WADE FRAZIER : A Healed Planet

[Wade Frazier]

Thanks Melinda:

I have written a little about my Hollywood connections at Avalon. I grew up a movie junkie, but rarely go to the movies anymore. My wife drug me to the movies last night, and I saw a movie that I really disliked (the first movie that I had watched in several months). I have not gone to the movies for the "movie experience" for many years. Unless my wife is dragging me along, I only go to exceptional movies that will make a difference if seen on the big screen (otherwise, I'll buy the DVD/blue ray). I look forward to the last Hobbit movie, but that is the only one on my list these days. I put on The Lord of the Rings periodically, but to watch the Shire sequence that begins the series, not really the rest of it much, and I understand the Tolkien family's displeasure at how the Lord of the Rings got Hollywooded up in bringing it to the screen, just like The Hobbit has been. The potential of the medium, and how spectacularly it has failed its potential, has been a bittersweet experience for me, but I still quest for moving movie experiences, and the most memorable are usually those that surprised me or transported me to a different reality. The Wallace and Gromit movie was one of those experiences. I had no idea what to expect, and ten minutes into it, I was a fan.

So, I am very sympathetic to people not caring for the conflict aspect of Avatar, even though I look forward to the Avatar sequels, and not for the story and upcoming battles with humans again, but for more immersion in those environments.

I have not had the time to play computer games since 2003, and I loved playing games such as King's Quest, in which the game was funny and explorative, with no blood and guts, but even the last King's Quest game became a sword-swinging affair. Today, war games dominate, and it is a very sad commentary.

I have mentioned being invited to do TV shows and even movies, but I have declined all such offers so far, but I have made some suggestions. One pal knows the Star Trek people and wants to pitch a movie on a positive future. I suggested that Roads world as a model, and the movie could begin with a nightmare scenario, such as Bush's transparent lies as he flacked for invading Iraq and the subsequent invasion and occupation. After several minutes of that opening the movie, the scene ended, and it then became clear that it was a VR exhibit in a virtual museum that people in that Roads world could visit, to get a sense of the "good old days," and anybody visiting such a museum was glad that those days were over.

I am sure that about all Avalonians are familiar with the Hollywood angle on ETs, or at least what the suspicions are, in that they are designed to condition people regarding ETs. One faction tries to make them seem benign (ET, for instance), while the other wants us to fear them (War of the Worlds and many others).

Yes, in a world of scarcity and profit above all, many harmful practices are made to seem benign. With abundance, such games would end…one of the many positive side effects of FE and abundance.

Yep, I look forward to engineers and other kinds of designers going at their profession if energy and materials were not a constraint. They could design stuff that bore very little resemblance to what we see today.

Time for bed.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As astute readers make their way through the essay and can engage in meaningful discussions of them, the level of conversation on this thread should rise. As I have stated, one of the essay's goals is helping readers gain a sense of perspective, in many ways. Earth is a mere flyspeck in the cosmos, but it is our home. Humans have been on Earth for but a blink of its history, but we have already wrought great changes, and with nearly unprecedented speed.

When those behaviorally modern humans left Africa, they quickly drove all of Earth's easy meat (Earth's highest EROI energy source for humanity's level of technology) to extinction, as well as all other human species. There is mounting evidence that the extinctions in Australia and the Americas probably happened within a millennium or so. The evidence also supports the idea that humans drove all the big birds in New Zealand to extinction in less than a century. The only quicker catastrophe in the history of complex life on Earth was the asteroid that spelled the end of dinosaurs.

Humans have been agents of unprecedented change and destruction, but in a single human lifetime, or several, the changes have rarely been very noticeable. Humans have to overcome that kind of blind egocentrism if we are going to make it. Today, the vast majority of humanity is oblivious to what we are doing to Earth. Scientists without conflicts of interest are terrified, but almost nobody else knows or cares. There are factions of scientists, most with conflicts of interest, both obvious and subtle, that argue that humans had little to do with the megafauna extinctions, and blame it all on climate. They have fellow travelers working for the hydrocarbon lobby who argue that humans have nothing to do with the climate change taking place before our very eyes.

That those "debates" even exist is a huge scandal and a strike against humans finally becoming a sentient species. In Wall Street's parlance, those climate change advocates for the megafauna extinctions and those who deny that the Hydrocarbon Age has anything to do with today's rapidly warming Earth are "talking their book" and staying loyal to their "in-group," whether it is their species or their paymasters in the hydrocarbon extraction industry. That selling out of one's sentience, or helping prevent others from attaining theirs, may spell the doom of the species.

We cannot bring the megafauna back, but we can forestall what could become the biggest extinction event in the history of Earth, for which humanity would be totally responsible. It turns out that environmentalists do not believe that humans are a sentient species or capable of it, as they are among FE's greatest adversaries, and the "solutions" put forth by environmentalists, Peak Oilers, and others addicted to scarcity are extreme austerity and depopulating Earth. Somewhat paradoxically, they have soul partners in the darkest aspects of Godzilla, who have a contingency plan to thin out the human herd to 500 million or so and enslave those bedraggled survivors in a new "Reich" of the ultra-elite. Conspiracists can be forgiven for believing that the Peak Oilers and environmentalist are on Godzilla's payroll, but virtually all of them are simply addicted to scarcity.

The truly bizarre aspect of the ideas promoted by Peak Oilers and environmentalists is that their plans would require vastly more sentience from the human species than embracing FE would, and instead of a voluntary self-extermination of the species, humanity can live in an unprecedented Golden Age that might never end. That nature of their promotion of austerity and self-extermination, combined with their fear and denial directed at FE and abundance, is something to behold. FE newcomers nearly invariably say that those people only fear the unenlightened implementation of FE, but the worst elements of humanity have possessed FE for longer than I have been alive, so it is already in the worst hands imaginable, and we are all still here.

It took many years of witnessing those reactions for it to finally sink in with me, of what we were really witnessing. The Peak Oilers and environmentalists have a disdain for humanity, when you get down to it, but their "solutions" require that humanity achieves unprecedented levels of sentience, so that the human species commits effective suicide out of our selfless regard for Earth and her life forms. How realistic is a plan like that? Not even they buy it, and Heinberg, for instance, has called the West's invasion of oil-rich western and central Asia "Plan War," as the world's rich nations steal the last easy oil from the world's resource rich but technologically poor nations (and they are that way because of the effects of colonialism and neocolonialism).

