WADE FRAZIER : A Healed Planet

Hi:

I was planning on making a post that takes a break from the integrity thread, but as I sat down to write it, I realized that it is an integrity post, or the lack thereof. I am reading Ian Morris’s books that Krishna mentioned, and so far, my conclusion is going to be, “not bad for a white guy.” Morris mentioned Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of our Nature as the best book on the modern decline in violence. I found myself rereading Uncle Ed’s critique of Pinker’s book, and Ed, like Noam, was always notable for taking it easy on imperial hacks, usually arguing that they had so deeply imbibed their indoctrination that they were incapable of seeing how irrational their work was, and it took me many years to really understand what Ed was saying. We don’t need to invoke conscious dishonesty or a “conspiracy” when other dynamics produce the same results. But in Ed’s critique of Pinker’s book, Ed outright called Pinker’s work dishonest, and I can see why.

I crunch numbers for a living, and have a pretty good BS detector for when people play games with the numbers to make them say what they want to. Ed showed how Pinker did that repeatedly in Better Angels, and when his statistical gymnastics actually failed to make his bogus points, Pinker then engaged in transparent sophistry to explain the data away.

One of Pinker’s exercises in particular raised my hackles, when he attacked Lancet’s study in violent death in Iraq after the American invasion, and instead embraced the Iraq Body Count numbers, which were admittedly an undercount. Pinker raised the Main Street Bias issue, which a chorus of imperial hacks jumped on in the wake of the publication of Lancet’s study, which is considered the only statistically valid study of Iraq’s violent deaths, and it used best-practice methods. I studied the attacks on Lancet’s study in real-time, when they came out, and it was disgusting. It was just another bunch of imperial hacks trying to cover up genocide.

Pinker is a Canadian at Harvard, and Morris is a Brit at Stanford, and both are, to a degree, bootlicking the USA. Morris much less so, but his praise of Pinker’s book is telling. Bill Gates and other “humanitarians” praised Pinker’s imperial valentine, and then took photo ops with people such as Paul Kagame. Gates’s IQ is a lot higher than mine, so “intelligence” does not seem to have much to do with embracing fraudulent work such as Pinker’s. When “intelligence” meets self-serving indoctrination, indoctrination almost always wins. That is not a high-integrity act. Even people such as Ralph McGehee took many years to wake up to the evil. These dynamics are a big part of why humanity has its toes over the edge of the abyss.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

As a coda to the previous post, my lessons on integrity were learned before I ever heard of the radical left, and Uncles Ed, Noam, Howard, and Mike. As I digested their amazing work, Orwell came up a lot, and it was in Orwell’s work that I first read about how servile intellectuals are to the powerful, but it did not really hit home deeply until I studied for writing Ed’s biography, as I studied the insane attacks on him and Noam over the years, from leading academic and liberals. I had done it before, but never so intensively. A five-year-old could see through the “logic” of the assailants, but they could not seem to see how bogus their interested-conflicted “rational” opinions were.

That was by no means a new realization, but as I studied for writing Ed’s biography, it hit home like never before how irrational the attacks were, and I realized that the vast majority of the attacks were not consciously dishonest, but they were all about protecting the hand that fed them, and it did not matter if it was an evil hand that slaughtered millions in the name of profit and power. All of today’s dominant ideologies are similar, with their well-paid “intellectuals” flacking for them. It really seems that all of those “smart” people are incapable of understanding how irrational, and ultimately dishonest, their attacks on people like Noam and Ed are, and it once again brings up Brian O’s question: Is humanity a sentient species? And if we are, does it mean much?

My fellow travelers with my highest respect all drank the Kool-Aid, but they all eventually woke up. The imperial pundits will likely all go to their graves repeating their imperial mantras that don’t pass even cursory inspection. It is really something to see, and impinges directly on the integrity issue. But I am going to back up and cover the integrity issue via how I learned my lessons about it.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Frans de Waal had a graphic in one of his books that illustrated the integrity issue quite well. His pyramid sits on top of resource availability, and energy is always the master resource. When people’s immediate needs are met, then they can expand their concern for the wellbeing of others, beginning with their family, then their social circles, then their society, then humanity, and then all life on Earth. When times get hard, people will justify eating their own children. Humans can justify anything, as their in-group shrinks to one person: themselves.

