WADE FRAZIER : A Healed Planet

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Stretching the mileage from my writings. I just answered a questions about hydrogen energy in another forum, and here it is…


For anything that we burn, the burning means a release of energy, and the issue is always going to be where that energy came from. Early in my essay, I show where chemical energy comes from, whether it is oil or hydrogen. Today, all energy used on Earth came from either the star in the local vicinity that exploded (it fused the larger elements together, including all radioactive elements, and its debris became the raw material for our solar system), or the star that we see today (the Sun powers all ecosystems, as well as the hydrological system). So, when we talk of oil, coal, gas, hydroelectric, or even nuclear energy, we are just talking about star energy, but with different windows of time when it was collected. Oil energy was collected by marine organisms and preserved in anoxic events over the past several hundred million years, with the bulk of it collected when dinosaurs ruled Earth. Most coal deposits were formed more than 300 million years ago, before fungi learned to digest lignin. Gas is generally "over-cracked" oil sediments. Wood is obviously sunlight energy collected very recently, usually no more than a few centuries ago. Hydroelectric energy is just farming the energy flows of the Sun-driven hydrological cycle, so is largely this year's energy. Wind energy also comes from solar energy that heats up the atmosphere and sets it in motion as the energy disperses toward the poles from the equator, as with the hydrological cycle. Tidal energy is about the lone exception, as it is primarily the energy of the moon's motion around Earth.

So, they are virtually all star energy in different timeframes and mechanisms of collection. There is no store of hydrogen energy on Earth. All so-called hydrogen energy is derived from one of those above-named sources, which is used to boost the hydrogen electron into a higher orbit, and burning hydrogen farms that energy and the electron collapses back to where it started. So-called hydrogen power is essentially nothing more than using hydrogen as a battery. That is a fine thing, but it is not an energy source. The current Sun or the former one was.

Now, so-called zero-point energy (ZPE) is a horse of a different color, and it is the energy that is embedded in the space-time continuum, which some call the background energy of the physical universe. I do not stray too far into the many esoteric theories out there. Einstein's protégé argued that the zero-point field (ZPF) was a viable source of energy. And, of course, this is where I come into the picture. None of my fellow travelers began our journeys thinking in terms of ZPE, but were trying to get more energy out of a gallon of gasoline, natural gas, and conventional energy sources (but Brian's first approach was conventional alternatives). It was only after having our company destroyed in Seattle that my partner began to think in terms of free energy, and even then it was not ZPE, but a thermodynamic approach.

We first heard of ZPE via Joe Newman in the spring of 1986, but it was not until after we had our company destroyed in Ventura that I first heard of somebody with a viable ZPE device, and it was Sparky Sweet's, and years after that, a close friend got the Big Show from the people who run the world. I know that ZPE is the real deal, but it is also subjected to the world's greatest act of organized suppression, which is closely related to the ET/UFO cover-up.

Yes indeed, the legal system is a racket that serves the other rackets. We discovered that the hard way. Once they prosecute you, you are on their turf, and they always win. Even when you "win" you lose, as the "mere" prosecutorial process wrecks lives. One of my sayings is that you get just as much justice in the USA as you can afford. Dennis and Brian went through a long, slow process of disillusionment. They both grew up drinking the nationalistic Kool-Aid, to eventually both be run out of their home nation, after surviving many murder attempts (well, Brian only survived one, and Dennis survived the rest). Dennis went from the naïve belief that justice could be found in the American legal system if you pressed into it far enough to eventually calling it the "Just us" system.


Best,

Wade

[Robin]

I'm going to paste a post that I just wrote up on another Avalon thread, because I feel that it is especially relevant here. I don't want to make it seem like I'm being pushy with my thoughts on Anarchy, but it is important to consider how our actions and inactions both directly and indirectly influence other people. If people do not understand that it is possible to be an immoral person through inaction, then we will never evolve in consciousness. FE cannot simply manifest out of thin air, and we most certainly cannot rely on any governmental body to create it.

Not having a government sounds scary to people, and I totally understand. But really it's just doing away with the illegitimate concept of "authority," and not much else. There will still be experts and professionals who are qualified to lead societal customs, and they will even be in groups that specialize in carrying them out. But this isn't authority through a governing body; it is using one's expertise to selflessly better society through the non-aggression principle and voluntaryism.

Your work on your website and your choir is voluntary and selfless, and to me is the epitome of how a society should be. Love entails more than the romantic attachments that people associate it with. It is having the care to understand how one's actions and inactions both directly and indirectly influence other beings, to abide by the non-aggression principle for all sentient beings, to recognize if we have an accurate understanding of our reality through our current perceptions, and to take action to change our inaccurate perceptions to better align ourselves with Truth.

The state of the planetary society is indicative of the "morality" that so many people claim to possess.

Robin

---------------------------------

You bring up a lot of great points, Omni. The only way that humanity will ever change and mold itself into a moral, functioning society would be for people to change themselves individually. We are all flawed in some way, but some people are more conscious of these flaws than others, and actively change their individual perceptions to align themselves with morality.

The collective societal structure, including the political leaders, is a product of our collective morality. The entire planet is littered with trash and politics is based off of corruption because our collective mind is littered with trash and corruption in the form of faulty, immoral perceptions. The only way to have a clean environment and a functioning society is to have the average individual act as a moral functioning human.

In my opinion, the only way we will ever live as a functioning, moral society is through Anarchism. Really, it is the only system that we have not collectively tried, so how do we know that it won't work? Anarchy simply means "no external rulers or masters," but does not mean "no rules." It means that we are all masters of ourselves - our mind, body, and spirit. This notion, combined with the principle of not harming other sentient beings and following standard rules, is philosophically what true freedom actually is.

An Anarchist society will not function in the current collective mindset of humanity, to that there is no dispute. Most people are so ingrained in their own egos where they do not understand what the non-aggression principle is or how it works. Most people also think that they are moral people because they pay their taxes and do not go around stealing and murdering people. But what they don't understand is that their actions, and especially inactions, both directly and indirectly influence other people.

By voting for a politician, the voter is indirectly responsible for the product of the politician's actions, and therefore, all of the police and military people's actions who carry out their orders. Even if the voter lives an "upstanding" life as a good Christian who believes in a supreme God, pays taxes, and doesn't directly harm another human being, they are still indirectly harming human beings because of their actions. Simply complaining that a politician is acting immorally is not enough, because the voter put them in power. Sure, the politician is responsible for their immoral actions, but those immoral actions are allowed to continue because voters still give them power. When an upstanding, moral voter allows these immoral actions to continue, they become immoral due to their negligence to act.

The concept of Anarchy is based off of the universal gift of sovereignty and free-will. Wherever there is any form of government -- whether it is Communism or a Democratic Republic -- sovereignty does not exist. It is an impossibility for a society to be free with any form of government, because the concept of government is based off of slavery through coercion. Even if all the psychopaths of the world suddenly disappear and humanity sets up a governmental structure that has leaders that are moral people who only have moral actions and intentions, we would all still be slaves by definition. As soon as authority is given any legitimacy, then sovereignty disappears due to inherent conflict and contradiction between the two concepts.