As I made clear in my essay and did in a recent post, the history of humanity and even earlier, such as with the bonobos, shows very clearly that the energy event led to the cognitive and social changes. Anybody who thinks that all of humanity has to become enlightened before FE can appear has about as realistic a perspective as those Peak Oilers and environmentalists do. They are all hooked on scarcity, in one way or another, and what they really fear is the end of the world as they know it. For every Epochal Event, the world ended as people knew it, and they would all have feared what lied ahead, as they could not imagine it, so would have preferred the devil they knew. In that regard, those who deny and fear FE today are no different than Godzilla or any other group that argues for the status quo of human technology and behavior. It is really selfish and fearful egocentrism that drives them, not great, caring hearts. Again, FE newcomers almost always deny that reality, but that is my impression after many years of dealing with those kinds of people and trading notes with people such as Brian O.

That is why I constantly say that if a person's heart is not in the right place (and those who are afraid of being real people on the global stage to make FE happen do not quite have their hearts in the right place), the rest will not matter, as their fears will steer them toward fear-based "solutions" and strategies. It all begins in the heart. Do we want a guaranteed hell on Earth, if humanity even survives the process, or a chance for heaven on Earth? That is the choice before us, which Bucky Fuller clearly saw.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Time for a short post between chores…

I just read this commentary on the current state of the stock market, and how fast market prices can collapse. A favorite Wall Street saying is that the markets take the stairs up and the elevator down. I played the Wall Street ponies as a teenager, believe it or not, which I suppose was another early indicator of my wild ride with Dennis.

I believe that one of the most important ideas in my essay is that dynamics at the organism, ecosystem, and economic levels are similar. If the system does not get enough nutrients, particularly energy, to support the many moving parts of its complexity, it collapses, whether it is an organism, ecosystem, or civilization. Energy surplus is the most consistently important measure of health in those systems. One response to my work is that few people seem to be able to understand the relationship between economic activity and energy. All that I can say is that my essay is specifically designed to overcome that defect of understanding, and I build up that awareness from the very beginning of my essay, so that when I finally get to the "modern" ideas of economics, the foundation of the real economy is clear. Economic ideas that focus on money are pretty worthless in the big picture, and that may be partly be design, as history's richest man and greatest energy mogul actively supported today's economic theories that denigrate energy and exalt money and social activity. Neoclassical economics is nonsense. The real economy is where everything of value comes from, and the financial economy is a huge fiction that serves to brainwash the masses in favor of the dominant classes. At best, the financial economy only mimics the real economy, and at worst is an entirely irrelevant distortion of reality. In very real terms, the physics definition of work underlies the economic definition of work. Economics is derivative of physics, not the other way around. So, the connection between energy and economics should become clear, if that relationship is understood. If people stray from that basic understanding, they then get lost in the woods when trying to understand how the world really works.

My essay approaches the issue of energy and economics from the real side of it, and shows how derivative financial concepts are. To approach our economic and environmental problems by focusing on the financial economy, and to treat energy and environment as extensions of the financial economy (neoliberal economists do just that), is to look at reality exactly backwards. No wonder our world is in such trouble.

That said, that article that I began this post with uses real world dynamics to show how the financial economy works. The ecosystems concepts of efficiency and resilience are key, and form the foundation of that observation in that article about how market prices can collapse. When ecosystem develop several-level food chains, they begin to lose their resilience and become unstable, and thus become susceptible to collapse. That is a hypothesis for why mass extinctions have regularly happened during the eon of complex life. From the very beginnings of civilization, elites learned to harvest the urban energy flows and skim them, just like bears know to sit in the river and eat passing salmon, and just like John Rockefeller knew that if he controlled the route to market for oil, that he could control the entire industry. The same logic was behind Microsoft wiping out Netscape. It is the same logic that Godzilla has to keep FE under wraps. Control it at the source, and they have a chokehold over the global economy, and hence, humanity. Rockefeller interests were likely part of Godzilla at one time, and might still play a role, but I doubt that they are at the top anymore.

That concept of skimming off energy flows underlies the capitalistic concept of profits. Profits are the Holy Grail of capitalism, and the game has been trying to wring profits from the system without doing the work, which is largely accomplished by rigging the financial economy to favor those who control it. But as companies lever up with debt to increase their shareholder profits, they make their companies less resilient and subject to collapse (AKA bankruptcy). The reckless printing of money by the world's central banks, with the USA's Federal Reserve leading the way, has resulted once again in asset price bubbles, and when this one pops, it will epic. The system runs on energy, and the declining EROI, which is tied together with Peak Oil (their combined effect reduces the energy surplus), is the real loss of resilience that modern economies have experienced since the 1970s. The financial economy only reflects that, and the smoke and mirror games being played in the financial economy are intended to obscure it, as what is happening in the global economy is class warfare, in what has been called the race to the bottom. The coming collapse of the financial economy, of which 2008-2009 was only a preview, will be catastrophic, and the disaster looms on many fronts, which is why Godzilla wants to terraform Mars.

Back to chores.

Best,

Wade

[Melinda]

Posted by Wade Frazier (here)
...The truly bizarre aspect of the ideas promoted by Peak Oilers and environmentalists is that their plans would require vastly more sentience from the human species than embracing FE would...

How true.

Options being :

1) The collective accesses extraordinary sentience by learning, exceptionally fast, to live peacefully off prana/chi (a rose by any other name...) without need for food, shelter or most technology (much of our transport, computing, manufactured goods etc.)

2) The collective amasses same sentience by agreeing selflessly to die out (also relatively quickly.)

Advocates of austerity know that neither of these are very likely - hence many have ended up writing off, even disliking humanity in order to justify drastic population reduction.

I haven't met most of the seven billion people on this planet, but I certainly don't wish death or sterilisation on them. It would seem somewhat hypocritical to take that view, even if it were out of concern for the ecosystem, without first offering to take my own life. I don't see it as a light-hearted point. The logic of people who advocate drastic population reduction because they consider themselves one of the worthy ones to sustain humanity doesn't make sense to me, and the ones who would give their lives also seem to be in the dark, given that the option of energy abundance has come into view, with the last century offering one FE inventor after another.

Having worked with children for many years and been lucky enough to witness their intelligence, their souls, and in some cases their inspiring displays of psychic sensitivity - I do not believe they incarnated into this world only to have narrow-minded or misguided adults make that decision (to end their lives prematurely.)

We are here to grow. Committing mass suicide isn't growth. Opening our tired eyes and seeing past our wounds to the life-affirming solutions that have been put before us, is taking true responsibility.

I say that, not from an elevated place, but merely as someone who is trying to respect that philosophy and live it as best I can.

The universe has more than enough for all of us, in abundance, and cleaning up our planet via life-affirming sentience, instead of via a culture of death, is part of our own redemption.

My humble thought for the day, which has felt long, though full of blessings.

