WADE FRAZIER : A Healed Planet

[Joe Akulis]

Hey Wade!

Just wanted to hop on and say hello. Nice to see the fire's still going. :- )
I've been relegated to just lurking for quite a few months. But I'm still lurking with keen interest, and learning things where I can.

Whenever you respond to people about your purpose, to manifest the biggest event in the human journey, and talk about unlearning things, it reminds me of a line from Seth Speaks:

"The changing physical scene throughout the centuries, as you know them, represents the inner images that have flickered through the minds of the individuals who lived within the world through the various ages."

I guess the first hurdle is getting people to realize that certain things that seem beyond reach are still possible. A lot like the things we dreamed of in science fiction often becoming reality 50 years later.

Just because no single person can single-handedly usher in some revolutionary technology, doesn't mean you don't have the ability to influence its eventual appearance.

Wish everyone knew that.

Joe

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I am looking at my list of topics, and I don’t see an easy way to string them together logically, so here goes. There is nothing like being there, and one reason for all of the Internet chattering and nattering is that those people don’t have any experience, or were close to anybody who did, so they chatter/natter, which is pretty pointless, IMO, like gossip. As I have written plenty, if not for my adventures, I would likely not have much worth saying. Experience is the greatest, and arguably only, teacher. But with language, writing, the Internet, and so on, those who learned by doing or being there are able to relate their experiences, which can shorten the learning curve for those who came behind them. That is the sole purpose of my work. If everybody had to learn how Dennis, Brian, and I did, almost nobody would survive the experience to graduate from the curriculum.

While experience is the greatest teacher (which is why a mystical awakening can only come through experience, for instance), the experiences can also be traumatic, which can send people off the deep end or off into other unproductive directions. It can wake you up, but you can also misinterpret what you experience, and I will give some examples.

I believe that people who had experiences that caused them to question the authenticity of the Moon landings probably ran into something different: the UFO/ET cover-up, which is very real, and is conjoined with the free energy cover-up, which is all too real. What Steven Greer did with his Disclosure Project, which culminated in secret Congressional hearings (and then his team was taken out and Greer was never the same), with Ed Mitchell at his side, was highly impressive, and when I began watching his witnesses talk about their experiences, some described the same technologies that my friend was shown several years previously, which gained Greer’s effort plenty of cred with me. Greer had long linked JFK to the heart of the ET issue, and Douglas Caddy’s reporting fit that scenario like a glove.

Brian discovered the hard way that the American government’s silence and debunking stance on the UFO/ET issue was fraudulent, and who knows exactly what there was about Buzz’s reaction to being asked how it went on the Moon that gave Brian pause, but Greer has long been adamant that the Apollo 11 crew encountered ETs. I have a tight circle around me on the ET/UFO issue, and do not relate third- and fourth-hand rumors, but only relate experiences from people close to me or what I encountered (if I am not citing something that has been published by what I consider credible sources). I heard from a close source about astronaut close encounters with ET craft at the International Space Station. Astronauts are not trained for ET encounters, but when they have them, they are sworn to silence (with threats that are more than implied), but not all of them can take that information to their graves, and some can leak out to a select few, and I have been a beneficiary of some of that. For instance, apparently, some close to Buzz know about his ET encounter, but they leave it up to Buzz to disclose it or not, and it looks like Buzz will be a good soldier and take it to his grave with him.

Greer has repeatedly stated that Armstrong and Aldrin had an ET encounter and were sworn/threatened to silence, and Armstrong took it to his grave. That does not surprise me at all, and could have been related to Buzz’s reaction to Brian’s question. But I want to relate an incident where the ET cover-up likely related to the Moon landings issue. Bart Sibrel was a TV producer and got ahold of some Apollo 11 footage that he misinterpreted as evidence of faked Moon landings. His presentation had me going for a few days, until I realized that his evidence did not depict what he purported that it did, but he and I had a three-hour conversation back in 2001.

Whether Bart really had anything was beside the point. Bart thought that he had something, and announced to the local TV station that he was going to bring the smoking gun to the TV station for immediate broadcast. It looks like Bart ran afoul of the ET cover-up, not the faked Moon landing cover-up. It was hard to know at the time just what Bart had ahold of, but a funny thing happened on the way to the TV station: Bart’s car was intercepted and he was arrested, his tape of “The Footage” was seized, and he was drugged and thrown into a mental institution in the remote countryside. He said that some “White Hat” person looked after him while he was incarcerated there, and he later escaped the institution, Deliverance-style, and made it back home. Did Bart really have the smoking gun of faked Moon landings or the ET cover-up? No, but he acted like he did, and that set the wheels in motion to prevent something from being aired to the public that TPTB did not want aired. In my opinion, once they viewed Bart’s “smoking gun,” they had a good laugh and were no longer concerned with Bart, and his “escape” did not matter to them, but they could not take the chance that Bart really had something. Nipping it in the bud early is far easier than damage-control later, spinning disinformation, etc.

In Ventura, when Dennis announced that he had the goods for making free energy happen, we were raided two days later, the sheriff’s deputies stole all of our technical material, and Mr. Researcher was never the same. Did they steal anything of great value, as far as free energy went? No, but Dennis made them think that we had it, and if you have something that they think is important to maintaining their global rackets, especially the issue that can overturn the entire applecart, then they will come and get it, and you can’t do anything about it. That is partly why when I see free energy aspirants think that they are going to play cloak-and-dagger games, with proprietary technology tricks, I have to shake my head. That approach is foolish, and can be suicidal.

But after his harsh treatment, Bart will go to his grave believing that he found the smoking gun of faked Moon landings. That reaction is understandable, but IMO, he did not understand why he was arrested and sequestered like he was, until they could have a look at his “smoking gun.”