To ask people to help all life on Earth, or humanity, or even their society, when they live in scarcity and fear, not knowing where their next meal comes from or if their job will last into next week, won’t work. Enticing them, to appeal to their self-interest, is the game that Dennis played (along with noble rhetoric, but that likely did not have much impact), and I got to see, repeatedly, why such an approach would not work. Dennis also played to all three population management ideologies, which are all based on scarcity and provide egocentric strokes and material rewards to their adherents. They are all self-serving ideologies, and won’t work for this Epochal task.

Almost nobody had the right stuff to avoid the perils and resist the temptations of the free energy pursuit. People who were involved to serve their self-interest always fell by the wayside, for one reason or another, and it was virtually always because they reached the limits of their integrity. They sacrificed the “cause” on the altar of their self-interest. Almost nobody walked away from the effort with their integrity intact.

In some ways, I am amazed at my naïveté when I left home, but in ways it was normal. As I look back at my childhood, I was blissfully insulated from many grim realities of my world. I attended the California equivalent of Saint Hitler Grammar School, winning its first spelling bee in 1968, while my great nation, at its peak of power and prosperity, was slaughtering millions of people. That same year, my mother took me to the UC Berkeley campus for some reason, and I remember seeing police drag a hapless hippie-type through the campus. Mark later discovered what Berkeley was really like, if TPTB felt threatened. I was raised in a racist and bigoted household, and I still cringe when I think what came out of my mouth when I left home. It took a couple of years to put that behind me, but one brother embraced it so fervently that he joined the Ku Klux Klan.

But I also had my mystical awakening when I was 16, along with my cultural awakening, and my energy dreams began then. I really did think that maybe a third of the population would do the right thing, when it came time to do it. That was naïve psychological projection, common among my overgrown Boy Scout fellow travelers. We all woke up eventually, and my post-graduate days began sobering me up quickly. My one-in-three fell to about one-in-five at the university and to one-in-ten by the time my first stint in LA was behind me. My “friends” I am sure orchestrated my trial by fire in LA, but what nagged me the most was the growing suspicion that my profession was worthless. Then that voice in my head came through and led me straight into Dennis’s company, which I still have a hard time believing happened, even though it did.

I was on fire for my first three months at Dennis’s company, working for free, until I saw my boss engineer the theft of the company while the employees cheered. It was my first big awakening moment. By the end of the summer, I thought that maybe one-in-50 had the right stuff.

Then I chased Dennis out to Boston, soon became his partner, we began raising Cain, and immediately attracted the Eye of Sauron (but it was probably aware of us in Seattle), and we received the friendly buyout offer, among other events. But our effort in Boston went nowhere, the man we hired to run the office tried to steal the business, as usual, and by the time we moved to my home town of Ventura, my number had slipped to one-in-100.

In Ventura, the fireworks really began, and when my three years in Ventura were finished, my life was shattered, I was radicalized, I would never again see the world the same way, and my number has not really moved much since then: people with the right stuff are one-in-thousands. It was the biggest and most painful surprise of my journey, a lesson that I resisted every step of the way, until it was beaten into my head in no uncertain terms. With that level of integrity, or lack thereof, amongst the general population, I can understand the pronouncements of doom that I regularly see and that people send me. I have not given up, and those whom I respected the most never did. Dennis is still at it in his 70s, incredibly. He should be dead dozens of times over, and has been banned from the energy industry in the USA, after David Rockefeller got involved, but he is still trying. I have never met or heard of another like him. There were other beacons in the darkness, such as Mr. Professor and Brian, but they were few and far between.

But that level of integrity is just what it is, and I stopped judging it long ago. However, I am regularly challenged over my biggest lesson, but the challengers have all been naïve, bereft of any experience of trying to make something like free energy happen, and some sallied forth, thinking to prove me wrong, and I never saw one of them get past Square One before they were defeated, usually self-defeated, and got sobered up, if their lives and careers were not wrecked. To deny that reality is extremely perilous for trying to manifest the biggest event in the human journey. One famous and grizzled fellow traveler, when he read my “personal integrity is the world’s scarcest commodity” statement, replied with, “You got that right!” :)

There is a lot more to come on this subject, including how it has informed my efforts over the past generation. I am not asking anybody to take the kinds of integrity tests that Dennis and Mr. Professor took, as passing the test often means a ruined or prematurely ended life.