[Wade Frazier]

Thanks Melinda:

There have been manifestos to "plan" that retreat into global austerity and drastic population reduction, and some even say that the path could be "prosperous." I have a bunch of such treatises here at home, but when I begin to digest their work, their plans presuppose a level of collective sentience and integrity never before sniffed by humanity, and everybody needs to play the game for it to work. I see their plans as little more than academics playing boy general. And yes, how do you not get a sense of disdain toward humanity when your "plan" is for people to stop breeding and revert back to some "carrying capacity" concepts that presuppose that FE technology does not exist or is "impossible," and nobody wants to play? Who the hell really wants to live their vision? At best, people are going to have to be coerced into such a "vision," or be like Kamikazes in their selfless fanaticism. Those "visions" are the epitome of the Zero-Sum Game, but in which everybody "volunteers" to be a zero. How realistic is that?

Again, I have engaged such "visionaries," as have fellow travelers, and those were quite sobering experiences, and was about when I saw that they were addicted to scarcity. The Project Venus guy blew a gasket when he had dinner at Brian's home and Brian brought up FE.

For my plan, I "only" need a hundred thousand or so to reach never-seen-before sentience levels (which really are not so lofty, but just jettisoning their scarcity-based conditioning and gaining a little scientific literacy), and then the rest of the world will gladly climb aboard to live in a world like this. During the studies for my essay, I came to realize that all Epochal Events were initiated by a relative handful of people, and everybody else took the ride on the back of the new energy technology. I do not see it being any different this time, especially with a vigilant Godzilla, but even most of his membership does not want to live on Mars if their games make Earth uninhabitable. I have seen Godzilla and his minions called a "breakaway civilization," and the notion is valid in the broad strokes presented, but Godzilla's so-called power is only derived by a sleeping humanity that has abdicated theirs. A hundred thousand people ratcheting up their sentience a few notches and it is game over for Godzilla, and he knows it.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I want to make one more post before I sign off for the night. One reason why I have made thousands of posts on this thread, and why I have begun my own forum for deep discussion of my big essay (and deep discussion on this thread could be seen as "auditioning" for that forum, although I do not plan to poach Avalonians), is so that the themes sink in. We are conditioned by scarcity from the cradle, and almost nobody in the history of Earth broke out of the scarcity framework, even in their minds. It will not happen overnight.

One reason why I post to Avalon nearly every day, on my good days and bad days, is to show that I am just a person, too, struggling through my life. If I can do this, so can anybody else who puts their heart and mind into it. Maybe you won’t sing like Ilie can, but one clear note is plenty for almost anybody to hit in their lifetime. Mine cannot be a choir of a few virtuosos and work, but needs to be a group effort. It will not be a big group, on a global scale, but it does not need to be. All Epochal Events were initiated by a relative or literal handful. I did not initially envision the choir doing the heavy and dangerous lifting of literally making FE happen, but more to create a fertile field for its manifestation, but we will see how it goes.

I fully expect that the people I seek will have many questions, and I expect to have robust discussions. It is like Pauli remarked about Bohr's talk about quantum physics, that if the audience merely treated his theories as received wisdom and had no questions, then Bohr had failed in his talk (or, as Pauli told him, the audience failed to understand).

There is really nothing intellectually daunting in my big essay. There is no indecipherable math, no brain-breaking theories of physics, or anything that somebody really needs a degree in science to understand (I do not have a degree in science, and I wrote it). But there is a great deal of information, and it is intended to help readers develop a comprehensive perspective. Not many people have developed comprehensive perspectives, and there can be many moving parts in it, but if people do the work, it will eventually make sense. Awakening experiences are key: this cannot just be an academic exercise. Again, if not for my crazy journey, especially my days with Dennis, I probably would not have much worth saying. So, nobody needs to think that they are going to "hit the bulls-eye" with an abundance-based, comprehensive perspective, hitting nothing but high notes, right out of the gate. There is just a bit to digest in my big essay. But I have people going deep on it, and when they come up for air, I will be here, and we can kick around the ideas and information in that essay, and the world can watch. There is no need for this to be a fast process, other than humanity hanging on the brink today.

On a similar note, I had my mystical awakening performing the same exercise that began Brian O's mystical awakening. It is called a remote viewing today. Millions of people had similar experiences between the 1960s and 1980s, but the Silva class is a shadow of its former self. I do not know what classes out there can provide a similar training to what I had, but I see people seeking the "hits" of a remote viewing out of the gate, when that was not really our goal when we took such courses. We had those hours of conditioning before doing those remote viewings, and I think that seeking those life-changing moments can be hampering to the seeker, as it loads the experience with too much expectation and anxiety. What is far healthier and leads to long-term success is pursuing those states for the positive effects to the participant. The point of the Edgar Cayce method taught in the Silva Class was not to get "hits," but to send healing energy to the "target," and diagnosing their condition was like a doctor diagnosing a patient before applying treatment. Diagnosis was just part of the process of helping people. If the goal is helping others, then the "reward" for all is assured.

If a person approaches it from that perspective, the "hits" will come, but they will be side-effects of the process, not the goal. Now, those are life-changing side-effects, to be sure, and they are essential, IMO, for people to relinquish the materialistic conditioning that is rife in our world, but they come for people whose desire is to serve. They do not need to come in the first ten seconds of the first exercise, like mine and Brian's did, but for those who do the work, they will come.

As I have stated, when you ask for guidance like I did (1, 2), after I felt backed into a corner (and I think that was my "friends'" plan, and I am not sure I like it, even though I likely agreed to it on some level), be prepared for an adventure. I still think about my journey periodically, and it can even be hard for me to believe that it really happened, but it was all too real.

Did I have any idea that my quest would lead to chasing the biggest event in the human journey? I doubt that any of us did. Those that I respected the most in the FE and related fields were just overgrown Boy and Girl Scouts, trying to do the right thing, not trying to be the world's saviors.

As I have written plenty, when we began to comprehend the magnitude of what we were chasing, we all wrestled with delusions of grandeur, in one way or another. How could you not, when you begin to understand the magnitude of it? So, when FE aspirants announce that they are the Messiah, I nod in sad recognition, as I see another casualty of the quest. The wrecked and prematurely-ended lives on the FE quest is quite a tableau of carnage that I really do not want to see anymore, although I am bombarded with "news" of the FE aspirant of the hour, etc. As an example, about ten minutes after I made that post about being asked about that "breakthrough" at Lockheed, I received an email from a pal, informing me of Lockheed's "breakthrough." I wrote posts like that to save time, as I expect to be asked the Lockheed question a hundred times in the coming years, so I can just refer them to that post. It just comes with the territory, I am sorry to say.

Good night.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

My editor did not deliver her finished product until I had largely revised my site's essays, to get them into alignment with my big essay. Since I received her notes, I have been re-editing my essays to reflect the style and grammatical changes that she suggested, and a one-man-show will never get all the editing right in one pass (or catch all the typos). I have re-edited my medical essay several times over the years, although the one that I did this year was the first re-edit in about a decade.