As an addendum to Bart’s adventures, for the couple of days that I thought that maybe Bart had something, it was kind of scary, and was a lesson for me about finding what you are looking for. If you discover some truth that TPTB want suppressed, to the level of “having the goods,” are you ready to deal with the consequences? That is a question that aspirants really can’t answer until they are faced with it, and my takeaway from the Bart experience was to be careful of what you wish for. If you get it, it may not turn out like you hoped. It is easy to get in way over your head in these milieus. I suppose that I should have learned that from my days with Dennis, but I am a slow learner.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Thanks Joe:

One of my favorite Seth sayings, and I am paraphrasing here, is that the most powerful force in our universe is the combined intention of focused, sentient beings. Brian understood, and I saw what just a few people could accomplish. When I think back to that Saturday morning nearly 30 years ago, when Dennis’s investor pulled the rug on him and we were days from being kicked into the streets, if you had told me at that moment what the next two years would be like, I would have looked at you like you were insane. I have experienced the power of what a few well-intentioned people could be. If I ever amass that choir, it will literally be unstoppable, but nothing like it has ever been seen before on Earth, and it will take time and hard work.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Before I run out the door to go hiking, a little addendum to my and Joe’s posts today…

Brian and I had our Camelot interview more than seven years ago, how time flies, and in that interview I stated my intention, which I clearly had for years before that: my primary goal was to make FE and what can come with it imaginable. Godzilla’s greatest triumph is making FE and what can come with it unimaginable, and the masses have readily obliged him. Imagining the next Epoch before it arrived, as a way to help it arrive, has never happened before, so even without the organized suppression, it is not easy to do, and I know that I seek needles in haystacks, and I know the qualities that will be needed. I knew all of that many years ago.

Just this past weekend, I was hiking with a pal who has been hearing about Wade’s World for a year now, and has been out there, playing FE evangelist, and he has ruined relationships, etc., just like I warned him. About the only taker that he found is a pal/mentor who is also a public channel. He is starting to understand, and he said that the number one reply to his evangelizing is along the lines of “It’s too good to be true.” That was probably the most common response that I heard during my first stint with Dennis. We are our own jailers, and Godzilla rarely needs to lift a claw.

One thing that I see all the time relating to my work is people getting excited about my work, at least until I gore one of their oxen. It is almost always around some self-serving belief of theirs, and it is refreshing when they nakedly state their self-interest (for instance, “I’ll be damned if I am going to pay some Global Warming tax, so I prefer to believe that Global Warming is a myth.”). Most are not that honest and usually concoct all manner of “clever” and irrational arguments to dismiss my work, and if they don’t go into active attack mode, they run away as fast as they can after delivering their parting shots. They can go with my blessings. Again, I seek needles in haystacks and know it, and I have learned over the years to not take those attacks personally, as the attackers are simply wrestling with their personal delusions and see me as a threat (or may be on the payroll). I don’t seek to engage such people, as it is a supreme waste of time and energy. Been there, done that. It took me many years to finally understand.

I don’t mind being challenged, but the challengers have better have done their homework, and I have yet to receive a challenge to my central thesis that was intelligent, honest, and informed. Not even close. I seek singers to train, not battles.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Trail report. I did this yesterday, scouting for wife hikes, and I found another. Less than an hour’s drive from home, an easy mile of hiking through beautiful woods got me to a water slide where parents take their children. Toddlers were in the water as I passed it. Less than a mile from there was that waterfall. I owned it. It was a fabulous bug-free hike, and while the trilliums, violets, and bleeding hearts are all long gone in the mountains near my home, going up toward the Cascade crest rewarded me with more. You can follow spring up the mountains, which is one of the great benefits of living here.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Taking a little break from Brian, Moon landings, etc., to go back to Joe’s and Vasili’s posts. It is quite a spectrum of people who contact me, and whom I interact with. I hear from free energy inventors, scientists, New Age housewives, conspiracists, Average Joes, and so on. While some are relatively worldly, most are naïve, largely because they have not played the game at a high enough level to where they saw how the system really works. That is how my fellow travelers and I learned our most important lessons, but it is not easy to survive that learning experience.

The Black Projects and other elite games are only part of the puzzle, and really not all that important. What is vastly more important is what the rest of us do. Yes, the toys in Godzilla’s Golden Hoard are indeed impressive, but a sleeping and easily manipulated humanity is not going to get any.

I am on the email list of Greer’s organization, and get emails every few days, and today’s seemed like it was recycled from years ago, and was about the elite games with FE and ETs, faked ET hostility, and so on. Greer’s take is very close to mine on what is happening at those levels (and Ed Mitchell’s), and Greer has been a significant information source for me, which I use with appropriate caution (all such information should be, including my work), but I am also doing something very different. Almost nobody on Earth is even fit to engage in the sparring matches that Greer has played with the GCs, and I don’t seek heroes.

I have purposely designed my effort to be low-risk to the participants, but they also have to manifest some gumption. Otherwise, my effort will just turn into more New Age/conspiracist chatter, in which naïveté, paranoia, disinformation, and scientific illiteracy dominate, and there is plenty of that on the Internet. I am doing something very different, but I don’t expect it to begin quickly.

Digesting the information in my big essay is plenty for what I have in mind, and I know that it will work, if I can find enough people with the right stuff, and what is not going to attract them is me going on the New Age/conspiracist/fringe talk circuits, but mounting a comprehensive conversation of that essay’s subject matter. That will attract whom I seek, not me holding forth with some one-man show, which is what my effort has largely been until now.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

On to my adventures in being Brian’s biographer and dealing with the Moon landings issue. I have written about it here and there, but this will likely be my definitive rendering of the issue.

Brian and I met in 1991, as our paths finally crossed. We had no further contact, and I wonder if he remembered me (probably not), until he published Miracle in the Void in late 1995, and I became that book’s biggest fan, so Brian later told me. I introduced him to Dennis, at Brian’s request, a few months later, when both spoke at a New Age expo, as Dennis was barnstorming the USA. Dennis thought that Brian had a lot to learn, playing the Paul Revere of FE, and Dennis was right, but Brian learned honestly, through the crucible of experience. I called Brian as he was downloading that 1998 image of the Face on Mars, so we were friendly in those days, if not exactly colleagues. It was not until I informed Brian of Armstrong’s Leap around June 2001 that we began to collaborate. He invited me to California a couple of months later, and I chauffeured him around during our seminal note-trading sessions.

I don’t recall much interaction after that until Brian invited me to help found NEM in May 2003. I was an emotional wreck, in the dark phase of my midlife crisis and was still reeling from the USA’s invasion of Iraq. The Nazis swung at Nuremberg for what Bush and gang did. I never asked Brian, but I would imagine that the oil-and-blood-soaked invasion of Iraq had something to do with his founding NEM when he did. The NEM experience was a disaster for both Brian and me, and we had no contact for years afterward, as I struggled with my midlife crisis and Brian lived in exile in South America, after he was kicked out of NEM.

