WADE FRAZIER : A Healed Planet

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Between chores, and anecdote time. I am too lazy this morning to look it up, and the books are in my office as I write this ( ), but in one of Jared Diamond's books, he mentioned encountering the greatest writer in a nation that he visited. I think it was in the South Pacific or an island off of Southeast Asia. Diamond knew the man, who was world-famous, and Diamond happened to be walking near that man's home. The writer was out in the fields, tending his crops, and he greeted Diamond. Diamond's point was that in poor nations, even their greatest writers have to play peasant, as there is no energy surplus to sustain their writing efforts. I think it was in Hall's and Klitgaard's book that there was a graphic, which looked similar to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, but was an energy surplus pyramid, and at the bottom was survival – having a full belly and a roof over one's head – and above it were levels of civilization, if you will, and at the top was stuff like the arts, literature, science, etc., which could really only exist in societies with large energy surpluses.

Only after the basics are taken care of can societies indulge themselves by supporting artists, programmers, scientists, etc. Only in affluent societies can concepts like free software even exist. The high tech revolution began in history's richest and most powerful nation, and that is normal. The Industrial Revolution began in a small group of nations that were riding a low-energy transportation lane, which only they had the ability to exploit, to world conquest, and England's rise to world dominance had its neighbors to thank.

If I did not have to make a living (and make FE happen! ), I would have liked to have been an art historian, and maybe at least partly because of my two months spent in Europe when I was 16, when I had my cultural awakening, just before my mystical awakening. My favorite artistic periods are the Renaissance and Belle Époque, for painting, and the Baroque, Classical, and Romantic periods in music, as well as the rock-and-roll revolution, and I grew up a movie junkie. Those periods of great art were all enabled by the relative affluence of the times. The Renaissance began just after Europe was moved back from its Malthusian brink by the catastrophes of the 1300s, and the energy surplus of Europe's watermills were instrumental in holding Europe together. The Belle Époque happened at the peak of Europe's global domination, and during the early days of Industrial Revolution, phase 2. The Baroque, Classical, and Romantic periods were all due to the ascent of Europe, and the imperial surplus that could support artists such as Mozart. The rock-and-roll revolution was a product of the postwar boom, which is humanity's most affluent period. And the movie industry has long been dominated by Hollywood, the cultural capital of history's richest and most powerful nation.

All of the ancient world's great feats of art and architecture were created during the energy peaks of ancient civilizations, from Sumer onward. The pyramid-building orgy in Egypt peaked with the Old Kingdom, when the pharaohs were seen as divine beings.

Heck, here in Seattle, I saw the high-tech boom, version 1 and 2, which we are likely near the end of, and artists thrive in those environments, with their nouveau riche patrons. Today, art is selling for ridiculous amounts, with all the easy money being printed up in affluent nations. It will all come crashing down, and soon (notice how I published that a couple of months before oil began its collapse, and it is all far from over), but for the moment, the inane amounts being paid for art is a sign of the times.

My point is that only with large energy surpluses can people be freed from the toil of subsistence and engage in mental work (programming, science, accountants like me), artistic work, etc. If we turn the corner into the Fifth Epoch, artists won't need patrons, and they will create because it fulfils their souls, not because they need to eat, and we will all benefit from it.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

A few odds and ends…

Last night, I read the dinosaur chapter of my big essay, and I fixed a couple of links. Links come and go on the Internet, even at Wikipedia, and I plan to annually update my site's links, and especially my big essay's. I am the author of that essay, and the two hours that I spent reading that dinosaur chapter overwhelmed even me. A lot there, but my essay needed to be full of meat, not light stuff, in order for my readers to achieve what I need them to, if they are going to be useful for my choir effort. But, it is not going to really sink in, on a comprehensive basis, for most that I seek, until people participate in lively discussions of the material. That has yet to happen.