Best,

Wade

Quote:

---

Posted by Wade Frazier

... Gates’s IQ is a lot higher than mine, ...

Best,

Wade

---

I'd be willing to bet a sack of avocados and a case of corn chips that this statement is wrong.

(Love ya, bro!)

-Dennis

Hey Dennis:

On the IQ front, Gates has me by about 20-30 points, and maybe more. I have known a fair number of people in the 160-170 range, and I know when I am outclassed in that department. I see “intelligence” as just a tool, like any other talent. It is what you do with it that matters. What makes Uncle Noam important to me is not his otherworldly intelligence, but his great heart and integrity. Dennis is as talented a businessman as I ever saw, but his heart attracted me to him. The same goes for Brian.

Gates parlayed his intelligence (and ruthlessness) into vast wealth, but I would not call him a great humanitarian. Oh, the Gates stories I could tell.

Best,

Wade

Wade, any thoughts on the open movement?

Hi Omni:

I had never heard of the Open Movement, and I assume you mean this. I have written that I extensively interacted with the father of open source software, Richard Stallman, and boy, was he ever stuck in his Epoch, like nearly everybody else. Of course, collaboration is good stuff, but the Open Movement, like Stallman, is going to be firmly rooted in its Epoch. They seem to be an urban renewal movement, while I aim to end cities as we know them. :)

What I see a lot of is people thinking that coming up with a new social organization is going to solve our problems, when social organization has always been determined by the “means of production” that Marx wrote about, which is always rooted in the energy acquisition methods. There are no exceptions to that dynamic that I know of. Reshuffling the deck of scarcity is no solution, as Uncle Bucky wrote of long ago.

Until the energetic means of production change, stuff like the Open Movement is not going to make much of a dent, IMO.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

This will be an anniversary post. Years ending in 8 have been particularly significant to me, beginning with when I was born, in 1958. In 1968, I was going to Junípero Serra elementary school, and winning its first spelling bee that year was a harbinger of where my academic career was headed. In 1978, I began my business studies, after that voice first spoke to me, and met Mr. Professor. 1988 was my life’s worst year, the year that I woke up, but it was also the year that I got together with the woman who became my wife. In 1998, I was working hard on what became my site today, and that was a happy year. 2008 was the year of my first public interview, when my career finally calmed down a little from the previous five years, when I decided that I could not work in public forums, and planned to mount my own one day. I began studying for writing what became my big essay that year, and Brian came back into my life, the same year that Dennis had the sitting president’s eyes bugging out of his head, and was soon run out of the USA for his effort, after David Rockefeller got involved, and the financial system collapsed.

Here we are, in 2018, the year I turn 60. My wife put me on the Whole30 diet back in February, and I am nearly halfway to my weight loss goal for the year (which I was not sure that I could achieve, as I was defeated last year in my attempt), but what was revelatory was how my metabolism changed after the 30 days. I am never going back to processed food. I can tell how health-wrecking it is, not that the idea is new to me, but when I work 12 hour days at my day job, the path of least resistance is getting my lunch at Safeway. I have not darkened their door since my wife put me on the Whole30, and I am never going back. All of my food comes from PCC now.

So, we will see what the rest of year has in store. Last year was a trying year, and I hope that this year is not so challenging. I am getting too old for that. :)

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Back to the integrity issue. In a world of scarcity and fear, acts of integrity are going to be few and far between. It is just how it is, and wishing/believing it was different, or judging the situation, is counterproductive. But humanity has its toes over the edge of the abyss and time is short to right the ship. Humanity’s future, if there is much of one, will hinge on the integrity issue.

