”

In the 20 years since I wrote my Columbus essay, I have not seen or heard of anything that supplants Sauer’s definitive account. How much survival was there of Española’s native population when Columbus “discovered” it? There are certainly no “pureblood” Tainos today. Not even close. Taino men exited the gene pool almost immediately. As far as the culture, nothing close to the original culture could have survived. If some of it has been kept alive, it is a kind of “diaspora” preservation, which bears faint resemblance to the original. The “settling” of the Western Hemisphere by Europe is history’s greatest crime and greatest demographic catastrophe, and that is the point of my writings on the subject, not how any mixed-blood survivors might have fared. In that way, it is like Ed’s and Noam’s work, where the focus is on us (our culture, our ancestors), not on our victims.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As a coda to my previous posts, long ago, I read a channel state that our so-called “cultures” were all adaptations to scarcity, and humans have done it in many ways. But cultures that are adaptations to scarcity are grotesque and will be quickly discarded in the Fifth Epoch, which includes all of today’s cultures.

I will be writing in my essay update about humanity’s changing morality a bit more. Ian Morris wrote a book about it, and I agree with its thrust, while there is a lot about his work that I don’t agree with (he is a man of his Epoch, after all ). In the late-second Epoch, after the short-lived Golden Age of the Hunter Gatherer ended, it was “normal” to kill one’s neighbors on sight, steal their women, try to slaughter them all and take their land, etc. (just like chimps ). When civilization arose, forced-servitude institutions became “normal,” as the agricultural surplus made them viable, and the first written laws prominently dealt with the treatment of slaves. Slavery was a hallowed institution in all agrarian civilizations, and was not questioned until machines replaced people, and slavery finally ended.

Sexism and racism are under siege in the USA, and the same has happened, to one degree or another, in all industrial societies. I see that as just part of the transition from agrarian to industrial societies. The Industrial Revolution is only three centuries old and only a small fraction of humanity lives in industrial societies, so there is cultural “momentum” still at play. But, there is not enough fossil fuel for all of humanity to industrialize, and we are fast running out of the fossil fuels that make our industrial societies possible. The USA’s standard of living has been declining ever since it hit Peak Oil in 1970, all of these high-tech marvels notwithstanding, which are as primitive as cavemen’s clubs compared to what is in Godzilla’s Golden Hoard.

When new energy sources were exploited (megafauna, crops, fossil fuels), there were short-lived times of peace and plenty, but they always ended when the easy energy ran out, and then it was back to the margin of survival, and life got hard again. That is what is happening in the industrialized world, with the rise of Trump, etc. Empires have risen and fallen ever since the first civilization, and the USA is no different. But in keeping with the propaganda and deception in industrial societies used for population management, which Ed and Noam spent their lives exposing, the USA pretends that it is not an empire.

But even Ed and Noam had no idea how deeply that all really goes. In the Fifth Epoch, elites will become obsolete, and they know it, which is why they have been so active in preventing the Fifth Epoch’s manifestation. Their greatest triumph is making free energy and the Fifth Epoch unimaginable, and about 99.999% of humanity has played right along with the social conditioning. Focusing on the elites and their antics is not part of my strategy, as it encourages people to think like victims, not creators, and creators create with love. I am also not a conspiracist, although I acknowledge the global elites and their machinations, but most of what I see in breathless conspiracist announcements is of dubious authenticity, to put it kindly.

We won’t break through the organized suppression and humanity’s inertia through the tactics and ideologies of the current and previous Epochs, and it took me a long time to understand that. Social approaches will not work, as they pander to self-interest. A new approach is required, I am trying one out, based on integrity and sentience, and we will see how it goes.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Time for another pandemic post. I was recently sent this, which is from FOX News. Of course, Fox News has an agenda. From the beginning, I was suspicious of any numbers reporting. Kind of like with vaccinations and the statistical gamesmanship that is being played, I knew that the numbers least subject to manipulation would be deaths. Death is not a debatable condition. If the numbers were being cooked, there would eventually be a reckoning in the death count.