I just finished re-editing my war essay, and that was some heavy lifting. I do not want to ever edit that essay again. I do not have many other essays that I want to tackle like that, and my American Empire essay is the biggest one left, but I think that I will take an editing break.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As I do chores, a few post topics are rolling around in my head, and we will see if I get any posts written about them today. As an aside, the unusual nature of my work hits me periodically, in different ways. Just now, I was reading links to my site, and here is another reason why my work is unusual. A college professor uses my Columbus essay as a teacher's resource, but it is the only publication in her list available online. It is similar to that guy taking on the Columbus Myth, who informed me that mine was his primary source of information, as I listed my sources.

Part of me does not get it. My essay should not be the only scholarly resource on the Internet that challenges the Columbus Myth, but it seems like it is. What a shame. The Internet is a hell of a medium, but scholars do not seem to take it seriously yet as a publishing conduit. No wonder I keep being hectored to make my essay into a book.

With that situation prevailing on a relatively uncontroversial subject such as Columbus's record in the New World, I wonder if there will ever be anything on the Internet remotely close to my big essay. Probably not anytime soon, and that is not only too bad, but is a strike against us turning the corner. Oh, how I wish that I was just one of many who do what I do, but I am trying something in uncharted territory. I see a window of opportunity that I am trying to exploit. I do not expect the Internet to go away any time soon, so my plan to do this for as long as I am able seems reasonable.

We will see.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As usual, when I read my work, edit it, or discuss it, I often find myself digging back into it, rifling through my library, or surfing the Internet. I do not shrink from controversy ( ), and when I revised my Columbus essay earlier in the year, I revisited the painful subject of the Native American genocide and their survival.

A decade ago, I saw my essay critiqued by "indigenous" writers who claimed Taino descent, and I have kept up a bit on the debate. Basically, in the late 1990s, the complete extinction of the Taino was universally accepted in academic circles, but some groups began to make the case that they were Taino descendants.

I tiptoed trough that minefield in my revised essay, and was just now looking to see what the state of the art was on the scientific end, and stumbled into this article, which reported that no indigenous paternal DNA has survived on Puerto Rico. It fits with the pattern that I discussed. Invading Spaniards were only too happy to inseminate the native women and slaughter the men and work them to death, and native women would have been about the only vessels of reproduction in the Caribbean in the 16th century, when the population bottlenecked.

We know that the Bahaman natives (those who first greeted Columbus) were driven to extinction in only a few years of Spanish slaving operations, and the natives on Espanola surely did not fare much better, if at all, and indigenous Puerto Ricans may have fared no better. There is a movement that claims Taino descent and cultural survival, but call me skeptical. I have almost an eighth Indian blood, but sure do not consider myself an Indian, and am very sensitive to white people playing "Indian," and never want to appear that way.

Ethnic identity will eventually disappear with FE, and humanity will be one family, with one race, language, culture, and economy. In a world of scarcity, notions such as ethnic, racial, national, political, professional, sexual, and other identities are important, but in a world of abundance, those will largely disappear or become pretty meaningless. In that world that Roads visited, the people all had the same color skin, which would be expected as geographical isolation ended. Their hair and eyes were nearly as diverse as the colors of the rainbow, but there certainly would not have been "clubs" of different hair and eye color.

The appearance of FE and an acknowledgement of the ET presence are probably joined at the hip, and interacting with galactic culture will be when cultural and "ethnic" differences will be evident. Humans are considered primitive in galactic circles due to our violent and spiritually degenerate ways, but once we grow up enough to be safe to interact with, then what humans will get from interacting with galactic culture might be heady stuff.

Back to chores.

Best,

Wade

[Ilie Pandia]

Posted by Wade Frazier (here)
Part of me does not get it. My essay should not be the only scholarly resource on the Internet that challenges the Columbus Myth, but it seems like it is. What a shame. The Internet is a hell of a medium, but scholars so not seem to take it seriously yet as a publishing conduit. No wonder I keep being hectored to make my essay into a book.

With that situation prevailing on a relatively uncontroversial subject such as Columbus's record in the New World, I wonder if there will ever be anything on the Internet remotely close to my big essay. Probably not anytime soon, and that is not only too bad, but is a strike against us turning the corner. Oh, how I wish that I was just one of many who do what I do, but I am trying something in uncharted territory. I see a window of opportunity that I am trying to exploit. I do not expect the Internet to go away any time soon, so my plan to do this for as long as I am able seems reasonable.

I was actually surprised to find on Facebook (and sent to my email) this:

"Celebrate Columbus day by going to a stranger's home and claim to be yours!"

So... there is some awareness to that as well.

I also got the "Columbus the hero, the explorer, the sailor" quotes and so on.

To comment on your work, yes you are in a "special place" for many reasons.

The Search Engine revolution has made the Internet very useful, by exposing information that was otherwise incredibly difficult to find! We (I) rely heavily on the Search Engine, I realize just how much this can be abused. You work, can be rendered virtually invisible over night, if your website gets silently dropped from the search engines (for whatever reason). But that's another discussion.

What you have done differently is this: as the book worm that you are, you have digested a library of physical books and then produced digital content that is Google searchable. If you would have wrote books and papers (as in on physical paper) I doubt our paths would have ever crossed. I rarely read physical books. I do that only when digital is not an option and I really want to read that book. My reading/studying relies on making notes on the book, searching back and forth for keywords, selecting text and searching it on the web for clarifications and clicking on links. I feel very limited when faced with a physical book and I have a hard time reviewing information in that format.

You are also a kind of a "dinosaur" . In an age where impact has to be delivered in under 5 seconds and under 140 characters of text, you write monster essays. If it was not for the fact that I was very interested in Free Energy, I doubt I would have spent more than a few seconds on your website. Also today, the graphic animations between the news are "cooler" than the news themselves, so there this is this obsession with visual impact, and then your site it's only text with no dialog in it .

I am not saying this to criticize your work, only to make you aware of some thought processes that you may not know about with regards to your readers. And you have told us (many times!) that there is a "method to your madness" and that you do not look for the "quick study artist".

So your website stands out:

- it's digital - so easily searchable - and this attracts quick study people, but also it make it easier to link to (rather than linking to a book, for example) - I refer to it often, like an encyclopedia: "What references did Wade find about this and that controversy/theory"

- it's huge - goes in depth on the subjects your write about - this will intimidate a vast amount of those that stumble on your website

- it's comprehensive - it touches virtually on every important aspect of our lives - and links that to energy availability - this will attract all kinds of people to your content, until they see either the length of the page or their "sacred cows" get gutted.

- it's a very high chance that your website is unique - and that is sad news indeed - but it may serve as a foundation rock for others to build on

You've raised the bar very, very high! And you are in a tough spot: the younger generation (the ones that are not fully indoctrinated yet) have super short attention spans. The older generation, is very rigid in its belief systems, and also not likely to read huge texts on a computer screen...