It is either slavery or Anarchism, and most people will cringe upon reading that. I say that humanity needs to be Anarchistic, because if were not, then we'll never evolve in consciousness. There is bound to be certain people who would continue to harm others, but that is inevitable in any society. But those few people will be taken care of by the rest of the moral society. If society as a whole ends up breaking down and people cannot live with one another without harming one another, then the human species of planet Earth was never meant to be a highly evolved species, and nor does it deserve to be.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Robin, my dear anarchist.

Anarchy is another form of social organization (if you want to call it "self-organized," that is OK; life and ecosystems are self-organized, too), which is really a political stance. I certainly respect other forms of social organization, but I will always go back to Fuller here: there are no political solutions to the problems that we face, and that includes new forms of social organization. When I was in college, the libertarian ideal appealed to me, and I think that I even voted libertarian in 1980 (I was almost your age, oh the follies of my youth ).

As I like to think that my essay made pretty clear, all social, political, and even cognitive changes were dependent on the economic reality, and that has always been based on energy. Without getting the energy to power the growing brain of the human line, humans would have never come into existence. Bonobos were able to radically change their social organization when their food supply doubled. Like all simians, including humans, their social organization did not become anarchic, but it became peaceful and fair, and it was no longer might makes right. No other simian of the African line, including humans, has yet achieved it.

Yet, there have been relatively peaceful interludes in the human journey, which were always Golden Ages that came about because a new energy source was tapped. When the energy ran out, so did the good times, and then it was wars, population collapses, genocides, etc. We are about to run out of the energy resources that have powered the industrialized world, and the coming collapse will dwarf every other one in the human journey, which might take humanity with it. A mere three centuries ago, nobody on Earth challenged the hallowed institution of slavery, but once machines greatly devalued human labor (machines perform 99.9% of all the work in industrialized societies), suddenly people grew consciences and slavery became a barbaric institution that had to go.

Yes, it sure would be nice if people just "woke up" and were enlightened, but while fear and scarcity rule the day, it ain't gonna happen, except for some needles in haystacks. Heck, even my "free" labors are only possible because I live in history's richest nation, was born at the height of its wealth and power (all energy-based, of course ), do not have to scramble for my food each day, got free college, have a genius-level IQ, and live in a culture that richly rewards such "intelligence." All proposed Utopias for all of history were based on shared austerity, and as Fuller noted, they have never worked and never will. The only anarchists today live in industrialized nations. I completely understand that anarchy, or self-government, is the ideal, but I have never seen any kind of social or political movement with a prayer, in a world of scarcity, because somebody wants what somebody else has, and they will take it. When individuals do it, it is called thievery, but when nations do it, it is called defending freedom or some other such evil nonsense.

I had many sobering experiences on my journey, and I suppose that the earliest was after I received my mystical awakening and became quite the mystical student. I joined quite a few mystical circles and communities, and I became gradually dismayed that they were all dominated by men who used their "powers" to get rich and get laid, and the women played right along, being groupies and funders for those "enlightened" men with their mystical haircuts, charismatic mystical patter, and some even had some true abilities, which they almost always abused (they are going to have challenging afterlives). That epitomizes the New Age, and I grew up right in the heart of it. It became appalling. I received most of that education before I ever met Dennis. Then I got my real education, and still spent years after that joining mystical communities, visiting them, and the like. I met Brian at a New Science conference, and that too was filled with hucksters, the unbalanced, the groupies, and the like. The day before I quit NEM, my wife went to give Brian a message at our conference, and she said that he was swarmed by the groupies that attend all such conferences.

Just as with all previous Epochal Events, the radical economic changes that come with tapping a new energy source will form the foundation of the new social order, and for the first time, if FE makes its appearance, it will be the first political economy based on absolute abundance. Those Golden Ages of relative abundance give us hints of where it can go. People living in fear and scarcity are not going to become enlightened. All of those different political and social systems vying for their day in the Sun today are all hacking at branches. Unless we solve the energy issue, and pronto, the rest simply will not matter, and all that the various groups vying for space at the table today are doing is fighting over who gets the best berths on the Titanic.

This is really important to understand. My effort will have that anarchic ideal, to the degree that it can, but I know that far less than one person in a thousand in the general population can muster the required integrity and sentience to successfully do it. Those are just the numbers, and no judgment is implied. The people who can live the anarchist ideal in today's world virtually do not exist, and I have been out there, searching, for 30 years. If everybody was given a billion dollars, which is what FE would effectively do, then something closer to the anarchic ideal becomes more feasible. But that day is not yet here, and people trying to reshuffle the deck with tax protests and new social organization (like Occupy) are putting the cart before the horse, IMO.

Best,

Wade

[Melinda]

Posted by Robin Galdek (here)
...Love entails more than the romantic attachments that people associate it with. It is having the care to understand how one's actions and inactions both directly and indirectly influence other beings, to abide by the non-aggression principle for all sentient beings, to recognize if we have an accurate understanding of our reality through our current perceptions, and to take action to change our inaccurate perceptions to better align ourselves with Truth.

I agree with what you wrote there Robin.

Many people value the word decency over love, because too many horrid and even violent things are done in love's name. Overbearing love of one's relative or partner. Love of the god one defers to. Love of the science, nation or tradition one worships. We can attach sentimentality or passion to beliefs, and call that love, whilst those beliefs can be arbitrary, depending on what we know or feel strong enough to acknowledge.

My understanding of love, if I were pushed to define it, is to see it in those terms you described and in terms of frequency, whilst remaining mindful that the notion of frequency still can be a slippery one to apply.

For example, if people are doing good deeds but they do them in a fearful mindset, the vibration within the community will still be a relatively low one - although doing the right thing out of discipline/principal can be a good template from which to encourage healthier circumstances and eventually a higher vibration.

Equally, certain conmen/women, or just people in denial, are very good at emanating lovely vibes that put people at ease, but their actions are far less loving than someone who is visibly and justifiably angry (out of compassionate concern) on the other side of the room. The conman may feel nicer to sit next to than the fraught person, but they are full of spiritual s—t by comparison. The higher your frequency, the quicker you can detect them. They prey on the needy or the ignorant, not sovereignty.

Some highly evolved people are adept at closing off their energy circuits to others so that whatever needy or lower vibrations another gives off are bounced right back. This is sometimes perceived as the more evolved person being cold or antagonistic - whereas really all their critic perceived/felt was their own baggage being projected back to them.

So frequency can be a slippery word to use. But I maintain the understanding that the greater true compassion, responsibility, and courage are wired into our thoughts and emotions, the higher our frequency. The greater our capacity to be and live through love in a higher form.

Posted by Robin Galdek (here)
...The concept of Anarchy is based off of the universal gift of sovereignty and free-will. Wherever there is any form of government -- whether it is Communism or a Democratic Republic -- sovereignty does not exist. It is an impossibility for a society to be free with any form of government, because the concept of government is based off of slavery through coercion...

