WADE FRAZIER : A Healed Planet

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

This morning's hike was a joy. I did not see a soul. I have definitely had my fair share of hiking in forests and meadows, picking berries, and the like, and I can only be grateful. Attached is a pic from this morning's hike. You can see that the bracken fern have died off and the leaves are virtually all gone from the trees. That is what my woods look like in winter, except when it snows, which is rare there but a treat. I have hiked there when there was six inches of snow on the ground and snowing pretty good, and that can be pretty magical.

My previous post of the manifold delusions that imperial peoples and "settler" states have is a small facet of our problems. The Big One is energy, as always, in a world of energy scarcity. A major purpose of my big essay is to help people develop comprehensive perspectives. When the big picture is seen, or at least a far larger one than is seen by the masses today, it really brings a lot into focus, and the myopic perspective of so many schools of "thought" in today's world becomes obvious.

As I sat there, taking a little rest this morning, taking that picture, I thought of that forest. Conifer forests are more than a quarter-billion years old, including the ferns. I was looking at a landscape that is ancient indeed. And thinking about the human journey that brought me there, I realized how out of place a creature like me really was, if we consider nature. Without the human line's toolset, it would have never left the forests and woodlands of Africa. Without our toolset, humanity would have never appeared on the evolutionary scene. Our tools made us. Conifer forests are marginal forests, as far as supporting animal life. The warmer lands have forests in which flowering plants dominate, which laid out a banquet for animals, to lessen the cost of reproduction. An ape is so out of place in a conifer forest. North America did not host primates for more than 30 million years, until humans came invading less than 20 thousand years ago. The only primates that could exist in North America were super-predatory, tool-bearing apes.

But a comprehensive perspective also is aware that such intercontinental invasions are not new. There were many intercontinental invasions in the Eocene, Asian mammals later invaded Europe and Africa, and North American mammals invaded South America, and Europe's conquest of the world can easily be seen in the same light, and Europeans driving humans to extinction on three continents can merely be seen as more of the same. But it also brings up the issue of whether humanity is really a sentient species, engaging in wholesale genocide like it has for recorded history, and celebrating the feats, of all things.

Time to make my salad for my family's Thanksgiving feast, and then watch a football game.

Best,

Wade

[Nine]

Dear Wade,

A friend of mine got killed while riding his bicycle a few days ago. He was hit by a Fed-ex Truck that crossed over into a bicycle lane and killed my friend.

http://bikeportland.org/2014/11/21/f...llision-113780

It was reported in the main Portland paper not the local cycling paper above, and the author did a very good job reporting the story yet being sensitive of the feelings of friends and family However, it was in the comments section of the article that just got to me big time. Some folks not feeling any empathy for any of us who are survived and are grieving went on a tirade about how bicycles should not be on the roads etc. and I was of course wondering if these people are even human in the normal sense of that word?

Of course these folks were a small minority of the commentators on the article but still....

And I am currently reading an article on Ponerology or the study of evil and what drives people in society to evil and the conclusion is that psychopathy is something from evolution and how a psychopath is the ultimate predator on the planet and that it is a physical and genetic condition afflicting about six percent of the population.

I have been reading how a psychopaths brain has an anomaly that can be measured by MRI and is a physical condition that almost makes them a separate species of Human being. How the six percent can control the majority of humanity through there manipulations of humanity and it is a global problem is what our Wade is talking about on his wonderful thread.

I observed this phenomenon in my employment with the Federal Government. It was at the same time frightening at times yet revealing and I had to deal with these people to get my job done. Wade's view of them is very healthy as to look at them as a natural process such as a thunderstorm or a tornado or an earth quake ...a process of nature.

And so as an American I can read Zinn or Chomsky or Frazier on the American Empire and not blow a fuse as our Wade says!

If something is not done about this on just an evolutionary scale shortly then they will be the dominant species of Human being and so the importance of Wade's work just hit home for me as I try to look at the big picture and I see every human institution infected with the psychopath mentality with the ultimate end of 90% of humanity as the goal of a small minority and Wade telling us over and over and over how integrity is the worlds scarcest commodity!!

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/so...tm#PSYCHOPATHS

Wade, you are providing excellent leadership on this issue and I believe that your plan will have success with the young first and then the old and burned out by the system such as me...

thanx

Nine

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Nine:

Sorry to hear about your friend. FE and attendant technologies make such incidents obsolete, obviously. That is a big subject, psychopaths and evil. Those comments that you see on the Internet are unfortunately typical, and maybe they come from that 6%, but what I have found on the Internet is that because people are not interacting as people but as anonymous texters, they tend to not treat people as people, and behave in ways that they never would if they were directly interacting with each other.

But this is by no means something new, but a new medium exists, and there are upsides and downsides to it, and is one reason why I will not have any anonymous members in my forum. Who would really want to join a "community" of anonymous people, like some secret society? I cannot see such a "community" getting anything important accomplished, much less help manifest the biggest event in the human journey.

One big point of my essay is showing the deep roots of many human behaviors and ideas. Social animals go way back, maybe even to protists, as sexual reproduction meant that members of the same species had to interact to procreate. Even cyanobacteria formed colonies. Dinosaurs were social animals, and monkeys have many traits that can be seen in human societies today.

The central feature of all monkey and ape societies is a defensible energy supply, and social organization is oriented around it. Because of sexual reproduction and preventing inbreeding, one gender had to leave its natal society to mate. With monkeys, males left. With chimps and gorillas, females left. When females left, that meant that the males became dominant in new ways, and those societies are notable for their brutality.

It looks like the entire human line to Homo sapiens was male dominated in that way, so those were likely as brutal as we see in chimps today, and one feature of all such societies was how members of out-groups were treated. All out-groups were fair game, and chimps engage in genocide of their neighbors. This can be seen in humans throughout history, even to today, in history's richest and most powerful nation, as it slaughters millions of people in order to steal their resources. While "leaders" such as Bush, Cheney, and Rummy are all psychopaths, to one degree or another, they were very willingly followed by a nation, even when the most transparently dishonest and stupid rationales were trotted out. The reason is because those "towel-heads" in Asia are an out-group, and humans have ever slaughtered out-groups with gusto.

My Thanksgiving post yesterday, as I show how Americans cheered slaughters of women and children, even having days of Thanksgiving to commemorate such events, is pointing out nothing new in the human journey, I am sorry to day. Evil deeds committed against the out-group, and the most irrational and asinine defense of one's in-group, is a universal human trait. Until people can see all life on Earth as our in-group, we won’t be a fully sentient species.

So-called psychopaths have only taken "normal" human traits to their extreme; their in-group has only one member: themselves. They are merely on the extreme end of a spectrum that all humans reside on, and the vast majority is far closer to the psychopathic end of the spectrum than the saintly one. If that was not the case, we would have had FE by now. I am looking for those less-than-one-in-a-thousand people who are honest and courageous enough to shed their egocentric indoctrination and simply imagine abundance. It is like a walk in the desert looking for them, but even one-in-a-million will work for what I have in mind. Will I find them? Some close to me think that it is a fool's errand, and they may be right, but I have to try.

