WADE FRAZIER : A Healed Planet

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Cobus:


Tesla's was the first where Robber Barons pulled the rug out that I know of, but there was Keely before him. The technology is really not the issue. FE technology was probably perfected before I was born. But we do not get any while we are collectively asleep.

Best,

Wade

[Cobus]

Wade

It is indeed Keely's work that I made reference to.

I agree. The successful technology will be the result of collective awakening and not the other way around.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Cobus:


The so-called "collective awakening" will only need to happen with about 5,000-7,000 people, and they are whom I seek. Every epochal event in the human journey was initiated by only a handful of people.

The masses will not begin to wake up until FE is delivered into their lives. I learned that lesson the hard way after many years, and it is one of my primary messages. FE newbies nearly invariably deny that reality as they try to enlighten their social circle, but that approach has never come close to working and is very hazardous.

Best,

Wade

[Cobus]

Wade

Again I concur. The initial collectives are perforce very small and particularly harmonised groupings.

By very small I mean about 3 to 7 numerically.

It is when synthesis occurs between these small collectives that we will see wonderful progress.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

This is about the learning basics of becoming a candidate for the choir. For those who seek to join the choir one day, they need to understand:

• The role of energy in not only the journey of life on Earth, but the human journey, including the epochal effects of tapping new energy sources;

• Some of the ideological constructs used to control populations, such as the notion of free markets, which have never existed, so that the idea of organized suppression becomes more than a "conspiracy theory" but an acknowledged part of earthly reality and an aspect of how markets are controlled; those constructs include the "laws of physics" and other ideas used to capture the minds of the "smart;"

• They need to become worldly enough to understand the organized suppression that has surrounded FE technology for the past century or so, and why that organized suppression has existed, which is because of…

• The epochal significance of FE;

• That the social circle approach and many others are not suitable for helping manifest FE, and FE newcomers need to relinquish all the "bright ideas" that they bring to the issue, which, as far as I have seen, are all variations of approaches that have never worked and are unlikely to;

• That I am doing something different, and apply their effort toward understanding it.

That seems simple, right? I have almost never encountered anybody who began to achieve those understandings, but those are the ones that I think are necessary for becoming helpful for what I am attempting. These qualities are probably necessary for achieving those understandings. For instance, I have never seen a materialist who really grasped the big picture, as materialists are trapped by their indoctrination and are generally the most heavily entrenched opponents to the idea of FE, as strange as that may seem.

Best,

Wade

[Cobus]

Simple as sliced bread !

Thought as energy is hardly a social concept.

It is in the hi-jacking of our thought patterns that the dynamics of applied poverty find traction.

The small bands of awakened demonstrate a vastly different energetic profile compared to conventional social circles.

The extensive organisation surrounding the suppression of FE insight is an ages-old indicator of the fact there there is an elephant in the room

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Yesterday I took a hike in this vicinity, pics attached. I first visited in 1986, and went over the mountains that you can see above and to the right of that beautiful lake. That is my fourth trip where I overlooked that lake (or maybe the fifth), but yesterday, mid-week in October, mine was the only car at the trailhead, and I did not see a soul for the entire hike. I owned it all, and it was shorts and t-shirt weather. That kind of solitude helps recharge my batteries, especially in spectacular country like that. Not many days like that are left in the tank for this year up here. Another wonderful hiking season is ending, but it just means that I hike the lower and closer mountains until spring, with maybe a snowshoe trip in the high country. Somebody has to do it.

Best,

Wade

P.S. As I have stated, because of how I have informed readers to attract my attention, I now have to spend time reading what is being written about me in cyberspace, which requires a thick skin. Just now I stumbled into this. He erred in some of the words attributed to me, and it was kind of odd to see my essay chopped up like that. But he did not plagiarize or impersonate me, which are the only things that trouble me. I regularly see my words repeated by others, and all I ask is that they just state that they are my words.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Well, that was fun. I mentioned yesterday that somebody used my medical racket essay as the basis for his article. When events like that happen, my first reaction is to wonder what I screwed up in the essay being used.