I think a truly sovereign, anarchist way of life will be a gradual, logical outcome of a responsible FE world. If we look at much of what government handles - it is the spending of money on healthcare, education, energy, building, transport, defence, and social management of various forms, etc. In an FE world where localised and abundant, clean energy sources enable individuals to attend their own welfare at a local level, far less centralised government is needed to manage and regulate a sprawling infrastructure. Far less (and eventually no) money is needed to be taxed and managed. Money is eventually not needed at all. People can make, maintain and share their own food, homes, health resources or equipment etc. And an abundant society has far more time to judge what education is beneficial to their children. The children are also freer to contribute to what they feel is most inspiring to their growth. With abundance comes less or no war, and less or no need for a vast military organisation.

But I think in a world of abundance many people would still choose to gather in communities, and there will still be room for agreeing to give certain political bodies power. It is not necessarily unhealthy to elect others into positions of responsibility, if they are deemed to have the wisdom or diplomatic skill to be best-suited to that role. For example, if some people wanted to build a large edifice, and others felt it would be detrimental to the landscape, the collective could vote to decide what was best. In those circumstances, having elected 'officials' to deal with certain matters simply means others are free to apply their own time and skills to where they are better suited.

We have shoddy, corrupted governments now, because we have a corrupted system based on scarcity. Government in a world of abundance could be and mean something else entirely. And if we don't like the word government, we could call it something new. The Representative. The Elected. It wouldn't really matter.

Even if you have an FE society that lays down certain rules from the start (such as not building structures, or regulating the landing of craft, in conservation areas) you might still need to have a governing body of some kind whose role it is to oversee those guidelines are respected. But in a more 'holographic' societal infrastructure, far more people will have the time, knowledge, courage and virtues that qualify them to step in and resolve local issues, before a representative body had to be called in for assistance. In an abundant world it would be viewed as stewardship of the earth, and guardianship of one another, done out of love, not greed or fear. The more provided for people are, the less likely there are to be those kinds of dilemmas, and therefore the less need for government. Shared abundance, in harmony with earth's environment, is conducive to both sovereignty and balance. It gives good sense the space to breathe and grow.

[Melinda]

Another little future vision. This one is of a school.

In the background you can see the school. Its whimsical shape designed by the older children, who, at 14-16 years, are all fairly capable engineers. They designed the building of the main assembly hall in anticipation of the April showers, so that the spring waters can spiral down the outer slopes. The material they chose has special acoustic properties – and the cascading of the rain creates different kinds of music that sound all around them and resonate beneath their skin. They say it's akin to an awakening feeling. Like the sky is moving through their bodies. This same material can also be folded and remoulded whenever the school is moved, and recast into new shapes, inspired by different themes.

To the right are the domed classrooms. These transparent rooms can travel as ships, and occasionally the children have taken trips to the poles at night to view the stars, or through the oceans to converse with the inhabitants of the sea world. Knowing their importance, the younger ones are often keen to monitor the health of the ocean realms. When they are landed in the assembly point, they often choose to roll back the flooring and feel the earth beneath their feet. They have all lent a hand in designing and tending the gardens, that sit just a matter of metres away, providing a restful and rejuvenating place to read and pick their lunch.

Many of their grandparents used to live in cities. But as free energy revolutionised technology and communication - permeating every area of life, from travel to home farming - more and more people spread out to form conscious communities, and rejuvenated areas of land that had previously been neglected. Less is more, being the chosen philosophy. The beauty of earth began to be restored and replenished. So where their grandparents once had views of factories or ageing, concrete tower blocks, now there were vast arrays of colour. Flowers and trees, grown with care, and homes which blended into and echoed the living earth.

At the forefront of the picture are three school teachers. Taking a moment or two before classes begin, to meditate with the local animals and enjoy a little telekinesis with fallen leaves that are scattered nearby.

The airs are clear, and electric. Full of promise. Lifted by a subtle hint of jasmine, and blessed with a calm.

[Nine]

Hi Wade,

My radicalizing moment:

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/12/20/us...s-himself.html

I will not even bother to comment on the inaccuracies and innuendo in that Times article and suffice it to say is that there was way more to it and I knew all involved and the real reasons behind it and the Times was only protecting my former agency. All witnesses were silenced.

BTW Melinda, loved your art work about what school should really be about and I was planning on posting this today and your art is very healing in nature and you are very talented.

thanx


Nine

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Well, Melinda, that is the leading candidate for art of the year so far, at least on my thread. It reminds me of that school in that Roads world, which reminds me that I need to finish that little story of a day in a life in that world.

OK, this is another paradigmatic post. One of the choir's greatest tasks is wrapping its hearts and minds around what a world based on FE can look like. I have put up a sketch of it. I have been told by people who have looked long and hard that nothing like it exists anywhere else in cyberspace, and I'll buy that. I have also sketched how unimaginable all of the Epochal Events would have been to the people living before them. A major purpose of my big essay was getting people looking at the human journey and human present with comprehensive eyes, which will help make my visionary chapter easier to comprehend. The masses will not even try to imagine it until FE has been delivered into their lives, just like with the previous Epochal Events. This will be the first Epochal Event in which people are trying to imagine it before it happens, and this I can guarantee: none of us can truly imagine it. Take the changes of the previous four events, wrap them in a ball, then make that ball several times larger, and you may begin to approach the magnitude of the changes that will come. As I have written plenty, I do not consider that Roads world to be fictional, and I use it as a point in the future where we can go, and I often think of it, wishing that I could spend a day there, but my little story will have to do for now.

As I have written, it was not really until I began studying in earnest for my big essay (beginning in about 2007) that I began to truly appreciate the epochal significance of FE. I have been pondering FE's implications since 1986, and I know that I have just scratched the surface. I know that FE and antigravity are tied at the hip, and are on the planet today. One won't come without the other. When that happens, no humans will ever be geographically isolated again, unless that is what they want, but I wager that not many will. FE will mean the end of nations, races, roads, mutually unintelligible languages, and cities as we know them. We will domesticate the solar system, live all over it, and Earth will never be mined or raped again. Most of today's professions will disappear, and what will remain will be almost unrecognizable. Those are easily foreseen consequences of the arrival of FE and antigravity, and the choir needs to embrace that vision. The fear and denial that the masses project onto the idea of FE is because they are afraid of change and prefer the devil they know, which is scarcity. They cannot be talked into embracing abundance, as crazy as that may seem, but they will only begin to comprehend it when they can experience it, similar to trying to tell an australopith about a campfire. That vision is what the choir will help come into being, and first we have to imagine it.