There are precedents for what I am attempting and what its impact will be, and perhaps the most instructive is what some isolated chimps did when their food supply doubled. The females took over, ended male gang dominance, used sex for social bonding, and it is arguable that bonobo society is more enlightened than any human society has ever been. If bonobos could do it, why can't humans? And we also have many examples in human societies of the ability to end male gang dominance. As all the easy meat was hunted to extinction on Earth, women gatherers became the primary economic (energy) providers to their societies, and their status therefore rose. Many such societies became matrilineal, so that the men had to leave their natal society to mate, and those have been Earth's most peaceful and enlightened societies. When men run societies, they are disasters of greed and violence, and psychopaths rule. Godzilla is almost exclusively, if not exclusively, comprised of men. Oh, they have Mafia wives, for sure, but it is men who excel at evil. Women are biologically wired to care for others.

The bottom line is that if we get over the hump into an FE-based civilization, we will become far more like bonobos than chimps, and you just won't see psychopathic behavior. It will not be encouraged, heck, cheered, as it is today. The archetype of evil men clambering to the top and running the show will disappear, which is one reason why I say that women need to step up, and step up far beyond what we see in the soft-headed New Age phenomenon, in which male "gurus" have their harems and the rest of that tawdry spectacle. At that NEM conference, my wife noticed how Brian was swarmed with groupies. The women involved in the choir have to reach far higher levels of integrity and sentience than that, and develop a little scientific literacy and critical thinking. The men involved have to put aside their inventor-itis, trying to be heroes and Messiahs, becoming rich and famous, and the rest of those traps that I see them fall into nearly every time. Again, I know that I am looking for needles in haystacks, but they are out there.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Fortunately, I am not the only one taking on the Thanksgiving Myth in the USA. You will see different agendas in challenging the myth, and I will also endorse the idea that Lincoln's declaration was also trying to unite a nation in the midst of its most calamitous war, which reverberates even today, 150 years later.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

One comment I have seen repeatedly directed toward my big essay is that it is too orthodox. If I am advocating FE and other "fringe" stuff, why do I not have the whole catalog of fringe theory and conspiracist lore in that essay, instead of what seems a paean to The Establishment?

Anybody who says that it is all orthodox either did not read the essay or understand it. I use what I find valid and relevant, and am not wedded to something because it is orthodox or fringe. I wrote an essay on the subject several years ago. My interest in "fringe stuff" began when I read Ripley's Believe or Not and Frank Edwards's "Strange" series about when I was 13, but as I was being trained to become a scientist, I began to take a no-nonsense view of such stuff… until I had my mystical awakening at age 16. My first professional mentor invented the world's best engine for powering an automobile around the same time, and my journey toward FE began, although I did not hear about FE until after I met Dennis. I had one foot in orthodoxy and one foot in the fringes since I was a teenager, and as Ken Wilber noted about the mystical orientation of the greatest physicists, they did not see the schism as between science and religion but between the genuine and the bogus, and that has always been my litmus test. Just because something was orthodox did not make it valid, and just because something was fringe did not make it invalid.

While most fringe stuff is invalid, the greatest evils can be found in orthodoxy. While our FE efforts were targeted by the world's greatest conspiracy with the world's deepest pockets, the conspiracist framework is simplistic and jaded, and sees the world through a victim's lens. So does the structuralist framework, and I see the schism as one between love and fear, enlightenment and dogma, scarcity versus abundance, and so on.

The attack-the-tumor paradigm of cancer treatment, the promotion of tobacco while making health claims for it, and the promotion of an industrial waste to this day as "medicine" are a few examples of the great evils in the medical racket. But that certainly does not make alternative medicine valid, and a great deal of it has marginal validity. Even when valid, the promoters were often hucksters. But there is highly impressive "impossible" technology and the data derived from such that makes the entire foundation of much of modern medicine look shaky. But the medical racket is the most lucrative on Earth, next to the energy racket, so you will find truly surreal situations there, but the most bizarre part about the situation is how easily people fall prey to it, preferring certain death over confronting their conditioning and indoctrination. You probably have to see it to believe it.

The energy racket uses similar means to similar ends, but energy is the Big One that dwarfs everything else, and each time that humanity tapped a new energy source, a new Epoch of the human journey began. We are on the brink of the biggest Epochal Event of all, but humanity might not make it over the hump, as we destroy ourselves and take most of the biosphere with us. That situation is the focus of my attention, and I am engaging in an unprecedented approach to try to solve the riddle.

That does not mean that I ignored everything except some narrow focus on energy. It is far from that, but few people on Earth currently understand how central the energy issue has always been on Earth, and what the Epochal significance of FE is. Along the way, I have snooped into the fringes, such as catastrophic theory, conspiratorial political events, alternative health treatments, "alternative" history and politics, and the mystical world and the abilities of consciousness, and just like my explorations of orthodoxy, my heart was always my guide, wedded to a rather unique mind that always sought what was valid, what was relevant, what was helpful, and where the roots were in relation to the branches. It has all been quite an odyssey, and I barely survived my FE adventures, and have had enough of that for a lifetime.

The uniformitarian framework is a couple of centuries old and became an orthodox dogma, and was not really overturned in orthodoxy until the appearance of the bolide impact hypothesis for the demise of the dinosaurs. In the eon of complex life, there was no more spectacular catastrophic event. All mass extinctions were catastrophes, but other than the asteroid that took out the dinosaurs and many of the megafauna extinctions, none would have been detectable in a human lifetime. The theory of global catastrophic events in the historical era, such as Velikovsky's work, does not add up to me, and I spent years looking into it. The catastrophist explanation for the megafauna extinctions is far less persuasive than the climate change explanations, and I consider the climate change explanations as virtually all bogus and a defense of the in-group known as humanity or the Stone Age peoples of the Americas and Australia (as white scholars "go native" in an understandable and even noble but misguided approach).

Literalist interpretations of ancient texts are barking up the wrong tree, IMO. Those texts have some facts in them, but are mostly fantasy to justify the positions of early elites, usually in cahoots with a corrupt priesthood. Using them to reconstruct ancient events is a pretty shaky approach.

Similarly, the "enigmatic" megalithic architecture was all made by either Stone Age or Bronze Age peoples, and they would have been good at working in stone. I have never found persuasive all the "mystical," advanced civilization, and ET explanations of that megalithic architecture. Those megaliths were built by the new elites to overawe their subjects and competitors. All early human civilizations did it. Until somebody adduces some artifacts that are not made of stone, I am going to be very skeptical of such fringe explanations of ancient monumental architecture.

John Kennedy and his brother were murdered in conspiracies. You can take that one to the bank, and many American political assassinations were the result of conspiracies, probably carried out via covert action, with a "lone nut" scapegoat served up each time. But the conspiracist culture in the USA is often paranoid and deluded, and "conspiracies" such as faked moon landings and other topics will live on long after I am gone, just like there is still a Flat Earth society. While there is plenty that does not add up about the 9/11 terror attacks, and federal government complicity would not surprise me in the slightest, even ignoring that those "terrorists" were trained by the USA in the first place, the spectacle that has evolved around 9/11 has been disheartening to witness, and the milieu has really gone off the deep end with recent events such as that elementary school shooting in Connecticut or the Boston Marathon bombings, as prominent conspiracists argued that the events did not even really happen but were fake events, like faked moon landings. Many conspiracists have become crazed, and I cannot help but wonder how many agents provocateurs are in their ranks, fanning the flames of their delusions.

Much of my "alternative" history study is not very "alternative" at all, but just the facts of history that our propaganda systems ignore or suppress, such as the true American Thanksgiving tradition, the lies about the USA's Founding Fathers, and the like.