I first heard of Noam Chomsky when Dennis was still in jail, but it was not until the next year that Lies of Our Times (LOOT) launched, and I heard of it while driving to LA to work at a medical lab that was nearly wiped out by the medical racket. I subscribed to LOOT later that year, and began to understand how the media worked. I had already been on the receiving end of its lies for years, but then I began to learn why it could only seem to serve up lies.

A couple of years of study and resuming my career later, a movie on Noam’s life came out, and I contacted Noam for the first time later that year. When I published my first site in 1996, I contacted Ralph McGehee, to get his permission to quote his work, which led to our relationship. A couple of years after that, I began corresponding with LOOT’s editor, Ed Herman, which led to my becoming his biographer a generation later. I contacted Howard Zinn a few years later, again seeking permission for a quote, and received his gracious reply. I became Brian O’s biggest fan when he published Miracle in the Void, buying 35 copies of the book and handing them to friends and family, and eventually became his biographer. Dennis has treated me like his biographer, which I suppose I am, and I recently contacted Peter Ward for another publication permission, and received his amazing reply.

So, there are points of light in the darkness, and I have been blessed to know some of the brightest, and Dennis most of all. So, I am not hunting for something that does not exist, just something that is very rare. And it was that understanding, that I resisted every step of the way, until it was beaten into my head, which led to my current approach. I am not asking people to risk their lives, playing on that high road. That is where the greatest lessons are learned, but it is also where your life can be wrecked or prematurely ended. I am seeking people who can operate at a level or three below that, whose hearts are in the right place, have woken up, and have enough integrity to let go of their scarcity-based conditioning and dare to imagine abundance. That seems pretty easy, right? :) Almost nobody is able and willing to do the work to hit the notes, and I accepted that reality long ago. But I don’t need many for my plan to work.

I regularly get newbies who might understand a piece of what I am imparting, think they understand the big picture, and rush out to proselytize to their social circles, which means that they did not really understand. The best of them come back to me, chastened by the experience, and are then ready to learn. They have to give up their sociality and in-group “thinking,” in order to understand, and almost no humans are willing and able to do that. Combined positive intention, not sociality, will be the key, and it all rests on the integrity issue, with sentience a distant second, and everything else is noise.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Another traffic marker… This thread went beyond 2.3 million views today. The traffic has greatly slowed down on this thread in the past year. Part of it is that traffic has shifted to my forum, and the bots have slowed down on this thread, for reasons I don’t know. Nobody really wants bot traffic on their sites, but it comes with the Internet territory these days, so slowing bot traffic is nice to see.

For what I am trying to do, quality is vastly more important than quantity.

Best,

Wade

Quote:

---

Posted by Dennis Leahy

Quote:

---

Posted by Wade Frazier

... Gates’s IQ is a lot higher than mine, ...

Best,

Wade

---

I'd be willing to bet a sack of avocados and a case of corn chips that this statement is wrong.

(Love ya, bro!)

-Dennis

---

My only face-to-face contact with Bill Gates was sometime in the early 1980's, in a meeting of about a dozen people, as Microsoft was trying to sell the company I worked at back then, Convergent Technologies, on some of their software.

My recollection now is dim, but I don't recall him showing any stunning brilliance. He came in, made his pitch as to how the future of technology was aligned with Microsoft, and left after an hour, for his minions to continue the detailed discussion.

Of course, that means little. Even the brightest bulbs don't glow hot all the time.

===

Some avacados and chips sounds good though :).

Thanks Paul:

Well, I brought up Gates, so I guess that I need to tell a tale or two. The attached picture features my friend Bill, on the left. I posted it back in 2014, soon after Bill died. The other Bill is two seats away. That picture is from a meeting, where Gates came to see about my friend’s breakthrough in search algorithms. Is it a bit of a story, but my friend worked for Microsoft or one of Gates’s other companies for somewhere around 20-30 years.

My friend was a mathematician who worked at one of Gates’s private companies at the time, and he invented what turned out to be a key breakthrough in search technology. While some people at the company immediately understood that it was a big breakthrough, his boss would not pass it upstream in the organization, because he did not understand it, and my friend Bill had to do an end-run of his boss to get Gates’s attention. When Gates got wind of it, he came over to the company the same day, to discuss it with my friend. The shirt that Bill is wearing was run over to the company by his wife, so that Bill could be presentable for his meeting with Gates.