This essay, published in the summer of 2007, as I recall, is what began bringing Brian back into my life, as Brian said that it was the best writing that he had seen in a long time on the issue. Brian’s influence led to my first public interview in 2008, and the next year, we did the Camelot interview, which I later learned was because Bill had been familiar with my writings since around 2001. A few months later, Brian asked me to help him write that DOE proposal, and I was in Brian’s circles again. It was a mixed bag, and I begged off of some of Brian’s invitations, such as getting together with FE scientists and inventors for some kind of effort. Been there, done that. I will never again get involved in somebody’s else’s effort like that. Most who I encountered in Brian’s circles were naïve, if well-intended. Some were scientists, others were activists and helpers, but it was a motley crew, like NEM proved to be. Some visited me and some I sent Brian’s way, but those experiences helped set the path that I am on today.

I was working long hours at a high-tech company (60-70 hour weeks for most of the year), which I did for ten years, during the entirety of my close collaboration with Brian, so what I did with Brian was all done in my “spare” time. This essay, for instance, is the public version of a letter that I wrote to Brian, and it took me most of a year to finish it. I began it around the time that I helped write that DOE proposal. After Brian died, it took me nearly a year to finally finish my tribute essay about him. Seeing the long time that it took me to write those small essays helped me realize that I needed a career break if I was going to write that big essay.

Soon after helping write that DOE proposal (the “Big Picture” part is all mine, and could be considered a prelude to my big essay), Brian asked me to write his NASA and Wikipedia biographies. I can’t recall the entire sequence of events, but one thing led to another, and writing those biographies was added to my list of things to do. On one hand, they needed to get done and I was honored to help, and I think that Brian sensed that the end was near. I am so happy that we got them done while Brian was still alive, but I was not looking forward to the experience. Brian’s Wikipedia bio at the time was a travesty, dominated by the fake Moon landings issue, and I had already had dismaying experiences with Wikipedia‘s editors. Brian was the only NASA astronaut without an official biography, which was obviously for political reasons, Brian being the NASA gadfly that he was.

I had my own Internet stalker, Brian received regular attacks and hate mail, had his own stalker when he spoke publicly, and I learned my lesson about unfiltered public interaction back in 2007-2008, as the trolls swarmed me wherever I appeared in forums that discussed my work. Other than Mr. Skeptic, who was probably a professional troll, the trolls were all anonymous cowards, which was only a variation of my journey’s primary lesson. Even supposedly protected forums had their problems.

I was expecting Wikipedia’s editors to be an obstacle to getting a good biography of Brian published, and I was unfortunately later proved right, so I decided that it would be strategically best to get his NASA biography done first, and then descend into the fray at Wikipedia. I wrote Brian’s NASA biography in the summer of 2009, with Brian’s input. The original biography is on Brian’s site. As you can see on that page, NASA provided a bureaucratic response for why Brian did not have a NASA biography, but as I discovered later, their provided reason was false, as I got Brian’s biography published without Brian ever having to sign a “NASA Privacy Act Form.” After several months of being stonewalled by NASA, at the same NASA portal from which they issued their false bureaucratic reason within minutes, I had to resort to Plan B. I believe that I submitted his biography to that portal three times, and had Brian do it once, without ever receiving the courtesy of a reply.

Plan B was finding another door to NASA. Just as we were thinking about the next steps, Brian was contacted by a NASA employee who was making a poster of astronauts who were also Eagle Scouts. He was friendly, but could not help us breach the stone wall regarding Brian’s biography. I finally contacted one of Brian’s colleagues from his NASA days, and he directed me straight to the astronaut corps. That was in late April 2010, more than seven months after I first submitted Brian’s biography to NASA.

I wrote to the astronauts that ran the astronaut corps, and a week later, the most famous active astronaut was assigned to get Brian’s biography done, and I wrote about it here. When all was said and done, only Chris Ferguson, Brian, and the astronaut corps came out of my biography process, at NASA and Wikipedia, looking good. Nobody else helped us, and I ended up interacting with several big names in the field, I am sorry to report. There is much more to come.

Best,

Wade

[Krishna]

Gritting my teeth and reading the book Core Economics
I did not expect anything better, but the lack of analysis around Energy makes it not very useful. I still have hope that I can learn something useful, I am less than half way through the book.

On the other hand Flying Dinosaurs by Pickrell, John. was a fun read. Thanks to my local library.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Freeknowledge:

Yes, Flying Dinosaurs was a fun little read. There was a huge blunder early in the book, where he got his classes of dinosaurs mixed up, but later in the book he had them straight, which was another instance that makes me wonder about the jobs that editors do these days.

Well, you might get something out of that book, but yes, modern economics is largely a waste of time. Social organization and exchange dominate mainstream economic theory, but those are effects of the level of energy usage, not causes. Parecon was the “radical” manifesto by Michael Albert, and it did not even mention energy. The “radicals” are not really radical, or maybe we could say that they are not “Epochal” in their thinking.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

When I wrote Brian’s NASA bio, I had him write his Martian part, as it was his unique distinction and he knew best how to write it. Through the editing process with Chris Ferguson, I left the Martian part alone and there was no comment about it. The astronaut corps certainly had no problem with Brian’s Martian credentials.

However, after Brian’s NASA bio was published, a leading space debunker informed me that Brian’s bio was inaccurate. I thought that maybe he took issue with Brian’s stated reason for leaving the astronaut corps: the lack of spaceflight opportunity. The Wikipedia page on Brian’s group states that he quit because of the hazards of training, not the lack of a spaceflight opportunity, as some other astronauts in his group stated. Brian gave several reasons for his disenchantment with NASA in his The Making of an Ex-Astronaut, published in 1970, and the dwindling likelihood of ever getting into space was one of them, along with the hazards of training. Lyndon Johnson came to Mission Control in early 1968 and told the troops that the funding cuts because of Vietnam’s invasion meant that NASA’s ambitious plans beyond the Moon landings were being scrapped, including planetary flybys. That was why Brian was hired, so he saw the writing on the wall and quit a few months later, combined with his other dissatisfactions with NASA.

I asked that space debunker (one of the most famous) what about Brian’s bio that he thought was inaccurate, and a couple of weeks later, I got my answer. That debunker enlisted the help of a NASA historian to specifically challenge this sentence of Brian’s biography:


“After completing a Ph.D. thesis on the physical properties of the Martian surface, O'Leary was specifically selected for a potential manned Mars mission when it was still in NASA’s program plan.”