Free energy and antigravity technologies exist on Earth today, and far more, and the UFO cover-up is very real. You can take that to the bank. I know because of what very close fellow travelers have experienced. Brian O nearly lost his life after poking into the UFO phenomenon, immediately after rejecting an "offer" from the USA's military. But all sorts of crazy yarns have sprung up like weeds around those situations, and a significant proportion is likely disinformation from the "inside" to muddy the waters. Conspiracists of every stripe have had a field day, and the tabloid media has enabled them.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

The nature/nurture debate is a very old one, and in The Blank Slate, Steven Pinker surveys some of the extreme ends of that issue. The so-called blank slate approach was that everybody is inherently equal with identical genetic and biological inheritance, and everything is nurture. It became a very popular position in the 20th century, and has led to absurdities such as women going to prison for "raping" teenage boys. They are still going to prison today in the USA for that very much victimless "crime."

In The Blank Slate, Pinker also assails The Peaceful Savage and The Ghost in the Machine ideas. The Peaceful Savage is the Rousseauian idea that there was a peaceful interlude in the human past, when man in nature was idyllic. The Ghost in the Machine is the idea of a soul.

A lot of The Blank Slate mentality is an understandable reaction to the "scientific" racism, sexism, and other "isms" that arose in the 19th century, particularly in the wake of Darwin's theories. Social Darwinism became the basis for Machiavellian schools of thought, and eugenics made its grotesque appearance. Behaviorists led by Skinner argued that no behaviors were inherent in the organism, and that all behaviors were learned.

It regularly reached ridiculous levels in which biology was responsible for 100% of traits and behaviors, or 0%, depending on the school of thought. What happened was that political ideas overrode scientific investigation. The suppression of FE is just one example of many in which political-economic considerations overrode science. The stigma against racism is so entrenched that scientists and doctors are discouraged from investigating any biological differences of the races, which is setting back medical treatments and scientific investigation. And any time that a genetic basis for a racial or ethnic group trait is hinted at by scientists, such as the high IQs of Ashkenazy Jews, the opposition can become vociferous and go far beyond the scientific issues being raised.

Suggest that any behavioral traits of any races and ethnic groups have anything to do with their genes, and expect a firestorm of criticism and even professional blackballing. It is known that various breeds of dogs have different dispositions, and it has a genetic basis. But the same cannot be suggested for humans. There can be kind and loving pit bulls and vicious golden retrievers, but we know what breeding has encouraged. The silver fox was domesticated within my lifetime by selective breeding, and they act like dogs.

The Peaceful Savage meme in anthropology in the last half of the 20th century was partly a reaction to the World Wars, and anthropologists desperately wanted to believe in a naturally peaceful humanity. That fiction was not overturned until the late 20th century.

The fact is that genetics matter, that economic conditions matter. Nurture can become nature. While Pinker assailed the Ghost in the Machine, a one-week meditation class can easily falsify the materialistic model of consciousness that Pinker and other materialists promote. While material reality, including genetics, can greatly impact consciousness, consciousness ultimately does not arise from matter. The materialism = science = reality is a false equivalence based on self-reinforcing assumptions. Have a remote viewing, and you can never buy that belief system. Physical reality is not the sum total of creation.

That all-or-nothing approach can be seen in many areas, and is why we have hard-core materialists going at it with religious fundamentalists, why we have airy-fairy new age approaches contrasting with materialist fundamentalist approaches. I am not sure if that is how some souls learn, by plumbing the extremes, or that most people just cannot hold more than one idea in their heads at a time. Karl Popper preferred simpler hypotheses because they were easier to falsify, but it is probably only the highly simple hypotheses – the kindergarten of science, if you will – that is easily subjected to such tests.

Scientists have developed the concepts of ranking causes and feedback effects, to create more comprehensive pictures of reality, and it is certainly a step in the right direction, but I have also seen scientists go overboard on "nuance" and lose sight of ultimate causes. This confusion and getting lost in the weeds is common in many disciplines, such as modern economics ignoring energy and the real world in its constructions.

One reason why comprehensive perspectives are so rare is that it takes a lot of work to develop them. It is not for quick-study artists, and has to integrate the detail-orientation of the specialist with the pattern-recognition of the generalist. Scientists today attempt that integration, but it is not easy. The proliferation of multidisciplinary efforts in the past generation or two is definitely a step in the right direction. The ultimate union is going to be the scientist and the mystic, as consciousness is recognized as far more than some ephemeral byproduct of chemical reactions. But there is a holy war against that union taking place, such as Sheldrake's banning from TED, led by "skeptics."

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Here is another example of the kinds of discussions that I plan for the choir to engage in.

Q. Can we discuss the varying carrying capacities of Earth's environment during each Epochal Phase of the human journey?

A. Sure. I suppose that first, the idea of carrying capacity should be defined. In biology, it means the number of members of a species that can exist on a piece of Earth's surface area, which can also mean aquatic environments. The idea of carrying capacity is usually used today to describe the land's ability to support human life. What that really means is what ecosystems can provide in the way of food for humans. In order to begin to understand the idea of carrying capacity, the idea of where "food" comes from needs to be understood.

Grazing and predation predate the rise of complex life, and is the idea of life forms feeding on other life forms. So-called autotrophs do not do that, but most receive their energy from the Sun through photosynthesis. Other autotrophs get their "food" (mainly energy) from inorganic chemicals. Very early in the journey of life on Earth, organisms (grazers) evolved to eat those autotrophs, and other organisms evolved to eat those grazers (predators), and life's arm's race began. Autotrophs constantly evolved to limit their vulnerability to grazers, and grazers constantly evolved to both overcome autotroph defenses while also developing their own defenses to predation. Predators constantly evolved ways to overcome grazer (and predators that were below them in the food chain) defenses, and increasing intelligence (as evidenced by growing brains) seems to have been a predatory strategy, to outsmart their prey.

There have been many biological events in the journey of life on Earth that increased Earth's carrying capacity, and perhaps the key one, as far as humans are concerned, was the appearance of flowering plants. Instead of defending themselves against animals, plants laid out a banquet for them, to reduce their energetic costs of reproduction. That led to primates appearing. To this day, the ultimate primate food is fruit. Some specialized in insects and leaves, but virtually all monkeys and apes are primarily fruit eaters (you will never see one turn it down ).

In the shrinking rainforests of the coming ice age, some "loser" chimps were forced away from the fruits of the rainforests, dined on poorer fare and learned to eat roots and other parts of plants that they could digest in the woodlands and grasslands near the rainforests. That expanded the carrying capacity of Earth for primates, although only the human line explored it much. Some chimp dig roots, and most great apes eat meat at times, but it comprises a tiny part of their diets.

Those human-line apes that began to leave the trees (but they almost always slept in trees until Homo erectus appeared), and added scavenged predator kills, and when the human line invented stone tools about 2.6 million years ago, they were able to greatly enhance their food supply, and the human line's brain began to dramatically grow. There were positive feedbacks as the growing human-lines brain and increasing intelligence allowed for inventing new ways to extract energy from the environment, and the Big One was the control of fire. To this day, human civilization is based on the control of fire. Controlling fire was the human-line's most important energy innovation, and likely fueled the growing brain of the human line and led to the appearance of humans.