Also, I edited all of my older essays earlier in the year, to align my site with my big essay. However, I did it before I received my editor's notes, which were mostly about style and grammar. Also, a one-man show is not going to catch everything in a pass through an essay, and more than one pass is ideal. That medical racket essay has had probably a dozen passes through it by me over the years, and I just spent the past day doing another pass through it.

While editing it, I decided to put an anecdote back in that my editor originally struck back in 2000. A friend heard a voice in her head at a critical moment in her life, and like Eugene Sledge, she heard an actual voice, not the foreign thoughts in our heads that Dennis and I had. I put it in a footnote, as I get why my editor believed that it was superfluous, but it can be vital information for those joining the choir.

I imagine that if I do not resume my career soon, some other essays will get another pass like the one I just completed.

We will see.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I think that I have mentioned it before at Avalon, and this is a good time to revisit it. I was psychically trained at age 16. I know that everybody has innate psychic abilities, but older souls are more likely to have much interest and talent, and they are less likely to get into trouble when exploring those abilities. I have known many psychics, mystics, channels, and the like in my lifetime, and I have written plenty about New Age excesses and other pitfalls of the spiritual path, and do not want to belabor them here. In a world of scarcity, personal integrity is the world's scarcest commodity, as everybody fights over their piece of the scarce economic pie, and acting without integrity in the mystical realm is soul-damaging behavior, and I do not recommend it.

I added that anecdote about a friend hearing that voice today, and want to discuss the phenomenon a little. When you remove the hocus pocus from organized religion, mysticism, and New Age stuff, it really is pretty straightforward. We all live forever, physical reality is more like a classroom than our home, and love is really all that matters. All the rest is noise. Humanity is learning to become a sentient species, and we are not quite there yet. We are probably further along the curve than anything else on Earth, with the possible exception of cetaceans. Raising our sentience and manifesting the biggest event in the human journey are joined at the hip, in both mystical and practical ways, and it always begins in the heart. Any "mystical" or fringe understanding that strays from those bedrock understandings misses the mark, and often badly. The means becoming the ends was one of the most important lessons that I learned in my mystical training, and I applied it ever since, which is a big reason why I survived my journey.

We also share the planet with beings on the dark path, whom are called psychopaths in psychological parlance, and they are on the planet with us for a reason, as painful as that reason might be. Many of them were sicced on us by the Global Controllers and others as we pursued FE, and it was not much fun to be on the receiving end of their tricks (1, 2, 3), but it comes with the territory. They taught me important lessons that I am trying to apply to my efforts, including building the choir.

So, psychopaths on Godzilla's payroll were sicced on us, and I have been probably been psychically attacked several times, generally at critical moments of my journey. I consider those events "tests." But I have also have had plenty of compensation, and part of that is being a member of history's most privileged demographic group: white, educated, American men. I also had a voice in my head come through at two critical junctures of my journey (1, 2), and the rest was literally history. The third time that it came through, I did not ask for it, but maybe kind of did, as I peeked into Mr. Professor's heaven. The voice that began speaking to Dennis first spoke up as Dennis was about to kill himself, and Eugene Sledge's voice came at quite the moment. My friend's came at exactly the moment when grand tales say that they do, often in Bible stories and the like. Hearing voices like that is about at the opposite end of the spectrum from those voices that schizophrenics and druggies like Brian Wilson hear. Those kinds of people cannot turn the voices off, and let's say that those kinds of voices that come through may not have the listener's best interests at heart.

Dennis calls the voice that he heard "God," but I have no name for my voice. My friend and Sledge feel that they heard "God" talk to them, and I will not dispute their notions about who it was. Maybe mine was "God," too, but I do not know, and I have not been very happy with that voice since it last piped up.