The historian stated that Brian was never assigned to a mission like astronauts were on this list. True enough, but that was not what Brian stated. The Mars flyby mission was on the drawing board back then, as described here, for instance. All that the space debunker and so-called NASA historian had to do was get Brian’s book and see his account of his astronaut interview, to understand Brian’s Martian credentials. That debunking exercise was idiotic. I had already seen how Dennis’s most prominent “skeptical” assailant was a criminal, but to see that leading space debunker engage in such irrational behavior was an eye-opener for me. To be charitable, that space debunker had committed the straw man fallacy, and seemed unconcerned about portraying anything close to the truth.

I was concerned that that leading space debunker was going to start some campaign at NASA to erase Brian’s Martian credentials, and he had to stature to try. That was just the kind of thing that made me wary of doing Brian’s biographies. I asked Brian to provide me some ammunition, in case I had to do battle with NASA and the space debunkers. He gave me the Alan Shepard and Wernher von Braun anecdotes. Fortunately, I never had to do battle, and that aspect of Brian’s career, and his unique distinction, will likely remain intact. But it was one more episode that gave me a bad taste regarding debunkers. When they weren’t being criminally dishonest, they were moronic, even the “smartest” of them. As I have written, it seems that most such irrationality is not intentional, but because their brains turn off when information threatens their cherished beliefs. They are incapable of rationally addressing the issues, which is ironic for a movement that claims to speak for reason and a scientific approach to dealing with the evidence. But it seems that that particular space debunker has been on special assignment for some time, like Mr. Skeptic appeared to be, so I was not going to waste any more time and energy with him.

One cyberpal worked in Mission Control more than a generation after my father did, and my adventures in getting Brian’s NASA biography published was depressingly familiar to him. NASA had become a shadow of its former self since the Apollo days, with its halls at Mission Control full of people seeking lost glory.

But the first stage of my Brian biography project was complete, and in the end, the astronaut corps treated me fairly and better than I expected. Brian’s bio was about the same length as Neil Armstrong’s, so I really could not complain. I was able to get in Brian’s professional relationships with Sagan and O’Neill, which were among his most significant, space-wise, and I got his Martian credentials in there. I am happy with how it turned out.

As I recall, I took a couple month break, bio-wise, after my NASA experience, before focusing on Brian’s Wikipedia bio, which was abysmal at the time. You can’t really see what the article looked like before I wrote the one that is largely how it stands today, but it was in very poor shape. Just now, I had to reinstate the link to Brian’s Ph.D. thesis, which I am hosting on my site until someplace else hosts it again. An “editor” erased my change, to put it back to a dead link to where NASA used to host it. That is typical of the kind of maddening experiences that I have had with Wikipedia. I’ll save my Wikipedia adventures and Brian’s Moon landings controversy for coming posts.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

The issue of Brian and the Moon landings brings up mixed feelings for me, on a few levels. Brian’s appearance on that FOX TV show is what “made” me go as deeply on the Moon landing evidence as I did, and my Apollo work actually brought Brian into my life as a colleague. But I never got Brian over the hump on the Moon landings. If he had done the work, he would have, but he didn’t take the time to. There were several painful aspects of the situation, and one was the ardor and even dishonesty of both camps on the Moon landings, trying to portray Brian as taking their side when he didn’t. For the record, Brian thought that it was exceedingly unlikely yet still possible that NASA faked the Moon landings, or at least some of the photographic record. He had several reasons for thinking that way, which both sides of the issue generally either denied or blew out of proportion, turning Brian into a political football. Brian regretted his involvement in the issue until his death.

I have written at length about my journey into the Apollo evidence and don’t need to repeat it here, but my view is that the Moon landings happened as advertised, with chemical rockets going to and coming from the Moon, with genuine Moon rocks retrieved from the lunar surface, and no photographic or other evidence provided by the “faked Moon landing” crowd has withstood scrutiny, as far as providing evidence of faked Moon landings. Most such “evidence” quickly crumbled upon inspection, although some took longer to get to the bottom of. Whether evidence of ET encounters was covered up is another matter, and I think that there was a cover-up, but it is an open question to me just how much the Moonwalking astronauts encountered ETs, although Greer is adamant that Armstrong and Aldrin both did, which is partly why they came back such “changed” men. I believe that that situation also contributed to Brian’s faked Moon landings musings, no matter how informal and offhand they were.

I will now tell the chronology as I know it to be, and my participation, regarding the brouhaha that centered on Brian’s statements. My cyberpal who worked in Mission Control more than a generation after my father did recently wrote that NASA’s culture of secrecy contributed to “paranoid” musings such as Brian’s. I have no doubt about that, but it was also far more than that. As I have written, Brian and my father had to get Top Secret security clearances to work at NASA, which in those days meant a pretty deep dive, such as the FBI’s interviewing their first grade teachers and childhood neighbors. The Space Race (which JFK tried to end) was a Cold War effort, full of anticommunist paranoia, cloak-and-dagger games, etc.

I have no idea when Brian began having suspicions about the Moon landings, and the first time it may have come to him were Buzz Aldrin’s replies to Brian when they shared an office at SAIC. When I was 17 in 1975, at Boys State in Sacramento, a Moonwalking astronaut addressed our group (it may have been Scott). He was naturally asked about what it was like on the Moon, and he replied with something like it would take a day to begin to tell about it, and he immediately dismissed the subject. That was probably the typical brushoff that people received, and perhaps Brian got one or two of those kinds of replies before he asked Buzz about it.

Brian’s leaving the Establishment was peppered with many events that soured him on the Establishment, which was a far cry from his flag-saluting Eagle Scout days. Brian’s high-profile protest in 1970 of the Southeast Asian invasions, which was the same year that he published his book on his astronaut experiences and solidified his NASA gadfly status even more, was a key indicator of where his career and life was heading, although he became very active on Capitol Hill.

But while all of that may have increased Brian’s cognitive dissonance and gradual suspicions about NASA, hosting a UFO conference and being approached by the military, and almost dying immediately after rejecting their “offer,” was when Brian began to get radicalized. I strongly suspect that those events are where a lot of Brian’s “skepticism” toward the Moon landings came from. After his near-fatal encounter with the military over the UFO issue, Brian was understandably open to anything in those realms being a fabrication or cover-up.