Fire also allowed for radical destruction of ecosystems for human benefit, and humans began burning forests with abandon about 50,000 years ago. While it increased the land's human carrying capacity, it began driving plants and animals to extinction, and the Sixth Mass Extinction began about the same time. Ever since, humans have increased the land's carrying capacity for humans while reducing it for all other species that humans did not find useful (and all competing human species were also driven to extinction), and human short-sightedness often wrecked the land's carrying capacity, which led to collapsing civilizations.

So, if we narrow down the definition of carrying capacity to Earth's ability to support humans, its carrying capacity under the hunter-gatherer lifestyle (after almost all the easy meat was rendered extinct) was about 10 million people, under an agricultural lifestyle, Earth's carrying capacity was about two billion people, and under the industrial lifestyle, it is probably 10 billion or so, but if we wanted everybody to have a peasant lifestyle with industrialized farming, it might go as high as 20 billion. The human population never got to the carrying capacity for any Epochal Phase, as that would have meant the extinction of most all plants and animals other than what humans found useful. While it was easy meat that suffered the most when humanity expanded across the planet, in the domestication phase, the human predilection was a war against "pests" and "weeds." All competing plants and animals have been under siege since the Domestication Revolution, and even today, poor Third World farmers are leading the wrecking of habitat that is driving species to extinction. They have been forced to the margins by the industrial powers and are farming marginal lands that were refugia of marginalized animals, and mammals in particular.

One upshot of FE is that Earth's ecosystems would no longer be needed to provide human energy and materials, such as food and wood. All food could be raised in indoor environments, almost anywhere in our solar system that we would want, so the thin and vulnerable ecosphere of Earth would no longer be under siege by humanity.

Even though hardly any human today can even imagine it, under an FE-based political-economy, harming Earth's ecosystems for human benefit would quickly be seen as being as barbaric as chattel slavery is today. If humans did not "need" to do it, they will quickly see its harm, and all scarcity-based and egocentric ideologies will also quickly fade to oblivion, and humanity might begin to become a truly sentient species.

When that happens, today's ideas of Earth's human carrying capacity, carbon footprint, and the like will become meaningless relics of a bygone Epoch of the human journey.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Speaking of women "raping" teenage boys, I just saw this. I have a close relative who beat his infant son to death. Now, that was a crime, and about as high on the heinous scale as it gets. The cheerleader having sex with a teenage boy will get more coverage than the recent news that American drone attacks kill nearly 30 times as many people as are targeted. Notice how that is an article from the British media? When I surfed Yahoo! for a minute, I could not find any American media that reported those "collateral" deaths. Typical.

On a lighter note, when I went downstairs into my kitchen, I was shocked to see the attached scene.

Best,

Wade

[Nine]

Wade,

One has to look at himself as an American when confronted by such things as you write about in your essay about America.

I would say that patience is a great virtue in this regard.....

Why do 22 American service men and ex service men commit suicide every day?

Can you or could you explain the concept of guilt to me in terms of evolution or chemistry to me?

It seems to me to be more than a natural process...

Many in the community of evangelicals would call this an awareness of sin.....

You stated to me that your friend Dennis was about to commit suicide but did not do so. He choose religion instead. do you not think that to not explore his "religion" would be a mistake?

Not that it was in any way true but to try to understand a process?

I believe that the process is very old and we do not understand any of it...

I am currently watching a series on Star Trek talking about a humanity guided by a tech superior race called the Volcan and that intuition to break free of such....by the humans...

You have pointed out that their is no morality to evolution....and yet you point to some type of conscientious that might guide it...

Jesus said that the truth would set one free...




thanx wade...

Nine

[Nine]

Wade,

post 4308 is all that america sees....

I would or could tell you about new tribe mission or robertson and his stuff....

but I wont....

Nine

[betoobig]

Hello Wade and thanks.
FREE ENERGY NOW
Love

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Nine:

Evolution, sentience, religion – big subjects, and I do not shrink from them in my work. I have a more mystical/scientific orientation, while somebody like Dennis has a Christian orientation, and his turn to religion was not at that moment when the voice spoke up in his head. My experience has been that the voice does not identify itself. Everybody that I know and know of who had that voice only heard a voice, sometimes even one that they could physically hear (1, 2). Dennis calls his voice "God," but that is only because of his Christian orientation, I believe. Dennis was raised on fire-and-brimstone sermons as a child, at the migrant farmworker camps that he lived in.

While that voice in his head came at a dramatic time (as the voice always does), it was not until several years later that he turned to religion, during a debate on Utopian philosophy, when it hit him that humanity was unable to govern itself, so needed a "benevolent dictator" to guide things, and at that moment, he realized that the Bible was the one and only word of God, a manual written by that dictator, and humanity ignored it at its peril. Dennis is a literalist Christian who believes that the Bible has some kind of magical power. I have always been with Dennis in spite of his Christian worldview, not because of it, and I think that it has to do with his migrant farmworker childhood. To each his own, and the star that I steer by for any religious or spiritual teaching is if it is loving. Everything else pales to insignificance. Dennis is the greatest human I ever met, but is still very human. He would have been great, no matter what his religion was.

I believe that Jesus was a mystical master second to none, but I consider literalist interpretations of the Bible to be misguided. I think that people can find wisdom in the Bible, and Jesus's words in particular (especially his Sermon on the Mount, which I understand is the closest thing to his actual teachings that has survived in the Bible), but it has more to do with the reader than the text, IMO. But all religions are based on scarcity and fear, as a means of social control, and all "sacred" texts of the world's organized religions are corruptions of enlightened perspectives by the professional priesthood, to turn the teachings into rackets. That is how it works, in a world of scarcity.

I think that it is very legitimate to wonder about the nature of consciousness in the journey of life on Earth. I ask if there was love among the trilobites, but I certainly cannot answer the question in convincing fashion, and ask it more to help readers think about it. As I have written plenty, the energetic and reproductive imperative is baked deeply into all life, including humanity. At least on land (cetaceans are another matter), the human animal is something new, with its gigantic brain. We are allegedly a sentient species, and I have written plenty about our big brains and how sentient we might actually be.

I do not consider this experience by Michael Roads to be fiction. I know highly accomplished psychonauts who have had similar adventures. The way that I see it, choosing love is the greatest act of sentience that all humans are capable of, and is the path to becoming a truly sentient species. Roads also experienced a humanity living at the other end of the spectrum. They had high technology too, but used it for extremely base ends, so "intelligence" and technology by themselves are only tools of our consciousness, or our souls, if you will. Our tools also made us, however.

This broaches the predicament that humanity is in today. We are semi-sentient apes that have played the energy game at levels that no other animal ever has, and we threaten to inflict a mass extinction on the biosphere that could become the greatest in Earth's history, which takes us with it. It is time to become a fully sentient species and reach new levels of playing the energy game, and in a way that is not only harmless, but helps heal the planet and our species. Organized religions are not going to help. Corporations and the rich are not going to help. Governments are not going to help. Environmentalists are not going to help. "Progressives" are not going to help. New Age "gurus" are not going to help. Scientists are not going to help. They are all committed to their frameworks and power and survival in a world of scarcity. They have all carved out their niches of hell and won’t budge. Brian mentioned how everybody "digs in their heels" as they protect their turf and see FE as a threat. All I can say to that is "Amen."