In the past week, I have been reading Charles Mann's 1493, on the consequences of Europe's conquest of the world. I used his 1491 in my American Empire essay, and those two books obviously represent his life's work, and what a worthy life's work it has been. He published 1493 at about the same age that I was when I wrote my big essay, and I think that it takes a lifetime to be able to write stuff like that (and do it before old age sets in! ). When I publish the next version of my big essay, 1493 will be among the materials that I use to update it. I already knew the gist of 1493, but Mann provided a lot of analysis and color around various events, such as what the Columbian Exchange meant for China. The primary effects, at least for humans, of the Columbian Exchange were Europeans bringing disease to the previously isolated natives of the Western Hemisphere (and Australia), and native foods transformed African and Eurasian diets and helped lead to a population explosion. Maize, potatoes, sweet potatoes, and manioc became staples from north to south, from east to west, in Eurasia and Africa, and in China, maize and sweet potatoes, in particular, allowed marginal Chinese lands to be exploited. China has been an ecological disaster for millennia, due to deforestation and agricultural practices, but the introduction of New World foods allowed the Chinese to farm highly marginal lands. I just read this essay by Mann. Good stuff. The implications are obvious: either humanity becomes a truly sentient species, or it is going to be Game Over, and soon. That is what my work is all about.

I do not often remember my dreams, but last night I had vivid ones that were with me when I awoke, and I went back to sleep and continued them. It was like I was in a waking dream, and the theme was familiar. I was trying to get ex- and current American presidents interested in FE. I recall speaking to Bill Clinton in particular. What a waste of time, even in my dreams! Every president since Reagan knew Dennis by name, and Bush the Second's energy advisor was one of Dennis's fans, but it did not matter, as Dennis was still run out of the USA. I am not sure if a dream like that counts as a nightmare, but it kind of felt like one, in the end.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Briefly, I look at traffic to my site each month, to see what people are writing about my work, to see if there are potential choir members among them (and sometimes there are), and this time of year, when school begins, my American Empire and Columbus essays become the most popular on my site, as they are used in college, high school, and even middle school classes. Those two essays pushed my big essay to a distant third so far this month. In July, the Columbus essay was in fourth place, but in September it is number one with a bullet, and that trend generally lasts through October. I have seen it used by professors, where it is the only essay on the Internet that they link to, and last year I heard from an activist who goes on Fox News and debates why we have Columbus Day, and my essay seems to be about the only scholarly Columbus essay on the Internet.

When I heard from that world authority on the first half of my big essay last year, I got the sense that there is nothing like my big essay on the Internet. The potential of the Internet has barely begun to be tapped, which is why I am doing what I am.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Krishna]

Posted by Wade Frazier
To "educate" people from poor nations into Fourth Epoch ideas is a mixed bag, with that clash of cultures idea that I recently mentioned.

(he made money modifying the original, so he only believes in giving away some of this work; I find where he draws the line to be a little arbitrary)

To Freeknowledge's post, he had me put in a Stallman-like copyleft license on my site, and I did not mind.

I suppose that you could call me a Free Software fellow traveler

To Freeknowledge's latest, if indeed the Free Software Movement has a higher altruism ratio than other groups

If I was not clear, I am not asking you to do anything about education, when I write about it I am writing about my understanding of the role of education in the world. I find very little difference in terms of attitude/culture in the younger generations between americans and indians. Which is why you see Indians without Bindi (red dot) in Seattle, nuclear families are the norm in India in my social class, in the US they are more constrained because they don't have purchasing power in USD and have to depend on sons/daughters.

Where did you get the idea that Stallman gives away some of his work? As far as I know he gives away all of it.

The license CC-BY-NC is not a copyleft license, it does not have a SA (share-alike) clause and it also is not a free culture work because of the non-commercial clause. I found a license that reflects your intent and asked you to use it as a signal to the free software/culture/knowledge folks that you are part of their movements. You are a free culture fellow traveler for sure, it is only the money making part that you differ from them. Stallman allows anybody to make money on any of his works be it software or writings while you don't. This is where the copyleft/share-alike comes in. If the publisher is forced to share-alike there is not much money in it and that limits the damage from money-making. You could consider a copyleft/share-alike license CC-BY-SA for your website, verbatim copies won't make money because of competition from your website. Derivatives won't make much money because once the first copy is sold (or otherwise made public) it can't be restricted anymore.