The choir will need to wrap its collective mind around the implications of FE and the human animal. Humans have many traits baked into our DNA and collective consciousness, and many will become obsolete when FE appears. Fear is about physical protection, disgust is intended to keep us from eating out of the sewer, and so on. The human mating game is baked extremely deeply in the simian line, but humans and bonobos use sex to recreate and procreate. According to Michael, sex is a biologically baked way for humans to connect with their "essence" (AKA "soul"), and I will not deny that. Humans "cheat" on their partners partly for biological reasons, such as females "hedging their genetic bet" by getting more than one set of genes to mate with, and males try to spread their genes wherever they possibly can. How much of that will change when the Epoch of Abundance arrives? Probably all of it, and radically. The nuclear family will likely go the way of other obsolete social constructs. What will replace it will be far more enlightened, unrestrictive, and will lead to raising the best possible children, who are raised in a nurturing atmosphere of love. In that Roads world, the children that he encountered had IQs that would go off of today's scale. They were happy, healthy, and brilliant, with talents that we can scarcely imagine. The least of them would be considered psychic prodigies and spiritual masters on today's Earth. One of the choir's great tasks is just imagining that world and its inhabitants. We can begin heading in the direction of that reality in my lifetime, and I hope that I live to see that course get set. Anchoring our awareness in that world, and then using it as the star that we steer by, to get there from here, is part of my strategy.

A lot of what we call human nature today is going to change. Sentimental attachments to cities, today's social structures, and the like will be relinquished by the masses when abundance comes to pass, and the choir's great challenge is getting on that path before FE is delivered into our lives. That is not easy, and falling back into scarcity mode will be one of the perils that the choir will face.

Time to go to bed, but in the morning, a few words about love.

Best,

Wade

[Nine]

Wade,

I wanted to discuss Shermer some more...

"That kind of whipsawing between the poles says a lot about such people, and while they may benefit from living through a spectrum of experience like that, what I have found was that they were usually zealots that seek the poles, and their perspectives hence tend to be pretty imbalanced, which really has little to do with their faith of the moment, but their own personal journey. Souls have many different ways of learning." post 4635

Wade, that is very good advice and I prefer not to live at the extreams or at the poles. And Shermer as an ultra cyclist is a case in point using his skeptic blog and magazine to miss-interpret what happens on 24 plus hour cycling events into a critique upon those who have valid documented experiences with ufo's and such!

Shermer never beat Haldeman in RAAM but he finished as very few have! And of course he has my respect as a great cyclist but his conduct in order to make a living is deplorable and that I would say to his face if I would ever meet up with him and I know Lon Haldeman and have road with him and he is a straight up guy!

And to RAAM and evolution:

" three physiologists from the University of Cape Town Medical School in South Africa took the next step. They worked a group of cyclists to exhaustion during a 62-mile laboratory ride and measured, via electrodes, the percentage of leg muscles they were using at the fatigue limit. If standard theories were true, they reasoned, the body should recruit more muscle fibers as it approached exhaustion — a natural compensation for tired, weakening muscles.

Instead, the researchers observed the opposite result. As the riders approached complete fatigue, the percentage of active muscle fibers decreased, until they were using only about 30 percent. Even as the athletes felt they were giving their all, the reality was that more of their muscles were at rest. Was the brain purposely holding back the body?

‘‘It was as if the brain was playing a trick on the body, to save it,’’ says Timothy Noakes, head of the Cape Town group. ‘‘Which makes a lot of sense, if you think about it. In fatigue, it only feels like we’re going to die. The actual physiological risks that fatigue represents are essentially trivial.’’

From this, Noakes and his colleagues concluded that A.V. Hill had been right about the automatic brake, but wrong about its location. They postulated the existence of what they called a central governor: a neural system that monitors carbohydrate stores, the levels of glucose and oxygen in the blood, the rates of heat gain and loss, and work rates. The governor’s job is to hold our bodies safely back from the brink of collapse by creating painful sensations that we interpret as unendurable muscle fatigue.

Fatigue, the researchers argue, is less an objective event than a subjective emotion — the brain’s clever, self-interested attempt to scare you into stopping. The way past fatigue, then, is to return the favor: to fool the brain by lying to it, distracting it or even provoking it. (That said, mental gamesmanship can never overcome a basic lack of fitness. As Noakes says, the body always holds veto power.)

‘‘Athletes and coaches already do a lot of this instinctively,’’ Noakes says. ‘‘What is a coach, after all, but a technique for overcoming the governor?’’"

Jure was killed on a training ride for RAAM...

And to Shermers alien remarks on his web page he has no character I guess!

Is living at the extremes healthy?

What exactly is extreme?

Well I guess it is what it is Wade...

Thanx

Nine

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Nine:

So, were you a postal worker? People going postal sure is an alarm that something is not right. There have been many events in the USA that should be alarm bells, but they are either not listened to or the wrong lessons are taken from them.

On Shermer, I did not know about his bicycling activities, but yes, it does dovetail into that whipsaw nature of exploring the poles of experience. Again, some souls learn that way, and I won't say that the experience is invalid, but it can be highly painful, full of delusion, and can lead nowhere. However, people who learn that way should probably be taken with a grain of salt, especially when they are in their zeal phase. Heck, I was called a zealot during my days with Dennis, and part of me understands the sentiment. My world was literally coming to an end in those days. I later realized that I was one of the few sane people in an insane world. Strangely, people began going postal in 1986, when I met Dennis.

OK, on to love…

Simply put, love is the energy of creation, and I believe that we are here to learn to be creators in our own right (this is kind of a creator's kindergarten). As I mentioned in my previous post, the sex act is a biologically wired method to contact our souls, but it is also a way to ensure the continuance of the species. There are other ways to experience love, but that is the only one baked into our DNA so dramatically. That biological wiring has led to the tension between what the Greeks called Eros and Agape, and the Greeks had two other words for love, one for friendship and another for love in a family.

So, a biological wiring to assure the continuance of the species (some others are hunger and the fight-or-flight response) is also a way for people to contact their souls. As we learn in evolutionary studies, many biological features have dual uses, and that dual use of sex sure has led to plenty of problems. So, people have a hard time with the word love, partly because the sex urge and games that can be played that are anything but love, and can lead to great abuse and pain. Rape is the polar opposite of love (and surely makes for challenging afterlives). Also in a world of scarcity, people dole out their love like any other scarce resource.

Putting sex aside, when I performed my hands-on healings and psychic experiments with fruit, that was some Level 19 stuff, and when I worked on that girl on her death bed, that was up a few orders of magnitude from working on fruit. I helped heal Dennis of hepatitis (a true miracle healing that stunned the doctor) soon after we moved to Ventura. When Brian experimented with Marcel Vogel, they projected love energy into crystals and then used them to prevent rotting. So, there can be very dramatic demonstrations of the power of love.

The greatest miracle I ever saw was my quixotic gesture of sacrificing my life, and six weeks later, Dennis was out of jail, which nobody thought was possible. For another view, love and personal integrity are the same thing, and personal integrity is the world's scarcest commodity. It took my wild ride with Dennis to learn that, and I realized that the reason why we did not have FE was not because of organized suppression, but because of the low level of personal integrity in the world (AKA lack of love). Almost nobody wants to admit it, however, as they prefer playing victim instead of creator. These are all aspects of my statement that FE and love are joined at the hip, in mystical and practical ways. I have seen it, lived it, done it, and the power of love is the most powerful in the universe. Indeed, it may be the only power.