Whether it seems to actually be heard by the ears or comes via impressed thoughts is probably not very important. Psychics have many different ways of receiving their information. I am an empath (probably related to my emotional centering in this lifetime), but there are many other ways to get the information. Some channels have light trances while others go so deeply that they have no recollection of what is coming through them. There is a great deal of variation, and the key to staying safe is staying grounded and acting from the heart. If people keep those ideas front-and-center, they will not get into much trouble, although I would not wish my journey on anybody.

My voice is not one that I care to hear from again, and I certainly did not "summon" it, but it was more like desperately begging for an answer. All I can say is be careful of what you wish for. I felt like I was backed into a corner both times, and kind of resented it, but it was the path I was supposed to walk, for reasons that seem to be clearer all those years later. I know that asking for that kind of guidance is not something to ever be done lightly, not if people want it to be meaningful. That seems to be one of the "rules of the game" here in physical reality.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I find the subject matter fascinating for every chapter in my essay, but I understand when people are most interested in the people parts of the essay. But if people are going to gain a comprehensive perspective, they need to relinquish their anthropocentric views. We are animals, and our lineage goes back to the beginning of life on Earth. We should understand our heritage.

That said, I have been reading up on those early human days lately, including the control of fire, the descent from the trees, and changes in the human line's anatomy and culture. One of the first chapters that will get updated for version 1.1 will be the chapter on the human-line path to Homo sapiens. There is a great deal of research and controversy in that area, and I look forward to new findings and keep reading up on current ones. Although Wrangham's Cooking Hypothesis is compelling in ways, there are plenty of competing hypotheses with varying levels of evidence. Some chimps sleep on the ground today, as silverback gorillas do, but that is a far cry from the ground-dwelling ways of Homo erectus. I generally do not weigh in with my own opinion on the scientific controversies, but did so on the control of fire and the megafauna extinctions.

I am confident in my views on the megafauna extinctions, while the timing and effects of fire seem more equivocal, although nobody disputes the epochal significance of controlling fire. The controversy revolves around when it was controlled and what was affected. Maybe cooking was not why the digestive system of Homo erectus shrank and why it completed the transition to ground-living, but the early control of fire has a lot going for it, and I have a hard time believing that once the control of fire was achieved, that any lineage from there ever "forgot" it. Anthropologists once stated that Tasmanians lost the ability to make fire, but that is hotly disputed today. Fire was such an epochal technology that it is hard to imagine anybody giving it up or "forgetting" how to. Fire was the technology that separated the human line from any animal that ever lived. Stone tools only reproduced teeth, claws, and jaws. Fire was a horse of a different color.

Time for bed.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I have been reading on the early control of fire:

http://stravaganzastravaganza.blogsp...y-of-fire.html

http://www.sciences360.com/index.php...rst-fire-9410/

http://megafauna.com/the-book/part-iii/fire/

and it is an area where I will follow the developments with great interest. The timing of controlling fire with its relationship to anatomical (shrinking digestive system, growing brains) and dietary changes (cooked food) is a key point of contention, and I do not expect the controversy to abate anytime soon.

One point is worth mentioning, however…

As I studied for writing my big essay, I found it common for dates to be pushed back with new findings, from the appearance of the first animals to the great oxygenation event and many dates of human line evolution. The reason seems to be that older evidence will be fainter, and more effort and more sophisticated tools are going to find the older evidence that was either overlooked, not previously found, or only became evident with the new tools.

A big goal of my essay is for readers to get a feel for such controversies and understand the process. As I have stated before, I rarely weighed in with my opinions, being a bystander like I am, but I have weighed in when political considerations and other conflicts of interest seemed to impact the situation, such as with the megafauna extinctions, global warming, and issues such as fluoridation and radiation, as vested interests have distorted the scientific process, often beyond all reason. Of course, FE and related exotic technologies is the big one, and everything else pales to insignificance.

My readers should become familiar with the process, however, as it will help them sniff out the bogus stuff on the fringes and the mainstream, as there are mountains of it out there.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Virtually the entire point of my big essay is for readers to develop a comprehensive understanding of the role of energy in our world, from celestial and Earth's physical and chemical processes to organisms, ecosystems, and economies.