Like I was saying open source and free software are the same thing. Free Software people are in effect telling the world that they thought about ethics and care about them. (I am not denigrating open source folks, just saying that you will find comparatively lesser number of altruists among people who self-identify as open source, they are also less likely to have thought about ethics of sharing and restrictions on sharing.) Whether you will find anyone home is an open question, yes they understand abundance, but they are engineers and most likely to be level 3's. If you want to contact them you can start with Debian leaders

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Freeknowledge, in the essay that you directed me to, Stallman wrote that he gave away free software, and then made a living by customizing it for customers, until he was given enough money that he did not have to do that anymore. That is what I was referring to. Believe me, this is all very familiar territory to people in the FE field, particularly inventors. I have been asked to try to get inventors to give away their FE ideas/technology, and have them make money consulting on its implementation. I have seen and heard it all. Again, somebody like Stallman could only afford to give his work away when he was being showered with money in other ways. Again the issues that the Free Software Movement faces are very familiar to me. We went after FE as a business, as a non-profit, with volunteers, and so on. Dennis put the best heating system in the world on people's homes for free, which was the most brilliant thing that I saw him do.

The parallels between Bill Gates and John Rockefeller are many and important, but the software industry is still young and innocent. Gates did not offer Stallman a billion dollars to go away, and then try to kill him when the bribe was rejected. That shows the vast gulf between what Dennis was taking on and what Stallman was, and shows how radically different FE is from Free Software, in important ways, even though they also have a lot in common.

The FE issue is infinitely larger than the Free Software issue, but there were enough similarities that I think that members of the Free Software Movement can more easily understand the FE issue. That was really the basis of my interest in the Free Software Movement in the first place, but when I saw how stuck Stallman was, I stopped trying, and when I recently heard that he is openly hostile to the idea of FE today, I decided to go public with it. I did not do it to pick on Stallman, but to just use him as one more example of the problems that FE faces. In his way, he was no different from Lester Brown, Amory Lovins, Richard Heinberg, etc. – all a bunch of Level 3s. I don't even bother with Level 3s anymore. Once they start spouting the "laws of physics" and "organized suppression is a conspiracy theory" drivel, I am finished with them. Been there, done that, too many times. Level 3s are the most hostile and entrenched against the idea of FE, like cult members are to anything outside of their ideological window. A Level 3's window is more open in ways, but shut tighter than anybody else's in others.

What I am attempting is not going to work if anybody is trying to make a living doing it, and people trying to make money off of my writings are risking themselves in ways that they cannot begin to comprehend, so I will not make it OK that people do that. If they do, I will ask them to stop. I am not going to get legalistic about it, but I will make my position clear. Again, FE is like The One Ring, and people can go literally insane when they are around even the idea of it for long. I am writing from rueful experience. I am not going to be responsible for any more wrecked and prematurely ended lives, and will do my best to keep naïve newbies away from the suicidal stuff, and self-interest and FE are a deadly combination.

The young in all nations have more similarities than the adults will, which is why Fuller saw that the youth more readily relinquished their in-group ideologies and thought in global terms. My target audience is likely going to be young adults, whose awareness has not yet ossified into their ideological straightjackets. Will many come from Third Epoch nations? I doubt it, but they are welcome to try. Yes, familial relationships are conditioned by the economic reality, always.

Your understanding of the role of education in societies going from the Third to Fourth Epoch is fine, and I want to make it clear that I am trying to help educate people to think in Fifth Epoch terms, as a way to help make it happen. Once it does, then people are going to begin thinking in Fifth Epoch terms pretty quickly, but not before then, other than the needles. I am constantly being approached to make my work into a book, a movie, to try some mass media approach, and other ways to water it down and reach the masses. I am not interested in those approaches, and those who advocate those avenues do not yet understand what I am attempting or what I am facing. Godzilla is watching, make no mistake, no matter how much in denial the naïve are. I am being highly specific with my approach, developed from a lifetime of life-wrecking trial and error. If people follow my approach, they can be helpful and can stay out of trouble. There are many ways to crash and burn in this milieu.