When we see the highly conditional love that Christians sparingly dole out to each other (a far cry from what Jesus taught), or we see the sex games that people play, they are all at least grappling with the love issue, and we can engage it on many fronts. How often do they achieve a creator's love in all of that? Rarely, but that is where the gold nuggets of our existence are found, and the path to the godhead. According to Michael, the Infinite Spirit did not manifest through Jesus until the last month of his life, and the message of the Infinite Spirit is that we are one.

In that heavenly world that Roads visited, it became heavenly because the people there chose love. In that hellish one, everybody chose an egocentric existence where anybody and everybody was expendable, but even the winners were losers.

The only path to FE that I am willing to try is one based on love, and making history's most lucrative technology and giving it away I think is something that Jesus could have gotten with.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

A brief note on different political persuasions…

As Fuller noted, all political systems and ideologies are about who gets the benefit of the scarce economic production. The quintessential example of the 20th century was the capitalist/communist rivalry. The capitalists argued that since they were so clever in organizing economic production that they deserved the lion's share of economic production. Communists on the other hand, argued that the people doing the work should get the lion's share. Capitalism was born in England by violently dispossessing the peasantry, which classical economists ignored in favor of heroic tales of capitalistic efficiency. In that way, they were no different than Court Historians and were simply providing ideological service to the new elite. The conditions of early industrialization were brutal, and its capitalistic excesses led to Karl Marx's work.

And here I will wax mystical for a moment. In my previous post, I discussed love. Religions began as a response to warfare, and all organized religions are methods of social control that rule by fear, so in that way, organized religions are no different than other ideological systems, and in fact, organized religion has been called one of the seven cartels that control the world economy. From what I have seen, I will not gainsay it. Today's organized religions are generally founded in the name of some person who lived a deific life, and so far, they were all men, which likely reflects the misogyny of the times. Before the rise of civilization, female deities were common, even dominant. As women's status declined with the rise of civilization, so did the feminine aspects of religion. Even so, the male personages whose lives became the basis for organized religion often had enlightening things to say, far more enlightened than the corrupted versions of the teachings that were made into religions, and I consider the most enlightened message yet delivered to humanity is that there is no out-group, and that all of humanity (even all of Creation) is one. Mystical teachings that I respect state that that is as close to what the godhead has to say as we are likely to hear while on Earth. And I will buy that. What that means, in mundane terms, is that there are no bad guys. The worst of the worst is no more than a child at play in God's eyes. Even dark pathers eventually understand.

Reaching that understanding is easier said than done, particularly in a world of scarcity and fear. What it comes down to is viewing the world as a creator would, or as a victim does. One is a loving perspective, and one is fearful. The entire political spectrum is, to one degree or another, based on fear. The way to tell if a political-economic ideology is on the right track is if it encourages us to look inward and own the part that we play in the events of our lives, or if it encourages us to look outward for the source of our experience (and blessings or troubles). The inward perspective is on the creator path, and the outward one on the victim path. When people play the victim, they project their inner fears onto the outer world, and give their power away. They look for heroes to worship and bad guys to revile. Victims feel powerless inside. So, when somebody advises people to stop giving their power away, they are encouraging people to find their inner sovereignty, and dare I say it, divinity.

The "authority" issue that Robin is bringing up, from his favorite anarchist, is a secular way of encouraging us to stop giving away our power, and as such, it is an enlightened message. The anarchist ideal, like the communist or capitalist ideal, can be a beautiful thing. It is beautiful if it is free, but if it becomes coercive in practice, then it has lost its way. The primary delusion of warriors is that might makes right, and coercion is the negative pole of their role. Warriors can really make things happen, but they are particularly susceptible to advocating coercion and violence to attain their ends, which is always counterproductive and self-defeating. The means become the ends. So, an anarchist who advocates a gentle taking back of our power is an enlightened one. Anarchists, communists, capitalists, and any other political stripe that advocates secrecy, deception, coercion, or violence is missing the mark. Do they focus on us, or the "bad guys"? This is always a good litmus test.

But as Fuller said, political systems competition is worthless for solving the problems we face, as our problems are on the production end of things, such as running out of the energy that powers the industrial world, not the exchange end, which is only concerned with who gets what. In a world of economic abundance, exchange becomes meaningless. This pretty simple concept, however, is impossible to comprehend for people whose minds are mired in scarcity, which is another reason why I say that I am looking for needles in haystacks.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Choir Q&A.

Q: Wade, how confident are scientists regarding the role of oxygen in the development of Earth and complex life, and what supports their confidence?

A: Oxygen is a crucial, maybe the crucial, element in the development of Earth as we know it, and complex life. It really is quite a subject, and there are still raging controversies regarding aspects of it. The evidence that scientists use to support their ideas regarding oxygen are an array of biological, geological, and fossil evidence. Oxygen is so reactive that if there was not a constant supply provided somehow to an atmosphere, the oxygen would react with other substances. Oxygen is nearly as reactive as fluorine, for instance, and fluorine is never found in nature by itself. It is always bonded to other elements. On Earth, scientists can only think of two ways that Earth's atmosphere could have had much oxygen in it: the oxygen in the oceans that was liberated via ultraviolet light that split water, or oxygenic photosynthesis. But oxygen also helped the ozone layer form, which shielded Earth from ultraviolet light, which would have provided a negative feedback, so ultraviolet light is not a very good candidate. It was life's invention of oxygenic photosynthesis, in which water is split to get the hydrogen for biological processes, and oxygen was the waste product of that process, that created and maintains the oxygenated atmosphere that we breathe today. Scientists think that if they develop the tools that can detect oxygen in atmospheres of planets outside of our solar system, that it will be a key indicator that life may be present.

Cyanobacteria, which is the primary source of oxygenic photosynthesis (and even chloroplasts in plants resulted from a cyanobacterium that formed a symbiosis with a complex cell long ago) can form colonies that leave fossils, and some have been found that are nearly three billion years old. A few hundred million years after that, Earth's atmosphere began becoming oxygenated. The way that scientists can tell that is by examining geological strata from back then, and they can tell that some minerals formed in the absence of oxygen, but formed on Earth's surface. An oxygenated atmosphere would not have allowed that. Those minerals were not formed later, which is evidence that there was atmospheric oxygen then.

There is controversy whether oxygen or microbial processes "refined" the iron from the oceans in a few events long ago, which formed the iron deposits that humans mine today, but scientist are nearly certain that some kind of life process was responsible for refining that iron.

There is also great controversy over a series of events that transpired less than a billion years ago, but led to the rise of complex life. The oceans began to become oxygenated several hundred million years ago, around when a series of ice ages enveloped Earth, maybe all the way to the equator. The oceanic oxygenation and rise of complex life seem related, but the controversy will not be resolved in my lifetime.

I am currently reading Don Canfield's Oxygen, and he is who Canfield oceans are named after, which are oceans without oxygen in them that can also be sulfidic. Canfield has changed his views and does not think that the atmosphere and oceans were significantly oxygenated until around 400 million years ago, when animals began to colonize land and fish got a lot larger. Until then, he thinks that Earth's atmosphere only had a few percent oxygen. That brings forward the second oxygenation event (the first one was more than two billion years ago) by a few hundred million years.