Brian’s brush with death was certainly part of why he was a high-profile supporter of Greer’s Disclosure Project. The reality of that milieu, when you begin playing at those levels, is so far beyond what cubicle-dwellers, conspiracy enthusiasts, and Internet surfers encounter in their lives that they have virtually no conception of it, from what the situations are to how you can react to them. Paranoia is a common reaction, as well as a naïve denial that can see somebody keep stumbling forward into those areas to the point where they can risk and lose their lives. It is not a place for the faint of heart. I have played enough in those milieus to where I actively avoid them, and I actively avoid people who think that they have what it takes to navigate those waters, when they have yet to get their toes wet. Having my life wrecked once was enough for me.

In the spring of 2001, I was stumbling and fumbling through the Moon landings evidence, but slowly making progress. The neutral point discrepancy vanished for me back in 1998, but in early 2001 I decided to get to the bottom of the faked Moon landing evidence, and by June, I had only a few lingering doubts when I published the first draft of my conspiracy and cover-up essay. I still had my email address on my site then (which I would remove less than a year later), and that essay elicited a great deal of feedback, and has been one of the most popular essays on my site ever since. I was soon introduced to Jay Windley, who is the 800-pound gorilla of the Moon landings controversy, and he answered my few remaining questions well and very professionally. Jay has plenty of savoir faire. I soon had about no doubt left, and then Jay led me to finding Armstrong’s leap up the Lunar Module ladder. That sealed it for me, in more than one way. Ever since reading Moongate in the early 1990s, the lack of any “feats” performed on the Moon by the astronauts, which would have ruled out Earth gravity, was an area of doubt for me.

There was a great deal of Sturm und Drang over the feats, or lack of them, for many years, and seeing that obscure footage (which I saw live in 1969, as did hundreds of millions of people), which was not part of the “feat” debate in those days, removed 99.9% of my lingering doubts. Armstrong’s leap happened on the Moon. I contacted Brian with the news, and he soon invited me to meet with him in California, which was the beginning of our close collaboration. Brian was highly impressed with Armstrong’s leap, but still wondered if it could have been faked with wires or some other trick. I introduced him to Jay, which led to this page of Jay’s.

But two years later, Brian wrote this in his Re-Inheriting the Earth:


“To set the record straight, there is no doubt in my mind that the capsules went into orbit around the Moon, because of the photographs, signals received on Earth, and capabilities of the enormous Saturn V rocket booster. It is conceivable but highly doubtful that the lunar landings didn’t take place. Who am I to say one way or another, since I wasn’t there? Regardless, the Apollo program was a great success. It gave me a valuable reference point for what we must do now.”


That is not exactly an endorsement of faked Moon landings. Brian never did the work to become convinced one way or another. To be fair to Brian, he had bigger issues on his plate. I can imagine what attention Brian received over his Moon landing stance: I was bombarded. I am still approached to this day by people who argue for faked Moon landings. Sigh. I have yet to see any evidence, when approached, which is not the same old “evidence” that was discredited long ago, as disinformation is constantly recycled to dupe the gullible, and today I consider the issue not very far removed from Flat Earth theorizing. One pal knows somebody who truly believes that Earth is flat, in the USA, no less. It is no joke. So, the faked Moon landing crowd may exist for a very long time.

For the record, that Fox TV show that gave Brian such a high profile on this issue officially approached Brian on the Cydonia issue, to get their foot in the door (in Brian’s words, they “ambushed” him). It was a wide-ranging interview, and those ten seconds on the Moon landings, which they aired on their show, was what they really sought. That was a typical media performance, especially for Fox, whose news shows resemble Nazi propaganda, which feature Dick Cheney holding forth to this day on all the WMD that Iraq had, as if he lives in another dimension, or that Global Warming is some kind of hoax.

Was Brian being irresponsible with his public Apollo musings? That is arguable, but I think that Brian was outspoken on many issues, most of which were vitally important, and he had no idea what he was getting into when he gave that interview. He regretted those ten seconds for the rest of his life. It wrecked what little remaining relationship that he had with the astronaut corps, and undoubtedly had something to do with NASA’s stonewalling me over Brian’s astronaut bio. After our meeting in August 2001, we never talked about the Moon landings again, as far as their authenticity went. We had bigger fish to fry, and we were not going to waste any more time on that trivial issue….at least until I began to write Brian’s Wikipedia bio in 2010. His Wikipedia bio was dominated by the fake Moon landings issue. I knew that I could not make it go away, but I did not want it to dominate Brian’s bio, as it was a tabloid issue. It really is crazy that that became Brian’s claim to “fame” late in his life.

You can see the edit history of his bio. I began making my changes in December 2010, and you can see others joining in and erasing my work and putting the Moon landings back into prominence, with its own section, after I tried to make it less prominent. Wikipedia’s “editors” were not going to let the issue rest. At least one I think was an Establishment asset, joining Wikipedia solely to erase my work. Of course, they were mostly anonymous cowards. After months of fruitlessness (I worked 70 hours a week at the time), I informed Brian that it was not going well and asked him what he wanted to do. He then provided me with what truly became his last word on the subject. But Wikipedia’s editors erased my references to it, as if they wanted the distorted version of Brian’s views to dominate his Wikipedia bio. Wikipedia is truly worse than worthless on many key issues, I use it with great caution, and hope that I never have to play editor/contributor there again. God forbid that an article on Dennis is ever written, as it would likely be pure disinformation. I doubt that I would do battle there regarding Dennis, partly because I would be too interested a party.

When Brian wrote his last word on the Moon landings, he informed me that Jay’s page on him was overblown, but we never got into the details of why he thought so. In June 2011, Brian wrote his last email to me, invited me to South America, and was planning on promoting my strategy for bringing free energy to the world. He died the next month. He was a great man, and I miss him dearly. His voice is very needed in these dark days.

I was working my usual insane hours at my day job, and when I took a career break in early 2013 to write my big essay, getting Brian’s bio issue resolved, especially regarding the Moon landings issue, was on my list of things to do.

The issue with Brian’s “last word” was that it was only hosted at my site, which is not “notable” enough for Wikipedia, although its editors have linked to my site plenty of times over the years (which eventually gets erased, but I still see traffic come to my site from Wikipedia, especially the Russian version, mostly regarding Paul Bragg, I believe). I reached out to all of the big names of the Moon landings controversy and related issues, trying to get it hosted someplace “notable” enough so that Wikipedia’s editors would not erase the reference to it. Nobody helped. The responses were a variety of excuses and challenges, if I ever heard back at all, and my impression was that Brian’s last word was not what they wanted to hear. The members of Jay’s forum were the most naïve and irrational of all, with lawyer wannabees and other Establishment worshippers holding forth.