Developing a Fifth Epoch perspective is really what the choir is all about. People like Stallman are stuck in the Fourth Epoch, as he subscribes to the Fourth Epoch religion. He can't help me, and make no mistake, I really have only one goal: helping manifest the biggest event in the human journey, and the biggest that humanity will ever have. That is enough to have on my plate, and for those I seek, they will need to keep a laser focus on the goal, and developing a comprehensive perspective will help attain and maintain it. That is what my big essay is all about. It is a textbook to help attain a comprehensive perspective, which will have energy and consciousness as the focus, which in one way is saying that the focus is on the entire universe. But just focusing on getting humanity over the hump is plenty for now. If we don't solve the energy issue, and pronto, the rest simply will not matter.

Back to bed.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

OK, back to vaccinations, finally. I guess that the bottom line is that vaccination has not really had a fair hearing, nor have the alternatives to it. A section of my site is devoted to racketeering. The pattern is similar in all of them, which is:

• The racket always works by enticing or forcing the masses to buy/use a "product" or "service";
• The benefits are either illusory, dubious, or greatly exaggerated;
• The damage is minimized, covered up, or even promoted as a great benefit;
• The theory and data are greatly manipulated by the vested interests and often turned upside down, in surreal fashion;
• The masses unthinkingly submit to the conditioning and become "customers," patients, victims, etc.;
• Those who resist the conditioning are dealt with, in an array of enticements and punitive tactics, which can go as far as prison and murder, depending on the racket;
• The rackets largely work because people believe in them;
• Almost nobody has the integrity or courage to question their conditioning, as there are enticements for playing along and punitive consequences for those who don't;
• There is often a spiritual dimension to the issue, with dark pathers creating and maintaining the rackets as way to wealth and power, light pathers often become martyrs for standing up to the rackets, and the masses simply do not care as they shuffle along to the dark pathers' herd management. Witnessing that dynamic is what causes people such as Brian O to wonder if humanity is truly a sentient species.

To me, vaccination rests on a shaky foundation, and that foundation is the subcellular milieu. Before Pasteur's germ theory of disease was even formed, research was pointing to a different paradigm, and the idea that Pasteur plagiarized that predecessor in his quest for wealth and fame is richly received by a little study. If the story ended there, it would be cause enough to question the entire foundation of vaccinations, but in the first half of the 20th century, two scientists that I am aware of developed microscopes with resolutions considered "impossible" by orthodox optical theory, but the proof is in looking through the lenses of their microscopes, which orthodoxy has refused to do since before I was born, similar to how the Wright brothers were initially received, but the denial regarding those microscopes is far more pronounced. Surviving micrographs exist from the first one, which was openly acknowledged as the world's most powerful microscope when it was invented, as electron microscopes had yet to be invented, and the laboratory of the microscope's inventor was a scientific Mecca before the medical racketeers wiped it out. The second microscope still exists and its inventor is still around, after being driven out of his home nation and nearly going to prison in the nation where he found refuge. Both scientists independently confirmed the pleomorphic findings of Pasteur's predecessor, which points to a very different paradigm of health and disease in the subcellular milieu.

That original scientist's work drew radically different conclusions from Pasteur's, and vaccination was questioned from the beginning, based on those conclusions. Not only that, but the data on vaccination's safety and effectiveness is very open to challenge. I would not call myself an expert by any means, but I have looked into the issue in some depth for a quarter century, on and off.

Not only was Pasteur a shameless self-promoter, but the man who led the wiping out of the man who developed that first "impossible" microscope was arguably the greatest quack of the 20th century, a man who was the face of Western medicine, but never practiced medicine a day in his life, failed anatomy in medical school (a highly dubious school to begin with), and whose claim to fame was promoting the health benefits of cigarettes in the pages of the Journal of the American Medical Association, as he was its editor, and his greatest "achievement" was designing the "research" to promote an asbestos cigarette filter! You could not make this up if you tried. The same man led the "War on Quacks," which is like George Bush the Second leading the murder of innocent millions in the "War on Terror," in true dark pather style, just like Orwell predicted.