You are basically looking for people close to Noam's level in thinking and writing, but still not trapped in some ideology or another...

I confess that I am curios as to what your "marketing plan" is. It may require someone like Dennis Lee to get to the numbers you want to get .

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Ilie:

Thanks for that perceptive post. Where to start?

I guess that it really goes back to whom I seek. I know that they will be needles in haystacks. They have to be able to digest scientific concepts (but not in much more depth or detail than I present on my site, particularly my big essay), but not be materialists, and a mystical awakening is the best antidote to materialism that I know of.

But most importantly, they need to care, and if they really care and have some gumption, they probably found out the hard way how few really care. So it is, in a world of scarcity and fear. Everybody that I have much respect for in these realms had high integrity, above all. Without that, the rest does not matter. But they also discovered that they were freaks in today's world, and it has likely always been that way. The few exceptions became martyrs/saints, the foundation of religions, etc. But there are also plenty of fake saints out there. As I discovered, the masses cannot even distinguish the psychopaths from the saints, and that goes to the paradigm shift that I hope to help my readers achieve.

Your Chomsky comment was appropriate. In the documentary Manufacturing Consent (the most popular Canadian documentary ever at the time, that has never played on American mainstream TV, surprise of surprises ), Noam talked about the mainstream media and his work. He is never on the American mainstream media to be taken seriously, but to be attacked, and very unfairly and irrationally, as usual. Noam talked about why he had never been asked to be on Nightline, and said that its producers did not think that he was "concise" enough, which meant that he could not get his points across in the several minutes between commercials. Noam noted that that was true, and was part of the system's genius. When speaking between commercials, there is no way to really say anything unconventional. Because if you say something unconventional, your audience is going to be challenged, and you would need time to present your facts and arguments to challenge the conventional "wisdom." That Nightline producer said that Noam's views seemed to come from "Neptune." Noam did not disagree, in that somebody who had only digested mainstream pabulum would not even begin to understand what Noam was saying. Noam further stated that the media and their masters are afraid to have Noam on the air, as he challenges the status quo and can back it up. Noam said that if the media was smarter, they would have Noam on, to make his points between commercials, and the audience would think that Noam was insane.

I am definitely in a similar position, in that people conditioned to 140 character tweets (notice how the attention span keeps getting shorter and shorter, to where we will all have gnat-like attention spans one day ) will have no interest in or comprehension of my work. However, if my work is intimidating in its vastness, I intentionally made it so that nothing about it was really all that intellectually challenging. There is no calculus in it, and I pretty lightly cover physics. Much of the "radical" stuff in my work is not brain-breaking, but just showing how what we have been taught is the truth is nothing but a crock, such as Columbus's "heroic" status. Nice to see that you got some "funny" Columbus emails. Maybe there is hope for us, after all.

As far as "marketing," as I have stated, it will go slowly. I may do some interviews, but not with the mainstream media ( ), and I recently mentioned that there are post-scarcity discussions out there, so much of my work will not seem from Neptune for them.

My best cyberpals have been those who stumbled into my work and went deep and did not come up for air for months. I have pals who will read anything that I write, site-wise, as they understand its importance. There are not many, but they exist. As I stated before, one of the world's leading paleobiologists and a famous popularizer in his own right said that the first half of my essay, which dealt with the material that he is a world authority regarding, was one of the best efforts that he ever saw, so I knew that I had a chance of reaching the lay audience, and my work had a chance to not be confined to arcane academics and scientists. Again, if only the Noams can begin to understand, then I have failed.

As I have stated, I went through the process with Noam's work, as I read it for about two years before it finally began sinking in. Noam is the most prominent academic on Earth, and if you dropped a rock into his mind, it would never hit bottom, but what took two years was not so much dealing with math-and-physics level concepts, but reorienting my thinking to understand his points, as they were so different than what I was used to, or anybody is used to, really, who is not some initiate of work like his.

I know that my readers are going to be in the same boat, or at least the readers that I seek. My work is not easy to understand, and what I eventually learned over the many years is that the presumptions of scarcity are the biggest barriers to comprehending my work. We are all force-fed scarcity from our cradles, and most have adapted and are afraid to change. I look for the vanishingly small proportion that has a love of the truth and is not willing to settle for the comforting fictions of our conditioning, as those are what have trapped our minds into a framework that makes FE and abundance unimaginable. In very real ways, I am just trying to make it thinkable. And yes, my work requires a pretty good attention span, but I have really broken it into small pieces that can be slowly digested. I know that if I had encountered my work 30 years ago, I would read it daily as I tried to digest it. I am looking for people like that, and they exist, but are rare.

So, the mass approach will not work, as I am looking for people who are less than one-in-a-thousand in the general population. That is why Dennis's approach, the social-circle approach, and others have not come close to working. I am pursuing the biggest event in the human journey, and there are no shortcuts. Also, for work like mine, or even Noam's, it starts slowly. During the Vietnam Era, Noam's "public appearances" were in people's living rooms. It took Jose Silva several years to train his first adult. This will begin small and slow, and that is OK.

As I have stated, I have been at this for 40 years, and have designed this approach so that I can do it for 30 more. Yes, my work is unique, because my journey is unique, and the longer I do it, the more unique I realize it is. I have some fellow travelers, and our experiences are similar, so it is not all that lonely, although my dear departed Brian had the closest perspective to mine.

As I look back at my journey, I had a genetic inheritance from my parents that set me up to be that Golden Boy, most likely to aid my soul's journey and my "mission" here. I am a member of history's most privileged demographic group, and my grooming to be a scientist and my mystical awakening prepared me for what was coming. To then have that voice guide my actions (1, 2, - really, that is so much larger than life that I still sit back at times and wonder if it really happened), to then go on a very wild ride that I barely survived with my sanity intact is an odyssey that very few on Earth have experienced. So, how to get what I learned across to those I seek? It is not easy, that is for sure. I devoted the equivalent of seven years of my life to creating my site as you see it today. It cost me millions of dollars to do that. Who can do that? So, yes, I do not know of anybody on Earth in a position to do what I have. Lonely? Sure. But is it uniquely important? I am foolish enough to think so, and poured my life into it. We will see if I can make a dent.

Again, I am looking for very rare people who have already had some kind of awakening experience, whose hearts are in the right place, and have some minimal level of mental horsepower to digest my work, which I doubt needs to really be that high. I think that if people do the work, they can learn to hit the notes that will be needed for that choir that has never been heard on Earth before. You can do it, as can others that I have encountered. The people are out there, but I need to find them. I want to avoid having too high a profile for now, because being "popular" is not going to help what I am doing very much.

As Noam said about Manufacturing Consent – it did not really get his message across, and that is one of the hazards of being "popular." So, exactly how I will "market" my work has yet to be fully fleshed out, but it will likely just be an extension of what I have done already. Getting the material in the best possible shape was most important, and now comes the next phase, as I resume my career and my "spare" time again withers away.