While no scientist will deny that oxygen is vital to animal life and likely saved the oceans from being lost to space, the timing and mechanisms are subject to dispute. This is an area of lively interest and continuing research, and I look forward to seeing how the data and hypotheses develop.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Pre-choir Q&A.

Q: Wade, why is oil so important? It sure seems like we have more than enough today, with prices cratering and Saudi princes saying that low prices are here to stay.

A: Oil is the most important fuel on Earth today. Oil is a liquid hydrocarbon, coal is a solid one, and natural gas is, well, gaseous. A liquid fuel is superior to solid or gaseous fuels because it combines the energy density of solids with the ability to flow that gas has. Those three fuels comprise about 85% of the energy used on Earth today by humanity, and we are quickly running out of them.

The world's oil deposits were formed by anoxic events at the border of the world's oceans, and most of it was formed along the shores of the Tethys Ocean during the dinosaurs' reign on Earth. Texan and Middle Eastern oil is of Tethyan origin. The Industrial Revolution began by burning coal, and 150 years into it, oil began to be drilled commercially. Oil became a huge economic prize, arguably history's greatest, and the man who became history's richest made his fortune by cornering the early oil market. His descendants are still influential, our organizations had dealings with them, and they were likely behind at least some of the organized suppression that our energy efforts encountered.

While those oil barons amassed outsized concentrations of wealth, oil became a geopolitical football when the West began to transition from coal to oil. When the British Navy converted from coal to oil in 1911, the Western powers began meddling in the Middle East in earnest and have yet to really leave the region. The world's biggest killing machine is currently ensconced there, and the USA's geopolitical maneuvering in the region may well lead to World War III, if we are not already in it.

There are several measures of energy utility, and one is how easy or difficult that energy is to obtain, and the concept of energy return on investment (EROI) is an important one. A century ago, when Texas oil began to be exploited, it had an EROI of more than a hundred. Today, the shale oil that has been heavily touted as a way to make the USA energy independent has an EROI of less than five. That EROI may be too low to support modern civilization. We are burning through fossil fuels a million times as fast as they were created, which falls a little short of sustainable. In this century, virtually all of the conventional oil and gas will be gone, and we will be left with coal and marginal "oil" such as shale oil and tar sands. The West's invasions of Hydrocarbon Country are all about the oil, and no other rationale survives minimal scrutiny, no matter what lying politicians have to say on the matter. There are very real consequences to running out of oil, including wars and environmental devastation. Without the energy that hydrocarbons provide, Earth's carrying capacity is only about a billion people.

The current oil glut will be short-lived, which is a result of flooding the market with shale oil, which was due to the easy money policies of the Federal Reserve in response to the financial collapse of 2007-2009. Shale oil and tar sands have costs of extraction from $40-$80 per barrel, so the current oil glut and price crash will wipe out those operations unless prices bounce back soon.

Of course, free energy solves that problem and many others overnight, which I am trying to help manifest for public use. But opposition to it comes from all corners, and the masses are in denial or fear regarding free energy, as bizarre as that can seem.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As somebody who has been writing publicly about Iraq since 1991, this article by Robert Parry shows how the drumbeat against Russia is so very familiar, beaten by the same people who beat it for Iraq and other targets of The Empire.

On a related note, the gangsters in the American judicial system just kangarooed a journalist into prison for the heinous crime of publishing a link to a public document.

What the USA did to Iraq was evil, but they did not have nuclear weapons. Russia does.

Grim times.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

A reader in another forum spent several hours in my big essay and came away bewildered. But he was trying, and this is my response to his heartfelt reply. It is germane to this thread.


Thanks for diving into that essay and trying. Thanks for your background information.

Funny about moon mining…when we held our first free energy shows in New England in 1987, we had a complete media blackout, and they instead ran an article on mining the moon for our energy. It was like they were rubbing our faces in it.

The social system issue is one that I keep revisiting with my readers, and the Epochal Event approach in my essay is intended to make it clear. All significant social system changes were predicated on the economic changes that came with tapping a new energy source. It is even deeper than that. If protohumans had not found a way to power the growing brain of the human line, humanity would not have appeared on the evolutionary scene.

An example of economics precipitating social change that I often use is bonobos. When their food supply doubled, the females and non-dominant males ended the several-million-year reign of violent male gangs, and bonobos reached a level of peacefulness that not even humans have attained.

You are right that in the current environment, some kind of "groundswell" effort is unlikely. I was involved with several "groundswell" efforts around free energy, and I quit the last one that I was involved with more than a decade ago. While I laud the intention behind them, they don't work. Humanity is too easily corrupted in a world of scarcity (that was the primary lesson of my journey), and the organized suppression easily defeated them. That organized suppression does not all come from "the top," either, as we discovered. I have survived and witnessed the many approaches that have not worked and are unlikely to, and 30 years after I began my odyssey, I decided on a different approach that nobody tried before, and it is what I am doing today. You might call it the enlightenment approach (but maybe not! ).

I am taking an approach that does not risk the lives of the participants. I have seen far too much blood and guts on my journey, and do not see the point in creating any more martyrs to the cause.

Again, hydrogen is not an energy source. TPTB do not care about anything that does not impact energy generation, because only that can change the game, and free energy can change it in unprecedented ways. In fact, nothing else that I know of can. My fellow travelers and I all began our energy journeys by wringing more energy from fossil fuels, and Brian was at the forefront of traditional alternative energy long ago, before he realized that it was too little and too late.

Indeed, humanity stands at the edge of the abyss. I have been writing about Middle East oil politics since 1991, and have written quite a bit about what the Western powers have done there. They began seriously meddling in the region during World War I (Lawrence of Arabia, etc.), soon after the British navy converted from coal to oil. Yes indeed, the overthrow of Iran's government was an evil deed that set back the region considerably. One of the brothers who helped engineer the overthrow of Iran's government is also a key suspect in the JFK assassination, who also led the "investigation" into his murder. That kind of fox-in-the-henhouse situation is standard in American government, as I am sure that you know all too well.

As far as my essay goes, it is indeed daunting in scope, but I need people to be able to gain an understanding of it (it does not have to be super deep, but sufficient to make this vision comprehensible). My goal is finding 5,000-to-7,000 people who can digest that essay and sing the abundance song with me. When we do, we will attract 100,000 people or so, from across the entire planet, who have been pining for that song for their entire lives. When that happens, developing free energy technology and giving it to the world will be easy. TPTB could not stop it then. Of that, I am certain. Believe me, they are watching me now. I have been a thorn in their side too many times and for too long for them to forget about me, but for now, they just watch. If I can find enough people to learn the song, I will no longer be a vulnerable plank that they can take out and have it just all collapse. Also, members from their ranks hope that I am successful, and they may be providing a certain level of protection, although I am certainly not relying on that.

To your point, yes, without a strong nucleus of people with the right stuff, no effort to change today's energy paradigm stands a chance. Ten like Dennis or a hundred like Brian, and free energy would be a done deal, but there are not that many of them on the planet today. I am shooting for 5,000 that do not have to lay their lives on the line, but it will still be hard work. As you can tell, that essay is not breezy reading material – only when world authorities read it for a day can they get much out of it, and even then, they are just judging its quality, and the results have been encouraging. We will see what kind of nucleus that I can form.