After that experience, which was unfortunately not very surprising, and just one more confirmation of my journey’s primary lesson, then the miracle happened. With Brian dead and no longer a very viable political football to both sides of the issue, sanity finally prevailed. Brian’s astronaut days are certainly his most “notable” accomplishment, although he would probably have met Wikipedia’s “notability” criteria even if he was not an astronaut, but to be fair, his astronaut days played a big part of opening the doors to being Carl Sagan’s, Gerard O’Neill’s, and Mo Udall’s colleague, as well as getting his pal Buzz Aldrin a job. Of course, if free energy makes its appearance before humanity flushes itself down the toilet, Brian will have more than one professional biography written about him, as will Dennis, and probably me, too.

With the faked Moon landings issue dying down in recent years, not the least of which is photos from the Moon piling more impressive evidence onto the stack, the faked Moon landing crowd has dwindled, and Brian’s bio began getting treatment from NASA types, and one of them erased the entire faked Moon landings section of his bio as unsourced tabloid fodder. Hurray! I can live with Brian’s Wikipedia bio as it stands today. Virtually his entire Wikipedia bio as it stands today is my work. We’ll see if somebody tries to resurrect the faked Moon landings issue, especially if they try to ignore Brian’s last word on the subject. I may dive back into the fray then, but I hope it never happens, and the issue is left to rest in peace.

All in all, the faked Moon landings issue was very educational for me, and not just the evidentiary part of it, but how I got sucked into the milieu, beginning with Moongate, how I navigated the morass of ax grinders and others, and how I learned to stay away from it. I learned a lot about how to evaluate such evidence, how to write about it, how to deal with inquiries, and how to do battle at Wikipedia. It brought Brian into my life in a big way, and was the most maddening issue of dealing with his legacy, which thankfully resolved itself, without my intervention.

If people want these kinds of conspiracist situations to mercifully disappear, the USA’s national security state needs to be dismantled, for starters. There are so many evil activities hidden behind the fraudulent shroud of “national security” that it provides the grist for fertile and paranoid imaginations to run amok. The faked Moon landings issue is just one of many that have sprung up since JFK’s assassination and cover-up, and it is ironic indeed that JFK tried to end the Space Race in his life’s last months, which may well have been related to his murder. If that Soviet-American mission to the Moon had happened, the faked Moon landings issue would have never arisen and the Cold War might have ended back in the 1960s. Those are big what ifs.

I don’t shrink from controversial issues, but I don’t want to tangle with another one like the fake Moon landings issue. In the end, it was related to improving my scientific literacy and honing my tools of discernment, and for that, I am grateful. I am going to wind down my scientific literacy posts for now and focus on my big essay update for this year. I may get it done in June, but September seems more likely. We’ll see how it goes.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

With that series of posts finished for now, a little more on my intention, which I was just discussing this morning. God bless Dennis and all of those FE businessmen, scientists, and inventors, but they don’t have a prayer in today’s environment. Only people like Dennis ever got to the level where Godzilla had to get very active, and Dennis had to survive the lower levels of the game before Godzilla took much notice. Although Dennis was eventually banned from the energy industry in the USA, he is still raising hell, at 70 years old. His journey has simply been incredible to witness.

If Dennis could not make a dent, I don’t know anybody else who remotely can with the businessman’s/inventor’s/populist’s approach, and I decided to do something different. Brian, like Dennis, was a man of the people, and carrying their spears was among my life’s greatest joys and honors, but it was ultimately all futile, other than being a great learning experience, if harrowing. Dennis should be dead dozens of times over, Brian’s life was shortened by his adventures, Mr. Professor’s life was ruined and shortened by his involvement, too, and I will always be picking up the pieces of my shattered life.

I don’t want any more blood on my hands or witness any more aspirants disappearing into Godzilla’s maw. It took many years to arrive at my current approach, and I am devoting the rest of my life’s “spare” time to trying it out. I am in no rush, although I am fully aware of the emergency state that humanity and Earth is in. I am going to do all that I can so that my effort does not lapse into today’s arrested development of the FE field, in which tinkerers, scientists, and promoters/businessmen (and Messiahs ) dominate. I think that if Bucky Fuller was alive today, he would be taking an approach similar to mine, and we will see how it goes. It may only help a little, it may be the critical missing piece, but it won’t hurt, which is more important to me than making a dent.

Forums come and go, and this one, for instance, is dead, other than my participation, along with a NASA pal’s. But I intend for my forum to outlive me, I have been very picky on who could join, and I expected it to start slowly, and it has. I am building the beacon to attract those whom I seek, and although it might seem like there is no action happening, a great deal is, behind the scenes.

Back to work on this year’s big essay revision.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As I have been doing all along, I am marking another 100K page views, as this thread will reach 1.1 million today, with those bots being more than 90% of the traffic.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I have been thinking about my effort some today. There will certainly be room for free energy theorists and inventors, but they are not going to be the main attraction, not by a long shot. The FE field has been in a state of arrested development for so long that such people instantly become the focus of all manner of attention that is usually counterproductive. I have not been in a room with a working FE device, and don’t need to be. If people need to do that before they are willing to study my work and sing, then they are not in my target audience.

I thought of an analogy only a few minutes ago, which is why I am writing this post. After my mystical awakening, I became quite the mystical student, and have had many experiences that showed me in no uncertain terms that there is far more than meets the eye to our existence. On my list of things to do was see a UFO. It was not that high on my list, but if I could easily see one, then it would be worth my time. I knew many people who had seen UFOs and even went out hunting for them, and they often had spectacular experiences. So, when a Boeing pal suggested going to Gilliland’s Ranch to see one, I was game. I did not go to dare one to appear, or genuflect to them, or have my worldview radically change, but I went with the intent to see one, and I was not disappointed. Within seconds of the event, I asked myself if it was worth it, spending a long weekend traveling to see a UFO. I decided that it was, and I took people there three times afterward, with the latest being last year (and yes, I saw something, very similar to my first event back in 2005).