More to write on those subjects, but later.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Briefly, between chores, that "high bar" that Ilie mentioned is very intentional. If I lower my standards, what I am attempting will not go anywhere. Believe me, I get the "How relevant is most of your essay to your goal?" question regularly. There is a definite method to my madness. If it does not go anywhere because I cannot find the people to form the choir, I will take that over some kind of Level 10, half-sentient effort that crashes and burns when the slightest pressure is applied. I have lived through too much of that in my life already, and am trying something different.

I offer no road to riches, but hard work. If a person's heart is not in the right place, that immediately ends their participation, as there is no immediate payoff. I have set up several "barriers" in my work to dissuade people who do not have what I am looking for. However, I am pursuing the biggest event in the human journey, and its impact would be beyond the dreams of avarice, so Godzilla is watching and will likely send his assets my way, and not to help ( ), if I garner much success. So, some will try to get into the party who should not be there, and if people do the work, they will be less susceptible to the silver-tongued psychopaths who will be sniffing around for opportunities, both the free-lancers and those on the payroll. But the goal of giving away the most lucrative technology in world history will go a long way to also dissuading the psychopaths and others who will not be helpful.

That formidable curriculum is intended to help people attain the awareness that is needed to sing and stay out of trouble, and one day we might actually help make something happen. Those who want to cut to the chase of the essay's last chapters usually are also those who advocate all the "bright ideas" that have never worked and are unlikely to. I cannot afford to have people with half-cocked and gung-ho understandings involved with what I am doing. Been there, done that. They can go see Dennis and other efforts looking for some cannon fodder.

So, some of my curriculum can seem tangential, but it is all related, and for those who do the work, they will eventually understand. There are plenty of precedents for the approach that I am taking. As I recall, samurais spent a year or so learning to pull a bow before they ever touched an arrow. I am sure that many want to go shoot at the bulls-eye the first day (and they were likely shown the door), but there is a long learning curve to pass through. I know that I am the original, and if everybody had to go through how I learned, we would never get anywhere. Most FE aspirants fall by the wayside almost instantly, and for those that do not, nearly all of them get stuck somewhere along the way, usually at inventor-itis, delusions of grandeur, Level 10 notions, and other places. Some are deadly traps, while others are just supreme time-and-energy wasters. I know that if I could find and train 5,000-7,000 singers, FE would be a done deal. It could not be stopped then. But those are not going to be thousands of Average Joes who stumbled onto my work and spent a couple of weekends, between beers, perusing it.
I realize that cults can operate in superficially similar fashion, and I have encountered their stuff, but anybody who begins to do the work can see that my curriculum is a horse of a different color.

Does my approach have a prayer of working? If I thought that it didn't, I would not have done it. Even if I end up being a choir of one, I do not consider this to be a waste of my time. It beats watching TV.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I think that I have mentioned before that my work has been compared to Marx's, but as an epithet. I did not become familiar with Marx's work until pretty late in the game, as I began reading works that openly acknowledged their debt to Marx. As I read some Marx, I could see how much of what I read from the radical left was influenced by Marx. But, I had no use for Marx's violent ("struggle") suggestions, which may have helped inspire Hitler. Violence operates from the victim's perspective, and materialists usually justify violence. Heck, pretty much everybody justifies violence, but materialists often have a robust philosophical approach to justify their violence, which shows why materialists do not see the big picture. I see the Left's advocacy of violence and coercion as arising from their materialistic outlook, which is another reason why a person probably needs a mystical awakening to really understand my work. Materialism is founded on a false assumption, which a mystical awakening can invalidate. But it all begins in the heart, and a mystical awakening is not enough if people have fearful hearts. I met many mystical and religiously inclined people who failed the integrity test on my journey. The integrity test is really the only one that matters. If those needles in haystacks pass that one, the others are relatively easy. But I do not ask anybody to pass the test at the levels that Dennis or Mr. Professor did, for instance. If everybody in the choir had to get over that bar, I would find only a handful in my lifetime. People do not need to live their integrity at those levels to learn to sing.

That stated, it was interesting for my studies to arrive at some of the same conclusions that Marx did, and he did it long before the scientific findings came in. Marx's philosophy was materialistic, but he was right in that material conditions provided the foundation for cognitive and social changes. I stumbled into it accidentally in my studies, as I saw that the energy event formed the foundation for the cognitive/social events. Energy came first, and consciousness advanced later. It can even be seen in growing the human line's brain.

But it is also true that the energy event was a mental/technical/social breakthrough by a relative or literal handful of people, so an interaction was happening. That is also reflected in Marxian dialectics, with their dynamic nature, and the material/mental dynamics, which Marx called the conflict between the material and mystical. Marx argued for a dynamic process, and can be seen as the positive and negative feedbacks that scientists identify in their work.

Where materialists miss the boat is their soulless philosophy that encourages them to think like victims, so that they need to defeat the "bad guys." That is where materialist philosophy goes astray. As Jesus said, there is not really any out-group. That reflected the enlightenment of Jesus, and two millennia later, his message has largely fallen on deaf ears, and especially with Christians, who are history's most violent people. Love is the answer and always has been, which a materialist cannot quite comprehend, although almost nobody else really can, either, as virtually everybody thinks like a victim, in one way or another, as we live in a world of scarcity and fear.

Just as with the previous Epochal Events, only a relative handful are going to initiate the next Epochal Phase, and just as the Fourth Epochal Event made slavery obsolete, the Fifth Epochal Event will make elites obsolete, as well as many features of civilization and the human journey that are called human "nature," but are really only side-effects of scarcity that will disappear when abundance appears. And almost nobody on Earth today can even imagine it. But that is normal, because nobody could imagine any of the previous Epochal Events before they happened. For this one, the event has already technically happened, so it should not be that hard to imagine what it can help come to pass, and my goal is to just get those needles to imagine it, and help them pluck those insidious scarcity assumptions from their awareness, at least while they imagine abundance. That is no easy trick, and why I know that I am looking for needles in haystacks.

Back to work.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I cannot help myself from making one more "Marxian" observation. Holding two seemingly contradictory ideas at once is called a paradox, and Marxian thought encourages the dialogue between seemingly contrary positions (thesis, antithesis, and synthesis). The best scientists did, too. Bohr said that encountering a paradox in scientific work was where the gold was, as wrestling with paradoxes was how scientific progress was made. The goal is synthesizing those seemingly contrary views. What I have constantly encountered on my journey are people who make a home in one pole and never visit the other or see its worth. The materialist/mystical divide is one of the most common. As I have often stated, materialists miss the boat with their victim-oriented perspective, but so-called mystics can miss the boat, too, as they get all airy fairy and ungrounded (so heavenly bound that they are no earthly good), which can be seen in the New Age community and others. We all need energy, and those who deny material reality while they fly off into mystical stuff miss the boat, and often worse than materialists do. We are in physical reality for a reason.