So, yesterday, I looked up deaths in the USA attributed to COVD-19. As of today, it is 138,000 deaths in the USA, and I knew one of the casualties. That is a significant number. Here is a CDC cause-of-death chart for 2017, and 2020 would be similar. If they were going to play games with the numbers, I think that the only opportunity would be with other respiratory deaths, and there were 216,000 of those in 2017, in the top-ten causes, which accounts for about three-quarters of all deaths. So, the deaths so far, only a few months into this pandemic, are definitely big enough that they won’t get taken from something else. The pandemic seems to be very real. One of my favorite financial bloggers produced a graphic of daily deaths, and the rise of COVID-19 deaths is dramatic. I think that the conspiracists have their work cut out for them, if they are going to call the pandemic an illusion.

What it exactly is is an open question to me, and I certainly won’t be stepping up to get my vaccine. I think the germ theory of disease is open to challenge, but it won’t get a fair hearing in today’s environment. I have seen all sorts of alternative treatment information, and how the medical establishment is shooting down everything that is not a highly expensive drug treatment of dubious effectiveness. The medical racket is just too entrenched and dominant for any kind of alternative views and treatments to survive in the mainstream for long, particularly these days. Until the Fifth Epoch arrives, the rackets will thrive.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

A little more on Cross…

Although Cross is the dominant editor of Ed’s Wikipedia bio, he is not dominant on Noam’s, but that does not mean that he didn’t try. He smeared Chomsky in Noam’s bio, with his characteristic behavior of elevating far-right lunatic stuff to a “reliable source,” in order to make his smears. He gets away with it with Ed’s bio, as Jimmy Wales defends him all the way, but doing it to Noam was going too far, unless Wikipedia changed its name to Nazipedia.

Cross is far from alone in perpetrating that kind of dishonest double-standard in treating sources. Steven Pinker also did it in his popular The Better Angels of our Nature, as he elevated far right nut-job Rudolph Rummel to his chief source on modern genocides. Mr. Skeptic did something similar, as he referred to a newspaper article that he knew was libelous, in order to score his propaganda points. The centerpiece of Ed and Noam’s Propaganda Model was the forces at play that result in the media’s surreal double standards when dealing with subjects with political-economic relevance, and bloodbaths in particular.

In McLuhan’s masterpiece, he went into detail on incidents of fraudulent debunking by the “skeptics,” which is then amplified in the skeptical echo chamber into being the last word on the subject, and all debunkers need to do afterward is refer to that debunker’s work, and they rest their case on that. I have encountered the same thing with Dennis, as debunkers and trolls assail me by simply providing a link to Mr. Skeptic’s libelous initial 15-mintues of fame, and they rest their case. Heck, the same caliber of “scholars” did the same thing on Noam and Cambodia. If they could do that to the greatest intellectual on Earth today, whom can’t they do that to?

Those are all just more examples of my journey’s primary lesson, and it brings up Brian’s query, “Are we really a sentient species?” I think that humanity is semi-sentient, at best.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I have a little more to write on those Nazis who became American heroes. All sorts of interests were protecting Nazi war criminals, including the Vatican, as they enabled the current revival of fascism. But it is the Gehlen Org that I want to focus on in this post.

While the Gehlen Org was lying to its American sponsors about Soviet capabilities and intentions, it was busy hiring useful Nazis (thousands of them), and spiriting the others to Latin America in particular, which more than 10,000 Nazi officers eventually called home. Gehlen himself was paid about $1 million a year by the CIA, and Allen Dulles attended Gehlen’s festive retirement party.

The Gehlen Org bore a great measure of responsibility for the Cold War, which nearly led to a nuclear holocaust. As Mussolini said, fascism was the union of the corporation and the state, and the USA has always been friendly to fascism.

These have always been neglected subjects in the American media and history, and when they are dealt with, they are seen through the bogus lens of “containing communism.”

So, seeing Ed and Noam smeared at Wikipedia, while death camp Nazis get softball treatment, even hagiographies, is just part of the scenery these days, and it is nothing new.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I am going to create a thread, titled, “The Talents, Responsibilities, and Limitations of Intellectuals.” I have dealt with all of its aspects before, but never as a coherent whole.