I seek extraordinary people who can lay aside their self-serving scarcity-based belief systems for long enough so that they can simply comprehend abundance. I know that they are needles in haystacks, but I have this new tool called the Internet to help me find them, and I have budgeted the rest of my lifetime's "spare" time to finding and training them, and we will see how it goes.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

A little post on humanity's biological imperatives, sentience, taboos, and other social dynamics. One realization that biological study can help with is deflating humanity's egocentric conceits (God's "Chosen People," Manifest Destiny, the flower of evolution, etc.), and realize that humanity is "just another species." As I have stated, humanity's upright posture and huge brains are fairly new on the evolutionary scene, and we are still getting the hang of being sentient.

Sexual reproduction is a billion years old or so, and the diversity in sexual reproduction is pretty amazing. Early on in the journey of complex life on land, the game of "display" began to be played, which was a way of advertising one's reproductive fitness. Sexual reproduction was a way to speed up evolution, to survive complex life's arms race, and many features of human sexuality are pretty hardwired traits that "worked" for complex life. Our standards of physical attractiveness are directly related to health and reproductive fitness, and "display" has been a central feature of human sexuality since before there were humans. Recent research has shown that all men, whether they are 16 or 65, are most attracted to women about 25 years of age, which is their reproductive "sweet spot." Women are attracted to economically powerful men who can provide for their children, whether it was the best hunter or richest executive.

The incest taboo is deeply baked into the human line as a way to prevent inbreeding, and all social animals have some kind of strategy that is deeply baked into their biology, and it is no different with humans. Even the male penchant to mate with "anything that moves" reflects the simian journey, in which males were only good for providing their genes to the reproductive process, so men have a biological predisposition to spread their genes as widely as possible, and women regularly "hedge their bet" and get male genes from somebody other than their "mate." The nuclear family is something new and economically conditioned, and I think that the nuclear family will become obsolete in the FE Epoch, and will be replaced with something far more enlightened.

But humans are supposedly a sentient species. We have already dramatically changed not only our evolutionary path, but the paths of numerous other species, from domesticated plants and animals to the many species that we have already driven to extinction, including all other human species. We can aim much higher than being driven by instincts and taboos. We can recognize their nature and the impulses, but I think that it is the mark of sentience that we are not ruled by them.

The FE issue can be very illuminating, when you interact with the world. Almost everybody reacts with fear and denial, as hard as that can be for FE newcomers to believe, as those newcomers see the potential for heaven on Earth, while 99.9% of the rest of humanity just sees their world coming to an end, and they react with fear, from the least "intelligent" to most "intelligent" among us. Again, it blows away FE newcomers to see that entrenched fear and denial coming from all directions, and for the few who get past that, they are greedy, naïve, overcome by delusions of grandeur and think that they are the Messiah, and so on. FE newcomers think that "progressives," or corporate America, or the governments, or so many who say that they seek answers could be nothing but excited by the prospect of FE. They get "excited" all right, and if FE proselytizers are not careful, that "excitement" can see them get burned at the stake. When FE newcomers see those reactions ad infinitum, the natural question arises: "Are humans really a sentient species?" I believe that when people react from fear, denial, greed, delusions of grandeur, and the like, they are not acting like sentient beings, but just playing their deeply baked survival programs, like any other instinct. Oh, they can string sentences together and seem "smart," but all that is happening is limbic system conditioning playing out through the cerebral cortex. If that is sentience, then sentience does not mean much.

Humanity is at the cusp of becoming a truly sentient species, but it will be up to a tiny fraction of humanity to lead the way. If it will not be my effort, it will be another, but the masses will not be reached by talk, but by experiencing what the Epoch of Sentience can look like. It is all based on energy, as it always has been.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

This is another choir Q&A.

Q: Wade, that idea of energy surplus being the true measure of a society's wealth is new to me. Can you help me wrap my head around it better?

A: Sure. The fact that it is new to you is a demonstration of how effective our indoctrination and propaganda systems are. Hardly anybody on Earth today even understands the relationship between energy and economic production, and this is an area where I will credit various "conspiratorial" musings, as history's greatest energy mogul and richest man funded the institution that dominates economic thought even today, which makes energy invisible and portrays economic activity as some purely social function enabled by the magic of free markets. There has never been a free market in world history, and scientists have no respect for the monetary approach to economics, as the financial economy is not real, but an elaborate fiction that serves ruling class interests. As long as people focus on the financial economy, they will never begin to understand how the world really works.

But to really understand the role of an energy surplus, it is most profitable to take a scientific view and first see the importance of an energy surplus in biological systems. Basically, an energy surplus is everything. On an individual or species level, the organisms with the highest energy surpluses thrive, while those with the least surplus die off, and when that is characteristic of a species, it will go extinct. Energy surplus underlies the concept of resilience, which means coping with the vagaries of life on Earth. Organisms with an energy surplus can weather the storm, such as a bad year for growth, such as a long winter, short growing season, or drought. A plant that has enough energy stored in its organism can better contend with the challenges that can come.

As soon as plants and animals could, those that could generate a big energy surplus grew large, investing that surplus energy in their biology, which led to enhanced survival. That strategy eventually backfired when humans arrived on the scene, as they could plunder biological energy reserves like nothing else ever did. They quickly drove the world's large animals to extinction and all competing human species, and they eventually engaged in rampant deforestation.

After humans drove all the easy meat to extinction, in places where they could, they domesticated plants and animals, which allowed for a greatly expanded human population, but the energy systems did not exist to produce a great energy surplus. Farming led to civilization, and the thin agricultural energy surplus was skimmed by the first elites, the first professions developed, and much of what we call civilization appeared due to that thin surplus.

But the process was not sustainable. While it led to a short-term energy surplus that sustained the first civilizations, it also depleted the energy sources, which were primarily fertile soils and forests, so all early civilizations ran out of that energy and collapsed, and they collapsed for the same reason that complex ecosystems collapse. The interrelationship between the "moving parts" of a civilization or ecosystem needs energy to run it, and the energy hierarchy (food chain in ecosystems, and social hierarchies in civilization) collapses when the energy runs out.

Today, in industrial civilization, the energy surplus would be anything beyond the food calories that a human consumes. Americans consume 80 times the energy that goes into their diets, and because half of that energy goes into running machines, which are about ten times as effective at working with a unit of energy as a human is, the average American is riding on the back of the equivalent of hundreds of "energy slaves" that feed off of that surplus energy. Those energy-powered machines perform 99.9% of all the physical work in an industrial society. That surplus energy powering machines is the basis for the standard of living in industrialized societies. People perform almost none of the work, although they are deluded into thinking that they do, as they do not understand the relationship between energy and economic production (mostly work, using the physics definition).

As you can tell, there has been no mention of money yet, because it is not real. It is only a social accounting concept. Money is an artificial concept, but when people think that money is real, then Godzilla's social managers have the game well in hand. Some financial concepts can help people understand the real world, but really, people need to understand the real world, first, and the financial world second, as it is merely an imperfect mirror of the real world. If FE makes it past the organized suppression and humanity's inertia, then virtually all financial concepts will become meaningless and money will cease to exist.

Just like early civilizations burned through their energy supplies and collapsed, industrial civilization is doing the same thing today. The USA's energy consumption per capita peaked during its first energy crisis and has declined since then. It is no accident that it happened a few years after it reached peak oil production, and the world reached peak oil production back in 2005-2006, and the sled run to oblivion has begun.