One of my Boeing pals, however, was never the same, and walked around in a daze for the next week. If a person has witnessed an FE gizmo working before they encounter my work, great. If they haven’t, so what? I seek people who have already made enough of a shift in their consciousness that witnessing a working FE device will not be a very big deal to them. Their reaction to seeing it will be like mine to seeing a UFO, along the lines of, “I really didn’t doubt it, but there is something to seeing it with one’s own eyes. My worldview did not change with seeing one, but it did help make it more robust.”

When my friend got his exotic technology show, his eyes were bugging out of his head, but that was partly because he was blindsided by it. He did not seek the show, but the show sought him. But for those that I seek, if they got a show like that, it would only be confirmatory of their perspective, not revelatory and life-changing. Those who are not going to get out of their armchairs unless they are invited to an FE demonstration are not in my target audience. Also, there is a yawning gap between a working FE prototype and something that can power a home. What my friend saw could power a home, but we are not going to get any right now. Sitting around, waiting for it to be delivered into our laps, is not very productive.

Best,

Wade

[Krishna]

As you know Wade, I will always have trouble with the mystical, and while I believe that FE can exist and won't be surprised if I could be in the same room.

Speaking of ET I read this article

I just finished Arrival of the Fittest, it borrows so much from algorithms (my favourite subject) that I had a blast reading it. Arrival of the Fittest and Vital Question have convinced me that life is not rare, so ET exists the only question remaining is whether FE exists and the technology in the show that you friend got exists or not.
Looking back at the enormous changes that have happened in the world, I can't dismiss it out of hand. I can easily imagine a world in which we are primitive.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Freeknowledge:

Yes, Arrival of the Fittest would appeal to number crunchers. I am in the middle of Earth’s Deep History, and it is a good read on how geology and Christianity interacted, and how long it took for scientists to disregard the Bible as some history of Earth and Creation in the West.

What my friend saw was mind-boggling, and until somebody has witnessed such events, they won’t “believe” it, particularly if there are many degrees of separation between them and the event, which is why I have always been conservative in my renderings of such issues and won’t discuss much that was not either experienced by me or a tight circle around me, or is something like peer-reviewed scientific papers or credible scholarship.

Anybody who has been in the field for long at a high enough level knows well about such technologies, and stuff like Sparky Sweet’s was mind-bogging enough. For those who truly seek, they will find, but the FE terrain is also dangerous territory to navigate. Those who have been in the FE field at a high enough level were either murdered, had their lives wrecked, etc., and coming to understand the state of the technology simply came with the territory.

You will always have a problem with the mystical until you have experiences that show you how false materialism is, which is the religion of our Epoch, not a scientific finding. Then, there is no going back, and it has wrecked scientific careers, such as Brian’s. There is no other way that I know of, and the experiences are not that hard to have, if one truly seeks, but be careful of what you wish for!

Many years ago, when there were arguments whether planets were rare star system features or not, Michael said that there were a million ensouled “species” in our galaxy, and Earth hosts two: humans and cetaceans. So, it has been interesting to see mainstream science slowly catching up, at least in the musings department. I know that cetaceans can read minds, and they like the idea of FE ( ). Michael Hyson’s experience was not that unusual.

One thing that the study for writing my big essay drove home is how close to the cave days humanity is. We are just emerging from some highly primitive times. When I think of the racism, sexism, and bigotry that I was exposed to in my childhood, I shake my head. The Fourth Epoch is very young, only a few centuries old, and we are still trying to shake off the Third Epoch. Just three hundred years into our future, this kind of world becomes feasible, if elite suppression ended. Imagine a culture with a million year lead or so. This kind of world does not even need much imagination to see, if FE was unshackled. Oh, are we primitive, but the egos of many people do not want to hear it. Attack-the-tumor cancer treatment, toxic waste as “medicine,” slaughtering millions to steal their resources, and the list could go on. What a bunch of barbarians we are, and the ETs keeping their distance, and keeping Earth under “quarantine,” is so easy to understand.

Best,

Wade

[Billy Vasiliadis]

Hello Wade,

I readily admit to being naïve and having had very little, if any, experience similar to what you describe and have been through yourself. I still have complexes, prejudices and fears. I still think, speak and act in ways which are immature and come from a place of scarcity and 'it's either you or me, we can't both win'. I say oh so many things but my actions often don't measure up. I'm not sure where I'm going with this, but I guess what I'm trying to say is that I can see what you mean when you say you are 'looking for needles in haystacks'. I remember in an older post of yours where you talked about how you were concerned that your movement would attract people who were simply looking for something to be a part of, and I can see and feel that so strongly within myself. A solid sense of self, and a real ability to self-analyse and self-reflect are vital attributes for the people you are looking for I would say. It's going to be a real challenge, but I really do believe that you will find people with the right stuff. It looks like you've already found a few.

It's pretty funny how we have all these ideas about who we think we are, and what we value, fall to pieces in the face of challenging experience. I think that is what I admire most about you Wade, that despite all the difficulties and suffering, you have stayed true to yourself and have kept your integrity and compassion, something which is really rare here on Earth.

I will try and begin reading your essay, but I'm concerned that I don't have enough background information or knowledge (or intelligence) to really get anything substantial out of it. Is prerequisite knowledge important in order to understand and integrate the information in your essay, or can you learn as you go along? I was under the impression that for those who don't really have much of a background in science, such as myself, supplementary material would be necessary to understand your writings. I guess I'm looking for a magic bullet, which of course doesn't exist.

Perhaps the biggest issue is one of commitment. To read through your entire essay and really do the work necessary to digest and understand it, would require a lot of commitment and effort. It would require a long hard look at oneself and a shining of the light on all those parts which are 'not so nice', which is never fun, to put it lightly. I'll be upfront and say I don't know whether those are things that I am capable of at this point in time.

On a side note, diet is something I have been absolutely obsessing over, wondering which is the best for humans. I have been wondering whether a raw diet is what humans are designed to eat, and is what we thrive most on, physically and mentally. I'm convinced that eating a diet predominantly of fruits and vegetables (at least 60%) is best, but the raw side confuses me. In the book you mention in your essay, 'Stale Food vs Fresh Food', the writer does talk about the superiority of raw foods over cooked, but more importantly how damaging flour is. I understand how extensive processing to food, like removing parts of it and/or adding a host of other processed ingredients to it can be damaging, but all this talk about flour being unhealthy, even wholemeal, has always confused me. Aren't you simply grinding the grain up? I will have to go back and read the chapter on flour, maybe I've simply misunderstood. I was also skimming through the part of your essay were you talk about the work of Richard Wrangham and how cooking our food gave us the calories and spare time we needed for our brains to grow. Reading through his wiki, it says that he believes that raw diets are not sustainable for human beings, with cooked food being necessary. In fact, I ordered his book 'Catching Fire', which I look forward to reading when it becomes available at my local library (someone beat me to the punch, maybe another reader of your work )

Thanks,
Billy.