My friend said that although his boss did not really understand what Bill had invented, Gates almost instantly understood it, and its importance. My friend’s breakthrough quickly became a big deal in the search industry, and made Gates even more money, as if he needed it. My friend did well financially, but going above his boss’s head harmed his career, even with that outcome. Microsoft is notorious for that kind of pecking order mentality. But my friend thought that Gates was as brilliant as advertised, especially in understanding what a complex math algorithm could do, and its implications.

Gates lives a purposefully modest lifestyle (relatively!), and he gets points for that, and he might even mean well, kind of. But he plays the “philanthropist” game, and for somebody that “smart,” how can he praise imperial tripe such as Pinker’s, or have photo ops with the greatest mass murderer alive today?

Best,

Wade

Hi:

I have repeatedly written that nobody is going to awaken by reading my work. People can only awaken through personal experience. One of the unhappiest aspects of my effort is when newcomers to my work introduce their “hip” friends to my work, to only have their friends’ heads explode a few pages into it, such as this section, and then come attacks, death threats, and the like, as people’s relationships ended in a series of painful incidents, and I have also been on the receiving end of such attacks. Just like everybody thinks that they have integrity, everybody thinks that they are awake, and that is always relative. More integrity than Hitler? More awake than a rock? Those kinds of introductions to my work are intended to drive away the sleeping, low-integrity individuals, etc. They have no business being involved in what I am attempting. They will begin to awaken when free energy is delivered into their lives.

While my effort is intended to drive away low-integrity individuals and the sleeping, I also don’t set the integrity bar all that high. I am not asking for the life-risking heroic levels of integrity that Dennis lived, or even Brian. I sacrificed my life to my path, and I don’t ask that of anybody. All that I ask today is for the people I seek to work on developing a comprehensive perspective that can understand the Epochal significance of free energy, and help sing the song of abundance with me, ideally at my forum, but there will be other venues to do it. If there were five choirs on Earth, making free energy happen would be easy.

Developing that ability to hit the notes is far easier said than done, because in order to understand my work and dare to envision what I am attempting, people have to relinquish their scarcity-based conditioning, and very few on Earth are willing and able to do that. Virtually everybody cherishes their in-group status, fears ostracism, and the like. A common delusion regarding my work is that I am trying to form another in-group. That is the furthest thing from what I am attempting. I seek to help amass combined positive intention, not another play on sociality. Newcomers often completely misunderstand where the risks are. They don’t have to fear anything from the Global Controllers; it is when they proselytize to their social circles that they get into trouble. If they just sing with me, the GCs won’t bother them, and their social circles won’t be the wiser and won’t even care.

Unless that choir can form, of 5,000-7,000 voices hitting the notes in harmony, it will be pointless to try to progress further. For the people I seek, they will come to understand why those standard paths to free energy have all failed, and see how I am doing something different.

Another integrity hurdle, that will help keep away the self-interested, is that my intention is to give away free energy, if my effort ever develops it. Nobody is going to become the John Rockefeller or Bill Gates of free energy, at least from my effort (or the Messiah :) ). Of course, the enticement of free energy is like nothing else on Earth, and if my effort ever builds up any steam, many will swarm to it, trying to see how they can cash in, et cetera. I have watched people turn into Orcs lusting after The One Ring in the free energy milieu.

Let’s just say that I will be very careful on who can be involved, and anybody can be asked to leave, if they fall of the rails, which is easy to do, especially when the ego gets embroiled in it. But since I am not asking for money or asking anybody to give up their livelihood or asking them to try to make money at this (I actively dissuade that idea), there won’t be any great harm done if people are asked to leave. If anybody is asked to leave, it will mean that I failed on my selection task, and they have my apologies in advance. In my experience, the people who will be asked to leave are those who just can’t help themselves from proselytizing, don’t really understand what I am doing, and they get embattled as they go out and preach, and drag that stuff into the choir. That is not what the choir will be about.

If we can hit the notes in chorus, the people that I seek will come. They have been waiting for that song for their entire lives.