When free energy technology is given to humanity, then the long-desired social changes will become feasible. Without free energy, they are not feasible. As Bucky Fuller said, there are no political solutions to the problems we face. That includes social changes. Nobody on Earth challenged slavery as an institution until machines made slavery economically obsolete. Machines perform 99.9% of the work in industrialized societies. Humans in industrialized nations are mostly machine tenders.

After several years of studying to write that essay in my "spare" time, it took me a year to write that big essay. I will not write its like again in this lifetime. It is essentially an online textbook, and I do not expect anybody to quickly digest it. I am devoting the rest of my life's "spare" time to building that choir, and hope that I have 30 more years or so to do it (yes, I am aware that humanity may not have that long, but the rush out and do it method has never come close to working). That choir may only help a little, it may help a lot, but it won't hurt. I was partly trying to help fill a gap that I saw in all "groundswell" efforts, which was an aware and engaged public who knew the score and where the opportunities were.

We will see how it goes.

Thanks again for reading.

Best,

Wade

[Nine]

Hi Wade,

Yes I was a postal worker.

In the early 80's the shootings started and those were times of unprecedented prosperity for the agency and its workers with unlimited overtime and lots of money to be made.

Things changed big time with the financial meltdown in '08 and really have not got better even with the decline of fuel prices of this very fuel dependent agency.

I was told by a trusted manager a decade ago that the various P&DC's and annex's would indeed be put into competition with each other and here is the result:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/post-off...5000-job-cuts/

It was a case of survival of the fittest and many times even being good was not enough if some politically connected animal got into the game.

The last decade of my career I choose the dock operations for its fast paced and stressful environ for a personal challenge and I did very well in that job and the chief duty of the job was to assist the manager and so I was a valued member of that team of folks and so I was a definite member of that in group at USPS and was in hardy agreement of their goals and that was to keep our office off the chopping block.

The large docks at any large postal facility are where all the cowboys come to play with the big toys the huge trucks and forks for the job and of course the rest of the other "post office" view us as freaks and outcasts yet a vital part of the operation and a certain amount of rouge behavior was both tolerated and even encouraged for productivity gains.

To my knowledge no shooting of any kind happened on the docks but fights and assorted violence did happen but usually resolved with an apology and a hand shake and a "get back to work"...

We certainly succeeded at keeping off that chopping block but with a high price and of course I was totally burned out from that experience in my early 50's and so took the early out.

And a brief explanation of why there are these huge downsizing of the employees:

http://mailingsystemstechnology.com/...3705588A54F28B

Wade, your trucking essay was brilliant....



I will defer to that great journalistic enterprise called the Onion for a spot on editorial about the postal service:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/pos...onoring,37815/

thanx

Nine

[Nine]

Wade,

What is Sentience? Or Energy? Or Mass? Or gravity?

Or even a given power structure.

A wiki definition of Sentience.

It really is not at all defined at least for me....


thanx


Nine

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Nine:

Workers everywhere are under siege. Part of it is understandable and desirable, as machines can replace humans. The crime is not in sharing the benefits. When FE comes, that issue will disappear. For instance, computer-driven cars are already here, and that will eliminate the diving profession, and that is a fine thing. While we have professional drivers, they are treated terribly, as the system does not value human life. The visions in that essay of mine, on how to make driver lives better, could have been implemented 20 years ago, and would be child's play today (and some companies have kind of experimented with it), but nobody values their lives. Even the drivers themselves have a combat mentality, but there does not need to be a war. The teamsters union is run by the mob (I have that on good authority from somebody who has met the leadership and has had extensive mob dealings), so where is anybody who cares about those millions of people?

Yes, we do not know what light, energy, gravity, etc., are. I have written plenty about sentience. Brian and Einstein had their own notions about it, and I'll go with their "definition." At Wikipedia, that definition is the ability to suffer. With the definition that I am using, sentience is the ability to think above a certain threshold. Adhering to dogma is anti-sentient behavior. Irrational adherence to in-group ideologies is pre-sentient behavior, and many "smart" people do that. Even macaques are patriotic. When people do that, they have abdicated their sentience. If people want to call it "enlightened," that is their call, but I am using sentience. I have written that when humanity can see all life on Earth as its in-group, then humanity will finally become a truly sentient species. The love/fear duality drives it. For instance, the people in this world are truly sentient, the people in this world, not so much. They are clever, but not quite sentient. Is Max sentient? It is debatable. That is even close to the Wikipedia definition. Somebody who delights in the suffering of others is marginally sentient, IMO. That is why I have called humanity a semi-sentient species: we have the potential, but rarely achieve it. Some argue for "sapience." Where do you rank animals that can pass the mirror test? Humans cannot pass it until 18 months. So, there is plenty of linguistic and philosophical hairsplitting that can come into play. I am referring to a state that humanity has yet to reach, sentience works for me, and I make my definition clear.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:


Recent posts keep bringing up a subject that is tied in closely to my FE strategy. I am not sure what it is, but it is probably related to people truly not understanding the epochal significance of FE and the nature of the previous epochs of the human journey. It is not easy to understand, but I seek the few who can. I kind of addressed the issue recently, as people only look at superficial aspects of how our world works (retail), and do not really understand what drives them (wholesale). When people see only the superficial levels, they think that some new belief system, some changing of the political-economic system (the retail parts, such as money, politicians, etc.), some new social organization is the key to solving our problems. All such activities are only hacking at branches.

People need to develop comprehensive perspectives, which necessarily have a key scientific component to them, if they are going to be any use for what I am attempting. But first, they have to care for something beyond their in-group. I discovered that hardly anybody really does, and that is the problem. If they truly care and have pursued their hearts, they eventually got a taste of how the world really works and realize that almost nobody cares. If they have yet to achieve that understanding, the rest will not matter. Many FE newbies want to make Godzilla some nefarious out-group, and if we just get rid of him, then all is well. That is a delusion. Godzilla is only the master of a game that almost all humans play. He is not the problem: we are.

Almost all FE newbies want to rush out and tell their social circles the FE Gospel, to only be dismayed at the denial, derision, and fear that comes up. It would be like running around in 1720 and telling everybody you know how evil slavery is. Everybody would have looked at you like you were crazy. Karl Marx had it right in that social relations are a result of the means of production, not a cause.

Humanity is not going to begin to understand the abundance that FE makes feasible until they can experience it. I seek the needles in haystacks who do not need to have it delivered to their homes before they begin to understand. They are going to be very rare people, on the order of less than one-in-a-thousand in the general population. Those are just the numbers, and it does no good to judge the sleeping masses. They are asleep for a reason, and they are not going to wake up with talk. There is no new belief to sell them, no new trick of thinking, no bad guys to go eliminate. Those are all paths of futility, and people trying them are liable to be burned at the figurative stake. That is not what I am trying to do. If people want to do some fishing for needles, my big essay is one way, or even that PowerPoint presentation that a scientist pal cooked up. But people will find that more often that not, and far more often, they are going to encounter denial, derision, and fear, and even just sending people links to my work can be enough to wreck relationships. I have seen it happen. That is just what it is. People need to be very careful if they are going to play that game.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Between chores. This is kind of an addendum to the previous post, and is a key to understand the state of the conundrum and trying to find those needles. All of my fellow travelers were guilty of projecting their overgrown Boy and Girl Scout attitudes on the world. We all began that way. Surely everybody wants to make the world a better place, do the right thing, and so on. We were all disabused of those delusions. Some sooner, some later, some more gently, and some brutally, but we all eventually woke up to the reality.