I make it very clear that modern economic theory is disconnected from physical reality, and I use the concepts of the financial economy very sparingly because they are not real. I have fielded the observation that if I wrote in terms of the financial economy more (money, debt, etc.), then more people would begin to understand. But a major goal of my essay is to get readers to discard those fictional concepts. They have about as much to do with the real world as fairy tales do. I write in terms of the financial economy very sparingly, and show how they can mimic the real world, not the other way around.

A big reason why I do that is that those around me only think in terms of the financial economy, and that is the only language they know. It is like they speak in gibberish, and people want me to speak the same gibberish as a way to get them beyond gibberish. I doubt that such an approach has a prayer. I begin my essay with the real world and do my best to stay there, and avoid the artifices of human ideologies. Once people slip into those ideological frameworks (which are all based on scarcity), then they cannot understand what abundance means, as their entire framework is based on scarcity. Trying to reach people wrapped up in the concepts of the financial economy is like trying to deprogram a cult member, and I have no interest in attracting that audience. They will be anything but helpful for what I am trying to do.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As an addendum to the previous post, of avoiding financial economic concepts in my big essay, it is closely related to staying away from capitalist ideology and the mainstream theories of government. Because almost nobody is willing or able to see past those ideas and institutions, almost every FE newbie that there ever was initially approached corporations and governments as they sought recognition and help. People see corporations and governments (where the wealth and power seem to be) as running and controlling everything, and they think that such institutions would welcome FE and abundance, when the opposite is the case.

I am sympathetic to those newbie notions, but they are potentially fatal delusions in the FE field. Dennis and Sparky thought that they would get tickertape parades, but the opposite happened. I carried Dennis's and Brian's spears as they approached the DOE (1, 2), but I really wondered what they thought we would accomplish. Dennis and Brian deeply drank the nationalist Kool-Aid and never quite got the taste out of their mouths, even though both were eventually run out of the USA, the land of the free.

So, using financial economic terminology and ideology generally leads straight to the corporate and governmental rabbit holes. Because of my background and profession, I constantly read analyses that call capitalism the greatest system ever devised (I just read one earlier today). It may actually be the most inefficient and destructive system ever devised. The organized suppression of FE and related technologies issues from private levels, and billion dollar offers to disappear are capitalism on steroids. Those who worship capitalism completely deny our experiences and those of our fellow travelers, and irrationally call them "conspiracy theories." Similarly, those who worship the system think that governments have the answers. Every attack on us was made by corrupt government officials doing the dirty work of their private interest patrons.

Even Dennis and Brian never stopped approaching governments and corporations, but those are deadly dead ends. If people want to have a shortened life expectancy, then they can play those games. I eventually realized that approaching such institutions were ways to give away our power and play the victim game, along with all the other approaches that I have seen. I am trying to do something different. I only need one-in-a-million for my idea to work. Some think that those with the right stuff to just imagine abundance in today's world and sing about it are not even one-in-a-million. Well, I am more optimistic, but what I am doing is not amenable to the Level 10 approach, although it is another standard newbie idea. Unless I can find people of sufficient sentience to discard that scarcity-based conditioning, then my approach will not work. I am not willing to have my work watered down to appeal to the masses, so that their cherished delusions are unchallenged and they see the world in terms of good guys and bad guys. That is the victim's perspective, and I need people who think like creators, or are at least trying.

I am not expecting what I am doing to gain overnight success, and I designed it so that I could do it for the rest of my productive life. It beats watching TV.

I am currently reading Ian Tattersall's Masters of the Planet, about the rise of humans. It is my third Tattersall book, I believe. His stuff is good, and will be some of the grist for my mill when I update the early human chapters (1, 2) of my essay.

Back to work.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Briefly, before I go to bed, one key point of my big essay, which is not necessarily obvious, is that before the rise of science, intellectuals over the millennia have tried to explain events, and they were often historians. Take the fall of Rome, for instance. Books are written to this day to explain why Rome fell.