Financial measures only reflect the physical reality, and usually poorly, and an example to provide some perspective to those who think in financial terms is that American wages have about doubled in financial terms since 1970, while gasoline is nearly 20 times more expensive, and housing is about 10 times as expensive. I received a free college education, and those days are long gone in the USA. The concept of discretionary income is probably the closest thing to energy surplus, and discretionary income is vanishing among the USA's withering middle class. As the global industrial economy begins to collapse, there has been a class war between the capital and working classes, but it is like fighting over the deck chairs on the Titanic. The ultra-elites that control free energy technology today are generally on the dark spiritual path, and destroying a planet was only seen in their circles as a side-effect of their power games, and some plan to terraform Mars as their ultimate survival enclave, but sanity might prevail. A sleeping humanity that has abdicated its sentience for the promise of security is almost effortlessly manipulated by the social managers, but a sentient populace living with a huge and sustainable energy surplus (AKA "abundance"), will not be amenable to those elite manipulations, and that, more than any other reason, is why free energy and related technologies have been suppressed and sequestered like they have.


In a future post, I will explore the dimensions of how an energy surplus is generated, and that will get into concepts such as total energy availability, energy return on investment, and other factors which determine a society's energy surplus.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

More choir Q&A.

Q: Could we further explore the idea of surplus energy for humanity and how it is generated?

A: Sure. Several energy concepts need to be understood, to understand surplus energy. The first is total available energy. Stars are the source of all energy used on Earth today (other than the zero-point field). The Sun's energy is the source for almost all energy used on Earth today, and the energy of radioactivity was provided by the supernova that made the heavy elements in our solar system. Sunlight energy is captured by photosynthesis, and is how virtually all energy enters Earth's ecosystems. That energy influx will continue while there are still ecosystems on Earth. The human line began tapping the energy of stored sunlight when it learned to control fire, which greatly increased the total energy available to the human line. When the Domestication Revolution began, humans began to tap solar energy on a previously unknown scale, which increased Earth's carrying capacity for humans by more than a hundred times.

The Industrial Revolution began when humans began to tap a new energy source, which was the energy stored in trees before life forms evolved to digest it. It greatly increased humanity's available energy. 150 years after coal energy began to be tapped for industry, humans learned to tap oil, which was formed from anoxic oceanic events, and humanity again greatly increased its total available energy. Gas was originally "waste" gas that was burned off at oil wells, but is the other fossil fuel used today, and coal, oil, and gas comprise 85% of the energy used by humanity today in industrial civilizations. Just like humanity wiped out the easy meat, which led to the Domestication Revolution, and how humanity wiped out the forests and soils, which led to collapsing civilizations, humanity is quickly burning through fossil fuels and all other energy resources, and total energy availability is falling off the cliff. By the end of this century, the oil and gas will be gone, and coal and hydrocarbons that never became oil will be the only fossil fuels left, and coal will have also likely reached its peak extraction rate, and even peak uranium extraction may have already been reached.

The total energy available is only one portion of the equation of generating surplus energy. Another concept is that of Energy Return on Investment ("EROI"), and understanding that helps illuminate the folly of the current "boom" in shale oil, fracking, mining the tar sands, and other marginal hydrocarbons. In the 1920s, when East Texas oil was the mother lode of oil production, for every barrel of oil invested in extraction, more than 100 barrels were produced, which led to an EROI of more than 100. Those days are long gone in the USA. Today, world oil production is still nearly 40, thanks to the easy oil in the Middle East, but the USA's oil production EROI is half that and falling fast. That shale oil, which has been the focus of an American "boom," has an EROI of around two. There has been a lot of hoopla in the USA about becoming "energy independent" in the USA, but all of that shale oil and fracked gas has abysmally low EROIs.

To turn that into money terms, so it makes more sense to some readers, the cost of extraction of Middle East oil is a few dollars per barrel. It is $40 and more for those "new" sources of oil and gas in the current craze. For most of those "new" sources that are being exploited today, oil needs to be priced at more than $100 per barrel to make it profitable. The USA has helped create a glut as I write this, and there is a bit of a price war happening. Oil is trading below $70 as I write this, which will make most of the unconventional oil economically unviable. The business press puts it in terms of money, but what it really reflects is the low EROI of such energy resources. So, for an EROI energy source of two, for every 100 units of energy extracted, 50 units are spent extracting them. That means that the surplus energy delivered is cut in half, if we compare those marginal sources today versus that East Texas oil of the 1920s. EROIs have been plunging worldwide, as all the easy and plentiful hydrocarbons are long gone, other than Middle East oil, which completely explains why the West has been meddling in the area and invading for the past century. The genocides that the USA has been inflicting in that part of the world are not measured in the EROI calculations, but should be, and if the USA ignites World War III over its military adventures in Hydrocarbon Country, what kind of EROI do you put on an energy source that humanity destroys itself fighting over? That also does not include catastrophes such as the Gulf Horizon oil spill, Fukushima, and turning parts of Canada into Mordor. About one-third of the Fortune 500's capital expenditures today are for hydrocarbon mining operations.

The developers of the EROI concept think that an EROI of close to 10 is necessary for an industrial civilization to run, and global EROI is quickly declining to that threshold.

So, total energy availability and the EROI of extracting it are important variables in computing surplus energy, but they are not the only ones. Also, the efficiency of turning those energy resources into work is also a key measure for determining surplus energy. Today, about two-thirds of the energy burned by hydrocarbons creates heat, much of it wasted, and only about a third is turned into work. It has not changed much in my lifetime.

Another concept for understanding surplus energy is how efficiently that energy can be transported to where it is used. There have been improvements over the years for that (such as using alternating current instead of direct current), but with the increasingly marginal sources of energy and the costs to extract them, transmission costs are increasing as those sources are increasingly far-flung. Huge pipeline projects are proposed today in Canada, to get the tar sands oil to market, and train lines are also being put into service, which have had spills, and those are all transmission costs.

So, all of those concepts come into play for calculating a society's surplus energy. As can be seen, total available energy is declining (nobody is making more hydrocarbon fuels), is being depleted at record rates, and peak extraction rates have already been reached for conventional oil, which is Earth's most coveted energy source. EROI is sharply declining, transmission costs are increasing, and efficiency of producing work from those energy sources has been stagnant. That all adds up to declining surplus energy, and the USA's energy consumption per capita peaked with the first energy crisis, and has declined ever since, just as the USA's standard of living has declined, and is a preview of what is going to happen to the rest of industrial civilization.

As noted in the previous post, energy surplus means resilience, and as energy surplus declines, so will a civilization's resilience. What the means is that a shock that may have created some discomfort in a more resilient society can lead to a collapse in a less resilient society. Although there was nobody around to measure it in a scientific manner long ago, the leading hypothesis for those ancient societal collapses is that their surplus energy declined to the point where a shock became disruptive, such as a drought or poor harvest, and the civilization collapsed, and the moment of collapse was when hungry urban professionals left the cities to find food. Industrial civilization is teetering in that direction today, and in the USA, urban environments are collapsing, such as what we see in cities such as Detroit.

I live in a high tech center in the Pacific Northwest, and Seattle will not become a ghost town anytime soon, but I regularly talk to refugees from cities in the East. A few weeks ago, I talked with a man who escaped Detroit in the past decade, as he told me of his home being invaded and his grandfather, who had lived in Detroit for his entire life and was not about to move, was shot during that invasion, and he never recovered from the wounding. Detroit could be seen as an evil place that is getting its just deserts, as the USA could be seen, but it is a preview of what the world will experience as we run out of hydrocarbon energy. Of course, it does not have to be this way, and I am doing what I can to avert the catastrophe, but almost nobody on Earth sees what is coming or cares. But I only need a tiny fraction of the awake and the awakening for my plan to work, and we will see how it goes.