Multidisciplinary efforts cross boundaries in generalist fashion, and the inductive thinking of generalists is usually where new hypotheses arise from. Drawing seemingly disparate parts into a new whole is how paradigm shifts happen, and if there is any description of my work that I can endorse, it is that one.

Back to work.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As I take a chores break, as a corollary to the material conditioning the "spiritual," it is well known that all wars have always had an economic foundation. It is even more obvious today. Although the imperial powers had been wrangling over how they would divvy up the Ottoman Empire for a century, the Middle East's fate was sealed in 1911, when Winston Churchill converted the British Navy from coal to oil. A few years later, the Sikes-Picot agreement, which was secret at the time, began to divvy up the oil-rich Middle East. The famous Lawrence of Arabia's mission was helping tear the Ottoman Empire apart.

The current debates over Islam in the West are very misguided, as economics trumps all, as usual. Cheney's Energy Task Force might well have been called Sikes-Picot II. Everything happening in the Middle East today is all about the oil, and everything else is noise.

Best,

Wade

[Melinda]

Posted by Wade Frazier (here)
...I had no use for Marx's violent ("struggle") suggestions... [...] ...That stated, it was interesting for my studies to arrive at some of the same conclusions that Marx did, and he did it long before the scientific findings came in. Marx's philosophy was materialistic, but he was right in that material conditions provided the foundation for cognitive and social changes. I stumbled into it accidentally in my studies, as I saw that the energy event formed the foundation for the cognitive/social events. Energy came first, and consciousness advanced later. It can even be seen in growing the human line's brain...

I found the Chomsky links you included in post #4088 pertinent to the free energy issue.

This was the second link :

http://www.chomsky.info/articles/1970----.htm

Reading that essay - one obvious point that came clearly to mind, about the limits of anarchism for growth in a scarcity system, is that even if labourers take control of farms / factories / production (i.e. managing and splitting profits rather than a minority of corporations or business-owners controlling those profits) you still have a situation where people are sharing comparatively scarce resources and are tied to lives of manual, robotic labour to meet basic needs, rather than being able to focus more on education and expanding our skills and interests.

If you try to work the 'fairness' principle into capitalism with profit share, those working are incentivized to push people to buy things they don't necessarily need, that don't necessarily serve their highest interests, in order to generate commission / bonuses / profit.

A free energy system that facilitates people being free to develop higher ethical values and broader skill-sets is still preferable.

After quoting Marx's disdain for any practices that :

"mutilate the worker into a fragment of a human being, degrade him to become a mere appurtenance of the machine"

Chomsky addresses the idea that :

"If private ownership of the means of production is, in Proudhon's often quoted phrase, merely a form of "theft" -- "the exploitation of the weak by the strong" -- control of production by a state bureaucracy, no matter how benevolent its intentions, also does not create the conditions under which labor, manual and intellectual, can become the highest want in life. Both, then, must be overcome."

And can be overcome with a loving application of free energy technology, which puts the means of production directly into the hands of every man and woman - at no, or greatly reduced, cost to the environment.

With the essay's analysis of political ideology, I was reminded of the Buckminster Fuller quote :

"Making the world resources adequate can’t be accomplished through political system competition. All politics are obsolete as fundamental problem solvers. Politics are only adequate for secondary housekeeping tasks. Mankind must take universal initiative in effecting the design revolution.”

http://www.ahealedplanet.net/roots.htm#fuller

In Chomsky's essay, after addressing the words of Diego Abad de Santillan, Friedrich Engels and Mikhail Bakunin, he makes the point well that the issue of how to softly transition to sustainable anarchist systems without state or capitalist involvement is a very difficult one.

In the context of free energy, one difficulty I see is that the gradual introduction of free energy via slow 'transitionary methods' - such as, arguably, introducing state/capitalist controlled pockets of greater/cleaner energy sources (like potential offshoots of Lockheed's fusion project) into the existing power plant grid structure - could be seen as a socially gentle/sustainable approach. But it's very difficult to trust that as having purely altruistic, sensible intent when those decision-makers are embedded in and have profited from a scarcity-based system. It's also frustrating to think that clandestine forces who benefit from environmentalists' fears of FE, have likely done decades of research and development, ironing out many early-stage issues with the technology's application. Technology superior to the 'truck-sized' reactors recently mentioned :

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-1...n-reactor.html

With shifts in perception in the world of physics, and the promise of FE technology, we can eventually surpass the infrastructural ideals of anarchism, and explore the holographic model instead. One where each individual part contains the blueprint of the whole - where each individual has the means to be self-sufficient in meeting their basic needs, and exploring the vast potential beyond.

I'm not discarding the Lockheed announcement, or trying to downplay its potential to help us solve our environmental problems. I'm just iterating that the landscape is still a tricky one. And the responsibility and opportunity to understand the FE options still lies with us, rather than leaving it to the same parties who have shaped the system structure for so long.

Wishing peace and abundance to you all (including Noam Chomsky) with this, my 200th post.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Melinda:

Oh boy, I could write a lot in response, but I will try to keep it brief. I have designed systems for a living, and my specialty was taking six people keying in data like monkeys and turning it into one person doing data entry, one analyst, and a smart computer system. The ultimate goal was eliminating monkey work altogether. A great potential of high tech is eliminating rote work in the information world. The same has been done with manual labor since the 1700s (and even earlier, such as the rise of the watermill). Indeed, energy-driven machinery, to an overwhelming extent, is the Industrial Revolution.

With FE and technologies that I know already exist, all human drudgery could quickly disappear, both physically and mentally. Chomsky noted that the problem is that the wealth is not being shared, but that also greatly understates the issue. Without energy to run those hundreds of billions of energy slaves that the West rides on the backs of today, the rest does not matter, and burning up our primary energy resources a million times as fast as they were created is the big problem, with a bullet. Everything else pales to insignificance. That is where the focus on social organization is pre-scientific and of no use, as with that Fuller quote that you reproduce. Inventing a new social organization or political stripe is meaningless, akin to trying to democratize the Titanic, which lefties and other activists have yet to comprehend. The social/political movement mentality is archaic and largely worthless for addressing what humanity is facing. All that political systems do is decide who gets the scarce resources. When resources become abundant, all of today's political and economic ideologies and institutions will go the way of dinosaurs and slavery, and social organization will radically change.

With FE and those technologies, the human "workday" will be something like an hour, for every human to enjoy a standard of living that makes Bill Gates seem a pauper. We can barely imagine how that will change the world and humanity.