What changed in the past generation is a scientific approach to the question of fallen and vanished civilizations. Then, various explanations proposed over the centuries suffered in comparison. In the end, just like complex life and complex ecosystems, complex societies had increased energy needs to run all the moving parts, and when the energy ran out, the civilizations collapsed. All early civilizations eventually ran out of energy, generally by a declining EROI that reached levels where the system became vulnerable to disruption.

Economics is not a science but pretends to be, and its explanatory power is thus pretty weak. Historians and other scholars often failed to see the forest from the trees and did not rank causes, as scientists strive to.

My big essay approaches the subject a little more scientifically, and the human proclivity of plundering one energy resource after another, to exhaustion, is its most consistent trait, and we are on the brink of our latest, greatest, and perhaps final energy resource exhaustion event. A big goal of that essay was to make the pattern and trajectory clear, which is obscured by many interests from many corners, and a willfully blind public has failed to see it.

When a scientific approach is taken, it becomes easier to rank causes and see the big picture. That we are on a sled-ride to oblivion by relying on fossil fuels should be obvious to any informed observer, and I cannot get on the case of Peak Oilers beating the drums of doom on that score, but they are also willfully blind to FE and its potential. I have seen that fear and denial come from all camps, but when I saw the Peak Oilers do it, their generalized addiction to scarcity came clear to me, and I saw it as the common denominator of those fear and denial reactions.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

At my forum, I just began a thread that will restart the "What becomes obsolete with abundance?" conversation. That one should stay on track.

This morning's posts were spurred by reading a story of a woman in California who was just freed after being imprisoned for 17 years after being falsely convicted of murder. With my experiences in California's legal system, I know about that woman's situation all too well.

Studies of human universals yielded the finding that punishing cheaters has been a human obsession for at least 50,000 years. As with everything else in a world of scarcity, punishment could become a racket, as it has in California. The system is structured to where the innocence of the "justice" system's targets no longer even matters, and lies and deceptions are the prosecution's primary tools. Another word for that situation is "evil." When scarcity ends, such behaviors also will. When people commit "crimes," which will generally be based on violating another person's free will in a way that harms them, the solution will not be judgment and punishment, but healing. Violators may well be sequestered from society, but in a place of healing and redirection, not punishment. Such "prisons" exist today in nations such as Norway. Those that would exist a world of abundance are barely imaginable to people mired in scarcity and fear.

When "stealing" harms nobody, amassing wealth at the expense of others becomes obsolete. An entirely new paradigm of human existence can appear, and I argue for it in my work. What I have called the fear of FE is projecting scarcity onto a situation of abundance. Fortunately, there is a term for what I advocate, and it is called the post-scarcity economy. As you can tell by reading reactions to the idea of abundance, even the notion of abundance gets scarcity and fear projected onto it, and reading about capitalist fears of abundance can be an amusing exercise, if sometimes frustrating, as it is obvious that fearful people cannot really imagine abundance and how it can free the human heart. Instead of that exercise in fear that that capitalist engaged in while imagining a post-scarcity world, it could look like this.

The post-scarcity crowd is going to be one of my target audiences, as abundance should not be such a mind-boggling concept for them, and they will hopefully not react with knee-jerk fear, as virtually everybody else does. But even the post-scarcity crowd can be blind to the energy issue, or trapped by the current energy paradigm, amazingly, so even the post-scarcity crowd has plenty of paradigm-busting to do before they can really understand.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I am reaching out to some pretty big names these days, looking for singers. They are going to be needles in haystacks, but as I have done for more than 20 years, I go looking in haystacks that at least smell like they may host some needles, and I mentioned the post-scarcity crowd in the previous post. They have a lot of what I am looking for, but there are downsides and pitfalls, too. Often, those who can most understand my work are "smart," but "smart" usually carries baggage with it.

The scientifically trained are usually going to be materialists of one stripe or another, and I have yet to see a materialist really understand the FE conundrum. They are usually trapped in the "laws of physics" mindset, and their structural orientation generally denies that there is any conscious manipulation of the world economy, in classic Level 3 fashion. Brian received both barrels of stuff like that as he played the Paul Revere of FE, to later wonder if humanity was really a sentient species.