[Wade Frazier]

Great post, Vasili/Billy, and I am going hiking in a few minutes. I will reply later today.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Vasili/Billy:

That you doubt that you have the right stuff is a key indicator that you may have the right stuff. Very early on in our relationship, Ilie would exclaim, “I am no hero!” And my reply was “Great, because I am not looking for any!” Heroes are not what are needed today, at least to make FE happen. Indiana Jones cannot do it by himself. Your honest introspection and self-doubt is immensely more valuable to me than cock-sure pronouncements that you have the right stuff (or are the Messiah ).

Although one of the world’s foremost scientists in the field raved about the journey of life on Earth part of my essay, that scientist is a popularizer himself, which is what made his praise even more meaningful, as that essay is written for people like you, not scientists. You do not need to be a degreed scientist to digest my big essay, and most of the references are to popularized works. IMO, you should not have to study much more than the essay and selected links and referenced works to approach the comprehensive perspective that I think is needed, and I am here to help. I’ll give an example in just this past week, of where scientific literacy is needed in order to navigate this milieu.

I am not the only person helping manage Brian’s legacy, and I heard from somebody in Brian’s camp who informed me that somebody was making FE from water, which can immediately solve our energy problems. Water does not provide any chemical energy. Not even Mills makes that claim for hydrinos, but he claims that his hydrinos can extract energy from the zero-point field. With just minimal scientific literacy, not much more than is needed to digest this chapter of my big essay, it should be obvious that no “water car,” “water motorcycle,” and the like is going to solve our energy problems, especially when they claim that they are merely playing the chemical energy game. Splitting water and then burning the hydrogen is not a source of energy at all, but using water like a battery. Batteries are not going to solve our energy problems. They are not energy sources. I don’t think that it is difficult to understand that concept, but many in the FE milieu (or, at least their cheerleaders) make such scientifically illiterate statements. Not only does it make them, and by extension the FE milieu, look like a bunch of gossipy New Age rubes, it serves to distract people from what is important.

Similarly, the promotion of electric cars as some kind of energy solution is supremely ignorant, but it abounds in mainstream discourse. All that you are doing is moving the exhaust pipe out of the city, for a city-driving electric car. It may help make a city more livable, but it is not an energy source. The energy source is the important issue, and everything else is just noise. The conversation that I hope to mount will not have anybody chime in with, “Hey, did you hear about that water car that can solve our energy problems?” Or, “Did you hear about that new battery that is going to solve our energy problems?” That may seem elementary, but it is amazing how such ignorant statements abound in energy conversations. Attaining the scientific literacy to understand why water or hydrogen or batteries are not going to solve our energy problems I doubt is a heavy lift for anybody.

I’ll readily admit, however, that asking my readers to become FE physicists and capable of fully digesting Sparky Sweet’s paper, for instance, is not on my list if things to do. Even if a high-level discussion of Sparky’s work was accomplished, what would it really accomplish? The FE issue is not going to be solved by mastering Sparky’s scientific hypotheses. Only a working model is really going to make any headway. I have been at this for more than 40 years, and it took seven years of my life to produce my site as it stands today. I don’t expect anybody to digest it immediately. When people tell me that they read my big essay yesterday and digested it, they are either the smartest person on Earth, a liar, or in so far over their heads that they definitely don’t have what I am looking for. If I was 25 and encountered my site, I would not have come up for air for a year. I am OK with people poking around and trying to validate my work (that is why I provide references ), but if they have what I am looking for, they will realize that I am not pulling a fast one, am not in thrall to some ideological slant, etc. I am OK with disagreements and challenges, even on Global Warming, but the challengers need to have done their homework and be able to articulate the source of their disagreement. Otherwise, it is empty opinions flying back and forth, which is worthless activity.

Studying Wrangham’s work is good work. Even if Wrangham is wrong about the early control of fire, understanding his hypothesis, the evidence for it, and the challenges to it, is a great way to develop scientific literacy. And you have a personal interest in it, which enhances your focus on it. That is a good way to go about this business.

For the record, in my view, at least half of the human diet should be raw fruits and vegetables, especially fruit. Any food processing should not go far beyond boiling or steaming, and yes, grinding grains into fine flours presents challenges for human biology. Today’s human diet is obviously far from that ideal, and kind of paradoxically, industrial nations eat worse diets than some poor nations do, as far as food quality can go. For instance, the average Cuban is vastly healthier than the average American.

Long-term storage of food and it attendant processing is the source of many human health problems. The more it is processed, the less it is food. People should eat as little food as possible that comes out of a box or can and has a long list of ingredients on it. That is the bad stuff, but the unholy alliance of agribusiness and the medical racket tries to make it all seem healthy.

Best,

Wade

[Billy Vasiliadis]

Hey Wade,

You talk about energy sources and I am curious what you think about the so called renewable energy sources. Things like solar and wind energy. Can they meet our energy demands? I've been doing some volunteer work with a local environmental group and one of our key talking points is the switch from non renewable energy sources (greenhouse gas emitting fossil fuels) to the safer and more clean renewable forms of energy. Is the problem with things like an electric car because of the fact that the electricity which will be needed to power the car will still be coming from burning fossil fuels? I am aware that some countries in the world (Germany, Japan, Sweden etc) get a significant amount of power from renewable energy sources and it seems that that is one potential path we can take if we want to lighten our footprint on the planet. Here in Australia, we have ready access to sun and wind, but because of poor policy and apathy, we don't take advantage of these natural resources. Instead we dig coal out of the ground and burn that in order to meet our demands, which is such a shame. A great deal of it is exported as well, if I understand it correctly. People are starting to wake up though, and it is my hope that enough pressure will be put on our current governments so that they can put forth realistic and meaningful targets and climate policies. Despite the fact that overall, our footprint is rather small, per capita, we are some of the biggest polluters and energy consumers in the world, up there with the US and Canada. So much for the Paris agreement.

Billy.