People like Dennis and Ralph McGehee nearly did not survive their moment of awakening. In mine, I envisioned scenes of murder, which was the lowest point of my journey, but led to the greatest miracle I ever witnessed. I had already experienced five years of sobering post-graduate reality when I lived with Dennis in Boston, but I bought Dennis's belief that people cared, but had nothing worth caring about. A decade later, Dennis admitted to me that almost nobody really cared, but he was sifting through the mine tailings of humanity, searching for those who did. After several years of trotting the globe and checking out FE, Brian decided to play the Paul Revere of FE. Five years later, as he told me how his ride went, he openly wondered if humanity was a sentient species. Everybody that I know who has played at the high levels had their moment of disgust with humanity. It is a normal reaction for work like ours. But for those who persevered and are still productive, they overcame their disgust, dropped their judgment, and just realized that they were seeing their native species in all its glory. That said, there was no use in pretending that humanity was something other than it was. We suspected what the potential was, as we partly embodied it, but we also realized where people were.

It took me nearly 20 years to be able to generalize what my fellow travelers and I were encountering. We were dealing with a species that lived in fear and sold out its sentience for the promise of security. What I eventually noticed was that all of the dominant ideologies were scarcity-based and appealed to the ego. What is more, I noticed that people were imbued with them from a very young age, even in their cradles, which formed a framework of their awareness that few ever escaped. Few wanted to escape, as adhering to their adopted ideologies fed them and gave them egocentric strokes.

The problem with FE is that it makes a world of abundance feasible and makes all scarcity-based frameworks meaningless. And part of people's awareness quickly picks up on that, which is why you see all the crazed reactions to the idea of FE that you do. Part of them immediately realizes that FE means the end of the world as they know it, so their reactions are to keep that reality at bay as much as possible. The reactions of denial and fear can range from the simplistic to the sophisticated, but they are all reacting to the idea of abundance. Simply put, they are not going to let go of their scarcity-based teddy bears with talk. They are going to be very faint supporters of the idea of FE, if they are not outright assailants of it, as strange as that may seem to FE newbies bursting with enthusiasm to make it happen. The good news is that it can happen, but not by plying one's social circles, and if you decide to engage groups that you think might be interested, such as environmentalists or Peak Oilers, be prepared for a lot of rejection. You will get a "hit" maybe one in a hundred times, if that. There simply are not enough people on Earth who care enough for the social circle approach to work, or approaching groups of various ideological persuasions. To one degree or another, they are all addicted to scarcity.

Heck, not one in a hundred Americans knows or cares how many millions of people in Asia we have murdered in the past generation. Stalin and Hitler would have been impressed, but it does not even register in the USA's awareness at all, other than lone voices in the wilderness here and there. When a leading Native American scholar had the temerity to write about it, his career was wiped out. So, this denial and fear is pervasive, and FE is just one many realities that suffers for it. It is a great waste of time, IMO, to try to blast through it. I am taking a different approach entirely. They won't be able to deny it any longer when it is delivered into their lives, and only then will they begin to awaken from their nightmares of scarcity.

Back to chores.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Choir Q&A.

Q: Wade, you paint a pretty grim picture of the human past, in a number of ways. Wasn't there some environmentally friendly civilization in the past, and a society in which I might be tempted to imagine living in?

A: As far as civilizations go, no. Were some societies environmentally gentle? Yes, there were some, but that is relative. Humans have not lived in harmony with their environments since they learned to control fire, which may be up to two million years ago. Also, wherever behaviorally modern humans arrived on their migrations from Africa, they hunted animals to extinction, especially the big ones, which were easy prey and the mother lode of hunter-gatherers. Those humans also drove all other human species to extinction.

So, after that universally inflicted environmental devastation, which drastically impacted the biomes, were there any societies that were relatively environmentally gentle? Yes, there were, but they were all Stone Age societies, as they cannot do as much damage as metal-wielding ones can, and it was only in certain phases of the progression of human societies that we could call them gentle. In four places on Earth, where the animals has been so overhunted and some plants that stored energy to survive the dry seasons could be domesticated, women began to grow crops as an adjunct to their gathering duties. Those societies had a phase that was relatively gentle and women had relatively high status, related to their economic contribution. As those societies grew, from the great increase in energy that could be generated by crop production, those four places hosted the first civilizations. Men rose to dominance again, women's status declined, and all early civilizations also collapsed, to one degree or another, as they were not environmentally sustainable. They all relied on deforestation, for example. The moonscapes in and around the Mediterranean, for instance, used to be all forested. The Yellow River is called that because of all of the silt from humanity's upriver deforestation and soil disturbance.

Some Stone Age civilizations were environmentally friendlier than others, and the Western Hemisphere had a number of them, from the Amazon to the Pacific Northwest to the American Southwest to the Great Plains to the Eastern Woodlands. Their population densities were far less than in much of Eurasia, and that lower density reduced population pressure. However, there were collapses at Cahokia, and the Anasazi and Mayan societies, for instance, as well as at Teotihuacan.

Basically, horticultural societies were about the best that humans achieved, as far as being relatively sustainable and someplace that a modern person could even think of living in. Those that became matrilocal were the ideal, but they were only about 30% of preliterate societies. Those that were patrilocal became dominated by male gangs and were extremely violent.

So, there have been brief periods when horticultural societies were relatively gentle, and that was an attraction to Europeans when they encountered the matrilocal horticultural societies of the Eastern Woodlands, which is why so many ran off and went native.

Some other horticultural societies formed outside of those four pristine civilizations, and some possibly independently invented domestication, and if they were matrilocal, then they were relatively gentle and somewhat sustainable. In the Eastern Woodlands, for instance, they burned through all of the local firewood in a generation, and so moved the village. That was only possible with low population densities. In other preliterate civilizations, such as in the Highlands of New Guinea, they were very territorial and violent, as were the hunter-gatherer societies of Australia. In Stone Age cultures, especially the patrilocal ones, about a third of all men died violently. The peaceful savage ideal is largely a myth, and all warfare was primarily due to battling over resources. There were some brief Golden Ages of the human past, until the energy ran out, and then it was warfare, genocide, population collapses and the like. So, there really has not been any society that was truly environmentally friendly (something had to give when humans carved out their societies from the environment), but some were gentler than others, but the gentle ones were all Stone Age societies, and they quickly fell prey to more technologically advanced societies.

An FE-based society could easily be environmentally friendly, and literally have no environmental impact. That would really be a first in the human journey.

Best,

Wade