Unless the "smart" have had experiences that opened their eyes, such as a remote viewing, bringing disruptive energy technology to market, or prominently poking their nose into the UFO issue, they are usually going to be stuck in their conditioning, in the naïve state the Fuller mentioned, and will not be able to really understand what is happening on Earth today, at least with the affairs of humans. They may understand quite well how humanity is wrecking the planet, but will be oblivious to key human forces at work.

If the "smart" begin to understand the bigger picture, they can have several reactions, and the most common are not healthy or helpful. A typical one is, "Wake me up when you deliver FE to my home." Another is fierce denial, which with the "smart" can manifest in ridicule and other emotionally stunted responses. That kind of response is a hallmark of the "skeptics." Another is turning chicken and not wanting to engage the subject publicly, for fear of ridicule, career curtailment, and the like. Some may say that they fear Godzilla, but what they really fear are the reactions of those close to them. In what I am doing, I am likely the only person who is going to hear from Godzilla. Weak links in the effort can become targets of Godzilla's minions, but I will try to keep the naïve, the gung-ho, the self-interested, and the like out of my effort. I am structuring what I am doing so that even if Godzilla's minions sneak in and begin to work their black magic, they will not be able to do much damage.

I finished Tattersall's latest today, and while a very impressive effort in many ways, it suffers from some of those limitations. At the very end of his book, he mentioned "crazy" ideas that people had, one of which was ET "kidnappings," and another was the idea that economies could expand endlessly in a finite world. With FE they sure could. What is really kind of "crazy" about Tattersall's ET comment is that it is not based on belief, but on what people have experienced. He equated space alien reality with thinking that human sacrifice appeases the gods. That kind of sloppy thinking abounds among the "smart," I am sorry to say, but they cannot seem to see it. That kind of irrationality has really been something to witness among the "smart." That said, some mental horsepower is required to glimpse the big picture in a scientific way, but I designed my essay so that degrees in science are not required to understand, and we will see how it goes. So far, my most avid readers are scientists, but I really need the readership to branch out beyond them.

One of the "funny" things about interacting with world-renowned intellects is that they take me far more seriously than my friends and family usually do, in that "prophets have no honor in their hometown" observation that Jesus made. The people who run the world are aware of my efforts and are listening, but those close to me really do not. Godzilla takes Dennis as seriously as a heart attack, while all that the leading names in the FE field can do is libel Dennis. That is some of the surreal territory that can come with the FE and related pursuits, and merely underscores the primary lesson of my journey.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Ah, my lacking self-discipline!

I decided to update my early human chapters (1, 2, 3) to reflect my recent reading, and to tidy up areas where I was not quite satisfied. None of the changes were significant, but were largely to put a little more meat on the bones and give more weight to the controversies. I can't say that I won't do that to other chapters in the near future, but I have no plans to. Version 1.1 is likely not coming until next year (if it comes at all), and version 2.0 is years away.

As I made those tweaks, I thought about the nature of the controversies, and all the areas where I see the most friction and the most delusion are where people are defending their religious convictions. And those convictions almost never have much to do with their direct personal experience, but something they were told or taught, and that especially applies to the members of organized religion and materialists. When we believe things that are not based on our experience (or partly on anybody else's reliably reported experiences), that is when we can get into trouble.

When I think about all the "smart" Level 3s, they all have a religious conviction in the immutable "laws of physics" and the idea that there is no such thing as organized suppression, or if there is, it cannot suppress anything truly important. To me, because I discovered reality the hard way, that is like believing in the Easter Bunny. While I am sympathetic to such naïve beliefs (I once held them, too), they are not connected to reality very well and people in thrall to such beliefs will not be helpful for what I am attempting.

Back to chores.