Best,

Wade

Quote:

---

Posted by Wade Frazier

My friend said that although his boss did not really understand what Bill had invented, Gates almost instantly understood it, and its importance. My friend’s breakthrough quickly became a big deal in the search industry, and made Gates even more money, as if he needed it. My friend did well financially, but going above his boss’s head harmed his career, even with that outcome. Microsoft is notorious for that kind of pecking order mentality. But my friend thought that Gates was as brilliant as advertised, especially in understanding what a complex math algorithm could do, and its implications.

---

As someone with more than a bit of math on my curriculum vitae, I can easily enough imagine understanding an algorithm that my boss didn't understand. That someone else, such as Bill Gates in your telling, could understand it might put them in the upper 1% of math IQ, but wouldn't necessarily put them in the upper 0.001% where the world class mind blowing geniuses (myself totally not included) reside.

Hi Paul:

In my response to Dennis, I linked to this story about Gates, and why he is in the top 0.001% or so and has me by 20 IQ points or so. Gates got a 1590 on his SAT. I don’t know which part that he “only” got a 790 on, but his SAT score puts him at a 165 IQ or so, which has me by about 20 points. He is in the top 0.001%, and I am only at 0.1% (710 on the math), and at those levels, you can definitely tell the difference. I had not looked it up until today, but a guy a year ahead of me in high school (we had the same teacher mentor, and great things were expected of us) got an 800 on the math part (top 0.001% or higher), got his PhD in physics at age 27, and has had quite the scientific career. Another guy in my high school physics class got a 760 on the math part (top 0.01%), got his doctorate in math at age 31, has been a university math professor for the past 30 years, and is kind of famous. I was once tutored in math by one of those 0.0001% guys, and it was quite an experience. I have been around quite a few of those 0.01% to 0.001% types, and I am kind of an intelligent dog that they can talk to, who can eventually understand what they are saying. I could have pursued a PhD in math or science, but my “friends” had different plans for me. I likely would have not been that remarkable as a scientist. I might have become a Peter Ward-type popularizer, although I would have likely been too much of a nerd to do what he does.

The good news for my work is that I am not that smart, at the very bottom end of the genius range. If I was up at their level, I have my doubts that I could have written as accessibly as I am told that I do. I am a lot closer to the 110 IQ that I think might be a minimum to digest my work and develop that comprehensive perspective, so I think that I can do this, when somebody with a 170 might not be able to. A lot of the “tricks” that I use to learn I think can be used by more normal people. Just understanding popularized science is adequate. I don’t have a bunch of equations or difficult physics concepts in my work. The basics are relatively easy to understand.

One thing that is interesting about my level is that I have encountered many fellow “in the 140s” people, and it is easy to understand each other; whether it is their scholarship, their interests, their sense of humor, and so on. I imagine that it is similar with those 160-170 types, that they can understand each other, and they are so rare that they probably glom together when they find each other.

As I have written plenty, “intelligence” is another talent, an important one for humans, but I recall Seth once saying that Down syndrome people are emotional geniuses, able to be happy all the time, and are “overrepresented” in industrial societies, to remind us of our emotional heritage. Max was certainly highly “intelligent,” but on the path of evolving our souls, those Down syndrome people are much farther along. As I wrote, there Gates is, praising imperial tripe and palling around with the leading mass murderer on Earth today, with his top 0.001% IQ. What we call “intelligence” is far from the be-all, end-all.

As I have written plenty, for what I am doing, integrity trumps intelligence by a long ways. I’ll take heart over head any day.

Best,

Wade

Quote:

---

Posted by Wade Frazier

In my response to Dennis, I linked to this story about Gates, and why he is in the top 0.001% or so and has me by 20 IQ points or so. Gates got a 1590 on his SAT. I don’t know which part that he “only” got a 790 on, but his SAT score puts him at a 165 IQ or so

---

Ah - thank-you for that table, mapping SAT to IQ. I never had a proper IQ test administered to me, but I did well enough on my SAT, not all that far behind Gates.

Intelligence, and other abilities, are highly skewed at the tails, especially at the high end tail.

I had the jaw dropping pleasure of briefly encountering, now and then, people who just blew past me on the intelligence scales, at least as regards things like hard sciences, math and computers. Gates' real genius, or fortune, was realized in other directions.