Best,

Wade

[Chris Gilbert]

I live near Detroit and have driven past many of the now abandoned and dilapidated structures. It's quite surreal and cathartic to witness nature reclaiming conquered territory first hand, and in this sense I don't mean "nature" just in terms of plants or animals, but rather the overall flow of the Tao.

[Robin]

Hey Wade,

I just came across a lovely passage in Helena Blavatsky's ISIS Unveiled (Vol. 1) that I wish to share. I was quite taken aback at the simplicity of the idea, and think it will interest you. The whole sub-chapter "The Quenchless Lamp" is worth checking out and has to do with evidence of ever-burning lamps found hidden in abandoned caves, but this passage especially caught my eye:

"The circulation of the blood and the law of gravitation are clearly mentioned, though the former fact, it may be, is not so clearly defined as to withstand the reiterated attacks of modern science; for according to Prof. Jowett, the specific discovery that the blood flows out at one side of the heart through the arteries, and returns through the veins at the other, was unknown to him, though Plato was perfectly aware "that blood is a fluid in constant motion." (The Quenchless Lamp, p. 211).

It's quite brilliant, really. The blood that circulates within our body is a perpetual motion system, not unlike modes of Free Energy. Right in our own bodies we exemplify the reality of Free Energy! All that we need is to supply our blood with oxygen and vital nutrients from food stuffs, but both are abundant and can be obtained from nature through sustainable means.

Sure, the heart does die some day of fatigue, but the energy from the decayed body is taken up by other species who also have blood being perpetually circulated in their bodies. So really, the Earth itself is a perpetual motion system, and if one follows the wise teachings of Native Americans and other spiritual tribes, we are all interconnected, much like the cells that make up one grand organism, called Gaia.

If one wants to prove the viability of Free Energy to a skeptic, just tell them: "Your own body is a perpetual motion machine, so why cannot this same system apply to a macro scale if our bodies were born of this Earth in this universe?"

Robin

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

More choir Q&A:

Q. Hi Wade. You write a lot about the "laws of physics" objection to FE, and could you expand on how unorthodox FE theory really is?

A: Sure. That is a great topic. First, as Brian O said, there are not really any "laws of physics," but just theories. To use the term "laws" invests science with the certitude of a religion, and science is supposed to be about doubt, not certitude.

As far as the theories that deny the possibility of FE, there have been plenty of orthodox scientists, some of world-renown, who have argued that FE was certainly possible. Einstein himself, before quantum physics was invented, said that his general theory of relativity made the "ether" relevant again, which his special theory of relativity supposedly made obsolete. Einstein's protégé, David Bohm, made that calculation of the nearly infinite energy in the "vacuum."

The implications of the quantum enigma, in which light acts like a particle or a wave, depending on the observer, is quantum physics's "skeleton in the closet." Einstein was very unsatisfied with the implications of quantum theory, and students of his day were purposely steered away from the implications by their professors. John von Neumann argued that consciousness was required to collapse the waveforms into particles. Einstein, Bohm, von Neumann…those were not exactly obscure fringe theorists. Even materialist philosophers have argued that atoms have consciousness.

So, the very foundational theories of physics that might arguably deny FE's possibility have pretty big problems, and there is plenty of room for arguing that the zero-point field is viable enough to farm energy from, and maybe a lot. The very same shaky foundation challenges the idea that consciousness is merely a byproduct of brain chemistry. Again, all that science knows exists are consciousness and energy. So, with the bedrock of physics that unsettled, talk of the "laws of physics" is ludicrous on its face.

A reasonable scientist would want experimental evidence of the non-corporeal nature of consciousness (since it is a non-physical phenomenon to begin with, that does not seem too tall a task and even a kind of nonsensical goal ), and evidence of energy being farmed from the "vacuum." There is plenty of scientific evidence that consciousness is far more than the mere byproduct of chemical reactions, but what is infinitely more convincing than any scientific evidence that can be amassed is having direct personal experience, and that is not hard to achieve, as I discovered at age 16, as have millions of others. There is a hazard of attaining that experience, however, for scientists, as they can become so disenchanted with dead, mechanistic physics that they leave the field, as Brian did. Many mainstream scientific careers came to an end when scientists had those experiences. I have even tapped the zero-point field with my mind many times, and did things such as mummify fruit with that energy. Brian performed similar experiments using crystal energy and love. I have also had "hot hands" experiences as I worked on healing people. Those are easy realms to explore for sincere investigators.

On the FE front, this is a more difficult area to satisfy mainstream scientists, as the evidence is subjected to history's greatest cover-up. The FE cover-up is related to the UFO/ET cover-up, and Brian nearly lost his life when he poked into the UFO phenomenon, immediately after rejecting an "offer" from the American military to perform classified UFO work. Brian knew about 25 dead FE inventor stories, and I was a central figure in one of history's most spectacular FE snuff jobs. My partner barely survived the experience, and many wrecked and prematurely ended lives attended our adventures.

Few of my fellow travelers really began their journeys pursuing FE, but our paths eventually led there. Also, we discovered that FE technology, as well as antigravity and other "exotic" technologies, have been around for longer than I have been alive. The technologies are very real, as are their organized suppression and sequestering. Mainstream scientists can scoff, but until they get out of their easy chairs and actually pursue FE technology or try to bring disruptive technology to the marketplace, they will never learn any differently and will sit naively in their soft berths in academia and the corporate world. That kind of naïveté is endemic among scientists, which Bucky Fuller noted. When one of his protégés invented an FE prototype, Bucky knew that there would be hell to pay, and he was right.

Sparky Sweet's tale is one of the best examples of what happens when an establishment scientist pursues FE and gets somewhere. His gizmo produced one million times as much energy as went into it and even produced antigravity effects, and Sparky mailed working prototypes to the big energy institutions, expecting a tickertape parade. The opposite happened, and after the final death threats were delivered, Sparky went into hiding the desert, where Brian visited him a week before Sparky died of a "heart attack." Sparky's device was solid-state and would win most, if not all, FE device competitions, but the phenomenon of ice forming on it as it ran is far from unusual, and is one of the best indicators of harnessing the zero-point field. One of James Gilliland's associates built an FE prototype that also had ice form on it as it worked, and he was subjected to the standard cloak-and-dagger suppression tactics. I have quite a few fellow travelers who paid dearly for inventing working FE prototypes. It really just comes with the territory, but naïve scientists who just punch the clock each day will never know differently.

I try to not laugh when I hear the "laws of physics" objection to FE, and I really have no interest anymore in trying to blast through that kind of denial. They will begin to understand when FE is delivered into their lives, and not before. And those who dismiss evidence of organized suppression as a "conspiracy theory" also are not reachable, and that includes nearly all mainstream scientists and academics.

In finishing, any scientist worth two cents knows that declaring anything "impossible" is the height of foolishness, particularly on topics such as FE.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Enishi:

Yes, nature can make pretty short work of humanity's structures, especially those made of wood. In recent years, I have seen many presentations of abandoned American buildings, such as here and here. Of course, one of my dreams is to "recycle" almost all manmade structures on Earth today. Almost none of them would survive in a world based on FE, kind of like almost nobody lives in caves today. Manhattan Island could be turned back into forest.