Best,

Wade

[elearah]

Posted by Wade Frazier (here)

The scientifically trained are usually going to be materialists of one stripe or another, and I have yet to see a materialist really understand the FE conundrum. They are usually trapped in the "laws of physics" mindset, and their structural orientation generally denies that there is any conscious manipulation of the world economy, in classic Level 3 fashion. Brian received both barrels of stuff like that as he played the Paul Revere of FE, to later wonder if humanity was really a sentient species.

Hi Wade,
I have read some of the posts in this thread and found them fascinating. I would like to add comments to some of your posts that, I hope, will make you feel a tad less alone.

Not everyone trained in science is trapped in the paradigm of science as the new religion. Actually, most of the best physicists I worked with back in the day were highly spiritual people.

I was trained as a physicist, and I´m an empath as well, and have no conflict whatsoever. On the contrary, my background allows me to work from the concept of model, and not worry about things being real or not.

About the voices, etc, you mention in a previous post, there is an easy way to discriminate. The voices that are worth hearing come with a feeling of awe. It can be felt in the middle of the chest, or the throat. If a voice creates a different emotion from awe or pure love, it is better to get out of there fast, especially if they try to inflame the ego. I also think that drugs have a spiritual component and essentially create a cord from the person to certain bad neighborhoods in the macroconsciousness. Really really bad news...

[Wade Frazier]

Hi elearah:

From what I have encountered, you are a freak among the scientifically trained (that is probably why you are here). Yes, the best are often spiritually aware, but there are not many of them. Brian O's lonely journey is a case in point. Virtually everybody that I knew in the FE field, who "ranked," had a mystical persuasion and scientific training, but it did not make for successful White Science careers. Mark's experiences were not that unusual, in that a mystical awakening can be hazardous to one's career in White Science.

Yes, physicists create and deal with more mental constructs than other areas of science, and I think that it is related to the mystical leanings of the best of them.

Yes, drugs generally are not very helpful to achieve and maintain the proper vibe, and I will agree with the feeling that comes with voices that you want to hear from.

Nice to hear from you.

Best,

Wade

[Ilie Pandia]

Hi,

There is something that I wanted to write about for some time.

There is a clip that is going on all over the web with a "Free Energy" device that gets started with a lighter (the kind that has an electric spark).

So I am looking at the clip that shows the experiment working and I am think: this is so silly and cannot possibly work for a ton of reason. This is actually stupid!

And then, while I sat with this, I realized that before airplanes were invented, I would have had a similar thought about flight. So I got out of my chair, got all the parts required (two parts!) and went on to perform the experiment.

Half an hour later I learned to things: the spark from the lighter can deliver quite a shock into my hands and the so called Free Energy device does not work as advertised.

Was I stupid for even trying? Perhaps... Should I have known better? I guess I should have. But this was a very easy experiment to do, with readily available parts so instead of just rationalizing that this cannot possible work, I figured it's better to just run it, test it and see what happens!

I have seen these remark used many times:

"no serious scientists is even considering this..."
"this is so silly that's is obviously false and that's all the proof that I need"
"this is not a subject worthy of scientific research as it is evidently false/silly/stupid/crazy/impossible"

So this begs the question then: what topics are worthy enough to be researched with a scientific approach and what topics are silly/impossible that no "serious scientist would touch them". Doesn't this line of thinking in itself limit where science can or can not go?

It seems to me that as soon as some questions are too silly to be asked, then you have fallen into a trap! Then you begin to fear ridicule, damaging your career, damaging your social circle and so on: simply because I have dared consider (or ask) a silly question that "everybody knows is false" or "laws of physics prove it's impossible" and so on.

I say, you have to ask silly/stupid questions and then look for what answers are there, what evidence (or lack there of) don't be trapped by the fear of ridicule. Yes, you will stumble into a lot of stuff that is invalid and does not work. But you will know it to be so because you have tested it yourself, and in the process you have learned how to do such tests, how to look at the result and the evidence and how to weight it all. And also how to face up to pear pressure looking at you like you're some kind of crazy person still believing in the Easter Bunny story.