I am the biographer of two Ivy League professors, one of whom was the most controversial astronaut and fellow free energy colleague, and the other was the most important coauthor of humanity’s leading intellectual. I have known some of the greatest minds on Earth, from a young age, and I am well aware that I am not in their class, but I was able to understand their work’s gist, eventually, and was able gain at least a dim understanding of how their marvelous minds worked.

I have been also told, by people whose opinions I respect, that I have some ability in making their work more understandable for the rest of us. That is partly why I do what I do, writing about science, history, politics, and other subjects like I do, and trying to weld them all into a comprehensive perspective, which I began doing when I was still a child. It has been a lifelong obsession.

Noam’s first political essay of note was on the responsibility of intellectuals. A book was recently published that celebrated that essay. However, Noam’s theme for the past 50 years has arguably been on the failure of intellectuals, as they largely did not meet their responsibilities, but instead abetted the crimes of the powerful, and largely unwittingly.

This thread is going to be on what is good about intellectuals like Noam, Ed, Brian, and others, how most intellectuals have sold their souls, and how even the best of them have their limits, as far as righting humanity’s ship goes.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

In Understanding Power, Noam challenged the entire concept called “intellectual,” and said that fixing a car engine requires more “intellect” than what happens with paper-pushing at universities. So, how about inventing a car engine?

Noam called French intellectualism a farce, and noted how French intellectuals were treated like sports figures there, but their “ideas” were often meaningless or trivial. Noam and Ed took on post-modernist thinking, and France has kind of been its headquarters.

Noam said that if by “intellectual,” we mean a special class of “thinkers” who serve the powerful and tell people what to think, he called those “intellectuals” more of a priesthood than real thinkers, and to be “anti-intellectual” toward people like that was healthy. Noam probably would not like to be called the “world’s leading intellectual,” and stuff like that. It is not a very honorable profession.

Noam does not think that his political work is very profound, but just common sense, and he has high regard for human common sense. He much prefers pursuing scientific questions than political ones, as far as his intellectual satisfaction goes. That common sense aspect is a big reason why he does the political work that he does and engages the public like he does. He says that politics is not rocket science, and he calls modern economists little more than intellectual warriors for the capital class, as do I. But those priesthoods and warriors try to mystify the subjects, with jargon and math that are not very useful, but serve to make the subjects arcane and mysterious to the laity. Noam sees that as largely fraudulent, as do I.

All of the scientific ideas and data in my big essay, for instance, didn’t need any advanced math to describe it, not at the level that I am trying to get them across. Sure, tensor analysis was used by Einstein when developing general relativity, but Einstein tried to work without math as much as he could, as he realized its seductions. He once said that the more elegant and impressive the math used to describe a theory, the more likely the theory was invalid. I crunch numbers for a living, and am well acquainted with their limitations for describing reality.

So, when writing about “intellectuals,” as I am about to do, I primarily mean people who “think” for a living and publish their thoughts.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

One of my neighbors just posted up some video footage from her back yard, attached. It is actually close to where I saw a bald eagle in 2018. That is a cougar. We have had bobcats in our yard, but a cougar is a horse of a different color, so to speak. One killed somebody near where I hike a couple of years ago.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As I get into “intellectuals,” I can’t overemphasize that the primary difference between good scholarship, good science, good intellectualism and the bad and even evil varieties of them is integrity. In a distant second place are intelligence, sentience, and the like. The hells of the astral plane are filled with “brilliant” beings such as Max. That is why for what I am attempting, I have always said that the heart is the key, and if a person’s heart is not in the right place, the rest does not matter.

What Ed and Noam wrote about all the time was how propaganda was generally produced by people who believed in what they wrote, but if you read Noam’s discussion of it in Understanding Power, for instance, he made it clear that those people sold out their sentience for the rewards of herd membership (the in-group) in their earliest years, and were not even conscious of it for long, if they ever were. Herd instinct trumped sentience, and they never woke up and probably won’t in their lifetimes.