Hi Robin:

Bucky Fuller was into Theosophy, and I have read many accounts of supposedly advanced technology found in caves and the like. I do not know the truth of those claims. Any "everlasting" lamp is tapping the zero-point field (or Earth's fields which are likely powered by sunlight, such as the electric potential between the ionosphere and the ground), but a heart does not. Funny on the heart analogy, as I recently wrote about an ancient Chinese manuscript written about the same time as Plato about the heart's circulation. But the conception of the heart as a muscle to pump blood through the body was not posed until the 1600s. A heart is a "perpetual motion" machine only like an automobile engine would be. It is the energy that makes it run, and if it runs out of energy, it stops. A car's energy source is obviously gasoline, which is ancient sunlight, while a heart runs off of the sugar provided by food (the immediate source is ATP), which also comes from sunlight. The Sun is the source of all energy used on Earth, except for nuclear energy, which came from the previous star in our galactic vicinity, and the zero-point field (and tidal energy can ignore the Sun's influence, kind of).

One concept that I present in my big essay is where chemical energy comes from. Any FE "skeptic," at least a skeptic who is scientifically literate, is always going to ask, "Where does the energy come from?" My post yesterday addresses the question. Basically, "empty" space is not so empty, and technologies have been developed to tap the energy in that "emptiness." Einstein's protégé calculated that it was a virtually limitless energy source. That idea has generated plenty of scientific controversy, but I happen to know of technologies that have tapped that energy resource. If "free-lancers" such as Sparky Sweet or Mark Comings or Adam Trombly did it, there was hell to pay. If you are on the inside, however, FE is a neat toy to play with. Jeane Manning has collected dozens of names that have been used over the years to describe the zero-point field. Maybe Blavatsky's term is one of those. I really have not read much Theosophy, and kind of lost interest in channeled work over the years. Oh, channeling is a legit phenomenon, as I discovered, but what I am most interested in is channeling that can lead to new discoveries in this reality. There really is not much of that out there, but it is what I am most interested in anymore.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

More choir Q&A.

Q: Hi Wade. How accurate and relevant are those reconstructions of ancient oxygen and carbon dioxide levels?

A: That is a great question that can lead into many areas, and I guess that we can start with the accuracy. As you can see in that chart as of about a decade ago, the error fields around oxygen throughout the eon of complex life, and for carbon dioxide before 400 million years ago, are fairly wide. Other models have derived different reconstructions, and I will be very curious to see what future work derives. Those models are built based on computer models of known dynamics that would affect those levels, combined with the results of testing chemical signatures in rocks and sediments. There are a number of indirect methods of measuring ancient carbon dioxide and oxygen levels.

That said, there is general agreement on a few key trends. Carbon dioxide was once the primary atmospheric gas, as we see on Venus today. Atmospheric water absorbs carbon dioxide and forms a weak acid, and when it falls to earth, that acid reacts with rock and carbon replaces silicon. Volcanoes belch carbon dioxide into the air. That forms the two key dynamics of the carbon cycle, and the third is what life does. Photosynthesis removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and makes the sugars from it that power life. Respiration releases 99.99% that carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere, but that 0.01% has resulted in around 26,000 times more organic carbon being buried in Earth than exists in today's biosphere.

So, the trend of reducing the atmosphere's carbon dioxide levels is billions of years old, and carbon dioxide levels have dramatically fallen during the eon of complex life. The levels are also thought to have seesawed, and when the levels were brought down far enough, it precipitated ice ages, and there have been some doozies. Our current ice age is relatively modest, and its ultimate cause is thought to be declining carbon dioxide levels, which have fallen pretty steadily for more than 100 million years. This is thought to be because volcanism has declined, primarily because of the decline in radioactivity within Earth, as primordial radioactive elements decay. Plate tectonics are slowing, and it is thought that in about a billion years or so, plate tectonics will largely cease, the carbon cycle will end, and Earth will first lose its complex life, and then all life, as Earth goes through its life cycle, and Earth will eventually look like Mars, a dead planet with no oceans and no geological activity.

When those dynamics are understood, the current "debate" over Global Warming is ludicrous. No scientist will argue against the idea that carbon dioxide traps radiation and raises Earth's surface temperature. Humanity's cavalier burning of hydrocarbon fuels is playing with the ultimate reason for today's Icehouse Earth conditions. The last time that Earth went from icehouse to greenhouse conditions, Earth experienced its greatest extinction event. Humanity is toying with artificially inducing a Greenhouse Earth, which would be calamitous for Earth's ecosystems. The greatest extinction event since the dinosaurs was when Earth began cooling down into its present Icehouse Earth, and a sudden change to Greenhouse Earth conditions will disrupt all of Earth's ecosystems and a vast mass extinction will take place, which could take humanity with it. So, the implications of currently increasing carbon dioxide levels, and the impacts in the past, are areas of intense investigation today. Climate scientists are terrified about what humanity is inflicting on today's atmosphere and where it might lead. A scientifically illiterate public and compliant media, working on behalf of the Hydrocarbon Lobby, have created a "debate" where none should exist. It is similar to the crazy "debates" over evolution. Evolution is a fact of life that only religious fundamentalists can deny, kind of like how some of them embrace Flat Earth "theory." Evolution does not make materialism valid, either, but denying evolution is another position that the scientifically illiterate swallow in their ignorance.

Oxygen levels over Earth's history have also been a source of a great deal of research and battling hypotheses. Oxygen is a highly reactive substance, and Earth is the only place discovered in our solar system that hosts atmospheric oxygen, because it is the only place where photosynthesis happens. If all photosynthesis stopped, Earth would lose all of its oxygen in several thousand years and the only life would be anaerobic microbes, as it was billions of years ago. As with carbon dioxide, scientists agree on some key trends. Earth's atmosphere did not have appreciable oxygen in it until after a billion years of photosynthesis, and then the Great Oxygenation Event began. That event may have precipitated the first ice age, but oxygen levels are considered to have been only a few percent of the atmosphere, at most, until less than a billion years ago, when the levels dramatically rose to modern levels. That they dramatically rose is not really disputed, but how they did, and what the impact on the rise of complex life was, is heatedly debated today. It is another area of controversy that I will follow with great interest. Unlike carbon dioxide levels, oxygen levels are not changing dramatically today and their present and future levels do not concern scientists, as far as humanity's and the ecosphere's welfare goes. Humanity may artificially induce anoxic oceans (as we are already doing, with the hypoxic dead zones), which could induce catastrophic hydrogen sulfide events, but none of that is related to atmospheric oxygen levels.

However, the role of oxygen in evolution, and particularly the evolution of complex life and its role in mass extinction events, is a major controversy today in paleobiological circles. Peter Ward wrote a book on the possible role of oxygen in evolution, and there is lively debate on it. His proposals are sprinkled throughout my big essay (1, 2, 3), and I greatly look forward to digesting the scientific findings relating to those oxygen issues. It is more than idle curiosity, although people could note that there does not seem to be a direct relationship between oxygen levels, evolution, and free energy. However, becoming familiar with the evidence and hypotheses really helps develop that comprehensive perspective that will be needed for my "choir" idea to work. Familiarity with those concepts, and understanding the nature of the debates and ongoing scientific investigation, is a great way to help develop comprehensive perspectives.


Best,

Wade