Manifesting the next epochal energy event is what is important, not playing the social organization game. If only 5,000-7,000 people (less than 0.0001% of the global population) gained the understanding that my work attempts to help people achieve, the biggest event in the human journey would be here, and the radical changes in social organization and ideologies would be an effect of it, not a cause, just as with all previous Epochal Events.

Economics has yet to grow out its 19th century ideas, before the science of energy was developed, and that may well be by design, as John Rockefeller funded the institution that developed neoclassical economics, which still dominates the profession. Marx was little better on that score, seeing economics primarily in social terms. But Marx can also be forgiven, as his work was done before the development of the science of energy. But 21st-century economics does not have that excuse.

All the anarchist social organization in the world is meaningless when the energy runs out, as it is already doing. As Einstein said, a problem cannot be solved by the same mentality that created it, and you are prudent in thinking that Lockheed and friends are not the interests that we should be looking to. Lockheed is part of the problem, not the solution. Anything coming from aerospace companies will pass through the filter of Godzilla's motivation. I recently mentioned the "breakaway civilization" idea that is being promoted. I do not want to get too deeply into it, but I have digested some of that promoter's work and have some of his books here at home, and all I will say is that I can tell that he is an academic and not an activist, which limits his perspective. But he has it right on Special Access Projects and private control, and that is the world where that fusion reactor technology hails from.

Basically, corporations and governments are useless for righting humanity's ship, as they all do Godzilla's bidding, either actively or unwittingly. Godzilla has technology that could go on everybody's homes safely tomorrow, but that is not his priority, you might say.

Whether production is centralized or not will not be all that important in a world with FE and attendant technologies, but individuals, households, communities, and other units could all readily become independent with those technologies. People could have completely self-contained homes, or self-sufficient "villages," and the like, or there could be one plant on Earth that made FE devices and distributed them. It probably would not be that way to start, but when power and control games fade to oblivion, I can see some centralization as a way to make things easier, but redundancy could easily be built into the system, too, like the Internet today. The primary issue is scarcity or abundance, and the social structures, ideologies, institutions, and the like are adaptations to those states. When abundance reigns, almost nothing about today's world will be recognizable. That is the kind of change that people fear, but when abundance reigns, fear will be the most inappropriate reaction, as it is a reaction to scarcity. That is part of the conundrum, as people deny and fear FE, when it makes the reason for fear disappear.

Best,

Wade

[Melinda]

Posted by Wade Frazier (here)
Hi Melinda:

Oh boy, I could write a lot in response, but I will try to keep it brief. I have designed systems for a living, and my specialty was taking six people keying in data like monkeys and turning it into one person doing data entry, one analyst, and a smart computer system. The ultimate goal was eliminating monkey work altogether. A great potential of high tech is eliminating rote work in the information world. The same has been done with manual labor since the 1700s (and even earlier, such as the rise of the watermill). Indeed, energy-driven machinery, to an overwhelming extent, is the Industrial Revolution.

With FE and technologies that I know already exist, all human drudgery could quickly disappear, both physically and mentally...

One of the problems we currently face is elites using technological advances to make a human labour force obsolete, accompanied by a political culture that either has open disdain for the resultant unemployed (a perspective in the more right-wing ranks), or is trying to honour the cause of the common man but doesn't properly address the energy-root of the problem (the more left wing contingent.)

So at the top of the societal pyramid you have people denying the technological solution either wilfully or due to ignorance.

Spiritually, rather than attacking that outdated system, my humble understanding is that we need to outgrow that frequency, thereby rendering it redundant. We all the know the adage that an eye for an eye will make the world blind.

To hold forgiveness in our hearts, whilst remaining vigilant, and peacefully, has to be one of the greatest challenges in nurturing sovereignty as we grow our souls. I'm certainly no expert. But I know it comes a great deal more easily when we're not swamped by unnatural levels of pressure, as we currently are. We just have to cultivate ways of rising above. Through kindness, acceptance, and those many layered expressions of love. I'm not saying that we deny our harder side (I have one), but that we safeguard and honour our highest aspects. That we integrate them.

I felt that sentiment flow through my heart recently, while a stray cat was curled up in my lap. The cat meowed softly in approval and we both looked at one another, before returning to our separate meditations. I've shared similar moments with dogs and birds and squirrels. The animals seem to get it when you're in the flow. They like it too, transforming and exuding a deepness and a calm glow.

"Whether production is centralized or not will not be all that important in a world with FE and attendant technologies"

It's interesting, contemplating what way we would go and how we would get there.

As people we have a natural tendency towards community, for nurture, growth and inspiration. As individuals we also have a capacity for solitude for those same reasons, experienced in microcosmic form. I don't personally, for example, have an issue with centralised bodies of power, committees, or councils where those deemed the wisest are elected for guidance. The quality of government really depends on the quality of intelligence in the culture that upholds it, and the effectiveness within that culture of methods to hold it accountable. In a world of scarcity, we know what kind of government that creates. But a world of abundance can dissolve the seeds of competition (over resources) that both keep us pitted against one another and enable external parties to play on our fears. So as you say, whether we choose villages of three or to gather in communities of hundreds of thousands, the point is that we have the FE technology that facilitates us sustaining them peacefully.

I feel like I'm just stating the obvious. But that's my rumination on your last comment that I quoted.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Melinda:

The FE conundrum has many facets, and we all play our part in it. Yes, at the "top," we have active suppression (Level 14), and denial and ignorance (Level 3), and all are rooted in fear.

At "lower" levels, ignorance (Level 0), denial (Levels 1 to 3), and fear (Level 5) rule, or a kind of apathy (Level 4 and also Level 0).

For the few who get past those Levels, they get trapped in their orientation due to denial, inexperience, naïveté (Levels 6 and 7), despair (Level 8), anger and paranoia (Level 9), greed, delusions of grandeur (Level 11), or thinking that those around them really look beyond their immediate self-interest, when almost nobody really does (Level 10).

So far, almost nobody on Earth has successfully navigated those hazards (except perhaps Level 19s ).

What a tough nut to crack, but cracking it will be the biggest event in the human journey, so it is worth gnawing on. I have been at it for 40 years, and like Brian O, I will be at it until I take my last breath.

Love is always the answer.

Going to bed now.

Best,

Wade

[Nine]

Dearest Wade,

Read your essay upon the American Empire. It was for me a wonderful book of truths that I knew but its funny how "spin" effects things.....its spun for us to see a truth but whose?

My father always loved Thomas Jefferson and thought that he or his party would bring a good life.

Trouble is that Mr. TJ was just like his old boss ...just the same....

Mr. Jefferson was very enlightened for his day except the facts show that he had a policy towards the Indian that was genocidal and so every President that followed Washington....and I will never tell a lie...

It was from the get go....and many American's will have a big problem with that little truth....

And so for any social situation at least in America one would be wise not to mention it....


Nine