As I recently wrote, some souls choose to go their entire incarnation cycle and never wake up while on Earth, and digest the lessons of their earthly lives on the astral plane. They never left herd consciousnesses while on Earth, but chose to sleepwalk the entire way. Michael stressed that that was a valid choice, and will still achieve what the soul came for. Well, that explains a lot of humanity’s predicament and Brian’s query of whether humanity is a sentient species or not. It is certainly not how I chose to do it, and my work is not for the sleeping, but the awake and awakening.

Noam and Ed also wrote long ago on how brilliantly subtle the indoctrination and propaganda systems were in capitalist societies. Even the best of us can be snared in them from the beginning, and our awakening can be a long and fitful process. But some also choose evil, or self-servingness developed into a science, for a more secular way to state it.

So, as I write about intellectuals, there is going to be a spectrum, from intellectuals actively engaging in evil and well aware that they are, to the saints of our world. Most intellectuals fall between those poles, with varying levels of sleep and awakening. The more asleep they are, the more they parrot the propaganda and actively produce it, while not even being aware that they are. The more conscious are going to be evil or saintly, and their work will reflect it, very similar to the theme in my writings on the cast of characters in my journey.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

So-called “intelligence” is a very charged subject. After all, our “intelligence” is supposedly what separates us from mere “animals,” although Darwin and many other scientists seem to have been right, in that human intelligence is only different in degree, not in kind, from other animals, and even plants have nervous systems and behavioral reactions and that lead to the idea that even they have consciousness, and so-called “mystics” have long contended that everything in the universe is conscious, to some degree, and that has long been a view of philosophers and even scientists.

I had world-class throwing talent, had respectable jumping ability for a white guy, could have run about a 4:30 mile if I had taken it seriously, competed with and alongside world record holders and Olympians, and I have a high appreciation for athletic talent. But it is just that, a talent, which is largely a genetic inheritance. I inherited my father’s throwing arm and running ability. Talent is not equivalent to virtue, and I regard “intelligence” as just another talent. I also inherited my father’s brain, although in the throwing and “intelligence” department, I was a distant second to my father, and ranked behind one brother in the intelligence department, whose throwing arm was comparable to mine, and he even threw a no-hitter in youth baseball.

In athletics and “intelligence,” I sit below those at the pinnacle of those abilities and marvel at them, but being good at basketball, math, or science does not confer virtue or integrity. Few sports or Hollywood celebrities are saints, and the same goes for “intellectuals.” In fact, prominent intellectuals likely have less virtue than athletes, actors, and musicians, as a whole, as their prominence is often related to how deeply they sold their souls to the prevailing winds of wealth and power.

So, this thread on intellectuals will explore their virtues, failings, and limits, what they are good for, what they are miserable at, and what their crimes and acts of courage have been. This will take some time to cover.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I wrote a thread on white male bias in scholarship and science, and pointed out the bias of scholars who, to one degree or another, sold out their sentience to be part of the Empire. There are quite a few immigrant scholars in the USA, and I have not seen one of them do what Noam and Ed did: take on the Empire. On the contrary, they moved to the USA to be part of it, and often defend it, even when they were its victims, such as Sophal Ear. I really have to wonder what is happening in a head like his. Is it conscious dishonesty, or is it something like the Stockholm Syndrome? The greatest international crime since World War II is what the USA did to Indochina, and that the Cambodian Ear would move to the USA and castigate Chomsky, on completely false pretenses, is bizarre. It could well be that he needed to make a name for himself, and attacking Earth’s greatest intellectual was a way to do it, and he knew the Establishment would laud his attacks, even if it his effort was fraudulent at worst and woefully misguided at best.

Dinesh D’Souza has more excuse for his stance than Ear did, if you can call it that. D’Souza’s work would be right at home on Fox News or Rush Limbaugh’s show. To one degree or another, those scholars all licked the hand that fed them. But those are just a couple of categories of conflict of interest that are evident in “intellectual” work.