Hi Paul:

I worked at software companies for a dozen years or so, and was around a bunch of genius types. Richard Stallman, who is a classic Level 3, got “only” a 1597 on his SAT (800 on math, of course), and my interactions with him were frustrating. I am guessing that Brian O was “only” in the 150s, IQ-wise. I have a brother smarter than me, and he is a sociopathic beach bum, while the other brother’s IQ is around 80, as my parents played genetic roulette. Strange family. I literally interviewed a rocket scientist once, who helped save NASA’s space program and was the biggest champion of Mr. Mentor’s engine. If I had to add it up over the years, I guess that I interacted with several dozen people who were in the 150-170 range, maybe 100 in all, maybe more, and it could be exhilarating. But all that brain-power, and only Brian and Dennis kept at it with the Big One, risking their lives, while the rest chased their fortunes, etc. So, if humanity does not turn the corner, what a waste of mental horsepower, not working on the big problem, the one that dwarfs all others.

In that heavenly Roads world, the average person’s IQ is probably 160 or so, and what I spent a lifetime learning, the average kindergartener knows. That is what love makes possible.

Best,

Wade

Hi Paul:

Well, you did not miss much, by not taking a formal IQ test. I had to take them while growing up, and I was a guinea pig for my wife’s doctoral program in psychology. For my first gifted program, when I was nine, a psychologist had to give it. After that, they were written tests given in mass environments, and as with the SAT, I was pretty much always in the 140s, so the tests are consistent, and that SAT-IQ scale is valid, IMO.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

And now for the downside of “intelligence,” at least for what I am doing. Materialism is the religion of the Fourth Epoch, and something like 85% of scientists are materialists of one stripe or another. It is particularly seductive for the “smart,” and during Brian’s sherry-sipping days, his fellow faculty members debunked and ridiculed the paranormal as their favorite pastime. The problem with being so “smart” is that once such people have digested their indoctrination, they can be invincible in defending their faith.

Not only that, but as Uncle Bucky noted, scientists as a group are highly naïve. Also, as Brian was fond of stating, there are no “laws of physics,” just theories, but the very term “law” conjures a religious certitude. Scientists and academics can also be addicted to their structuralist orientation, and that combination can lead to Level 3-ism, and one variation is:


“Free energy is contrary to the laws of physics and therefore impossible, and tales of its suppression can be safely dismissed as a conspiracy theory.”


Those geniuses that I have referred to were largely nerds, often with low social IQs, and another hazard is that genius is a close cousin to insanity, as both perspectives don’t see the world the way that the rest of us do. I have watched geniuses go off the deep end, especially on the free energy quest, and if they understandably go paranoid, look out. I have borne the brunt of that insanity more than once.

In ways, the “smart” are going to be the most resistant to the arrival of the Fifth Epoch, similar to The Brookings Institution’s advice to NASA on scientists and ETs. After playing the Paul Revere of Free Energy for five years, spreading the word on free energy to the world’s leading intellectuals and progressives, and all that he received were crazed reactions of fear and denial, Brian began openly wondering whether humanity was a sentience species.

All of my free energy fellow travelers that I respected the most all had mystical awakenings, and my jury is still out on whether a mystical awakening is a choir requirement. I think that a materialist can hit the notes, but a materialist orientation is certainly a handicap, just like being a religious fundamentalist is.

Best,

Wade

Quote:

---

Posted by Wade Frazier

The problem with being so “smart” is that once such people have digested their indoctrination, they can be invincible in defending their faith.

Not only that, but as Uncle Bucky noted, scientists as a group are highly naïve. Also, as Brian was fond of stating, there are no “laws of physics,” just theories, but the very term “law” conjures a religious certitude. Scientists and academics can also be addicted to their structuralist orientation, and that combination can lead to Level 3-ism, and one variation is:

“Free energy is contrary to the laws of physics and therefore impossible, and tales of its suppression can be safely dismissed as a conspiracy theory.”

Those geniuses that I have referred to were largely nerds, often with low social IQs

---

There but for a few twists of fate might have gone I :).