I wrote a chapter of an essay on how historians have sold out. I regard organized skepticism as a criminal enterprise. In a way, my scholarly journey has been like Diogenes’s quest for the honest man, and readers may notice that I primarily refer to men. Women scientists and scholars are few and far between, just like how they are less than 20% of Wikipedia’s editors. As I have mentioned in my work, women have to step up, if we are going to get over the hump. It seems to be getting better, but not nearly quick enough if we are going to avoid the abyss.

Noam’s, Ed’s, and Howard’s works tower above pretty much every other American scholar, on the subjects that they wrote about, which was largely about calling out the Empire, at least when Noam was not playing scientist. His political work is a “hobby” for him, which really is incredible.

I think that in order to understand the bias of any science or scholarship, one needs to understand the assumptions that frame it, and they all have foundational assumptions. They have to. There is no such thing as an absolute bedrock reality that we can all hitch our awareness to. As Einstein said, there are no hitching posts in the universe, and achieving true objectivity, while a noble goal, is not possible. Our awareness of physical reality is filtered through our senses, which, as Seth said, are lovely little liars.

If there is any validity to NDE accounts and other accounts of the other side, and a great deal of veridical evidence comes from them, then the goal of objectivity is kind of a folly. But, to me, all that means is that science and scholarship have their limits, and the greatest scientists knew it well. There are quite a few limits on the scientific and scholarly enterprise, and I’ll get into them a little more in coming posts.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

If you read Howard’s A People’s History, read Wineburg’s critique of it, and read the section of Zinnophobia devoted to the issue, it is difficult to call Wineburg’s critique anything other than a deliberate deception. That “consumer advocate” reporter’s segment on Dennis, which I saw only a few weeks after meeting Dennis, I can’t call anything but a deliberate deception. Betsy knew that her attacks on Dennis’s company were not only deliberately deceptive, but they ruined many lives. When the going got rough for her, and her face was rubbed in her crimes, her conscience eventually awoke to the extent that she quit her job with the Attorney General’s office. However, I was not surprised that she got caught with her hand in the cookie jar and was disbarred, and she was the best of those sicced on Dennis during the Seattle and Ventura ordeals.

Mr. Investigator openly admitted that he lied to gain his coveted convictions, and did not even care if his targets were innocent. When Mr. Deputy made faces at me while I was on the witness stand, it was the first time that a psychopath unmasked himself to me, but it was not the last time, and when Mr. Skeptic unmasked himself, there was no more doubt to give him the benefit of, and he just kept piling it on over the years, knowing that it would dupe the gullible, no matter what people like me know and publicly exposed about his lies. He just made new ones up. He stalked me on the Internet for more than a decade, heaving his disinformation bombs at me, to quietly fold his tents, once Dennis had been run out of the USA.

Whether people are deliberately lying or just parroting the propaganda is not always easy to tell, but when Wineburg or Mr. Skeptic did it, and kept doing it, it crosses that line from idiocy to active deception. That they kept piling it on were examples of Ed’s Chutzpah Factor.

Other times, such as when that space debunker tried to debunk Brian’s Martian credentials, I think that, to a degree, it was just idiotic of that debunker, not intentionally dishonest. But, it seems that when engaging in debunking behavior like that, the debunkers do what Sagan and Dawkins have done: they never ever tried to gain anything but a superficial understanding of the issues and evidence before making their grand pronouncements, as their message was clear: those subjects were not even worthy of study. For people to weigh in on that, for subjects that they happily admit to not knowing much about, as well as all of those deliberate deceptions listed above, are just more examples of my journey’s primary lesson.

While it can be shocking, when first encountering those kinds of deceptions, it is not all that interesting, psychologically. Liars do what liars do, and Max and friends will welcome them home one day, as we all reap what we sow.

It is far more interesting to me when people perform their deceptions while not even realizing it, which was a key theme in Noam and Ed’s work. So, that kind of criminal dishonesty, by government officials and “intellectuals” is common enough, but I want to discuss the unconscious aspects of it, the unthinking acceptance of assumptions that are easily demonstrated to be false, and those that have a great deal of evidence that weigh against them, although it is usually marginalized. That discussion is coming.

Best,

Wade