If you look into fluoridation, you find the same dynamics. The same for heart disease, and on and on. The greatest medical racket of all is in cancer treatment. It is all evil, from top to bottom, and dark pathers are at the helm. What I found out the hard way in the energy racket made it very easy to understand the medical racket, and I bore the brunt of the medical racket, too.

With that overview, I will make some posts that get into the details and data, and I will make the case that it is far from proven that vaccinations are safe and effective, get any credit at all for vanquishing disease, and also show how the alternative paradigms have never been given a fair hearing, as vaccination became a racket in Pasteur's day, and it has only gotten worse since then.

Best,

Wade

[Fiberglut]

Wade, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you for your tireless efforts to raise the consciousness of humanity. So many of us talk the talk, but you have actually taken physical action and work on a daily basis to do just that. Not only do you work tirelessly, but you offer insight and awareness that cannot be found elsewhere. A simple thank you is insufficient praise but it is all that I have to offer at the moment. There are very few people on this planet who can say that their work is paradigm shifting. You are the exception to the rule. I am truly humbled by your efforts.

[Fiberglut]

Wade, having just finished your essay on Mother Theresa I must wonder aloud, is everything promulgated by the MSM a lie? It seems that the true saints of the world are the victims of suppression, imprisonment, torture and death while those labeled as saints are nothing more than self promoting psychopath's who push the agenda of the elite to a large extent. After all, the elite are largely Luciferian, and the world they encourage us to self create is nothing more. Perhaps theses statements are too harsh and overreaching to be considered doctrine, but I do think there is more than a hint of truth in such a message.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Thanks for the kind words, Fiberglut. Ah, some would call me crazy, and maybe they are right.

Seriously, if Bill and friends were not running interference for me, Avalon would be a troll-fest, like ATS is. I do what I can, but I can only reach people who have already been awakened somehow, and there are not many of them walking Earth, proportionally. Yes, Mother Teresa's image was fraudulent, as was Padre Serra's, etc. I have an essay on the mainstream media, and it is indeed evil, and those at the top definitely know what they are doing, but I find the structural aspects far more interesting than the conspiratorial ones, and they are far more important, too. Yes, those at the top are evil-minded and are going to have challenging afterlives, but the lion's share of the responsibility goes to the masses. Neither conspiracists nor structuralists like to admit it, however, as they both like blaming the elite. That is how victims think, and thinking like creators is the only way out of the mess that I know of, and creators create with love. Godzilla stepped on me, more than once, but I wish him no harm. I wish him obsolescence.

Best,

Wade

[Fiberglut]

Wade, I too offer heartfelt thanks to Bill Ryan for introducing you to us. With respect to the system, I agree that to the extent we participate, we all share part of the blame. We tend to go along to get along, having been conditioned by what I like to call the Billy Budd phenomenon, a process whereby the moral individual who takes a stand is often sacrificed to the system by his fellow man in a process utilizing cognitive dissonance as a mechanism to keep the status quo in place

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Fiberglut:

Yes, indeed, making examples out of the disobedient and "disruptive" has been an elite game since the first elites. When The Inquisition had people burned at the stake, it was a societal "lesson" being played out.

Best,

Wade

[Fiberglut]

Wade, just curious...what is your take on the holographic universe concept? Have you researched the topic at all?

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Fiberglut:

Heck, the idea of the ZPF is an offshoot of holographic universe theory, a la Bohm, etc. Talbot's book goes into that stuff, and takes in NDEs, OBEs, etc. The Infinite Spirit's message of "We are one" is classic holographic universe stuff. Yes, I am familiar with the concepts.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

OK, let's go deeper on this vaccination business. I guess the short answer would be to read my medical racket essay. My editor reached her personal paradigm shift while editing it. Near the end, it all began to make sense to her, and she saw how it dovetailed with my adventures in the energy racket. When pals read it, probably the most common response is to be speechless and overwhelmed when they are finished.

There are two tracks to follow, really. One is the paradigmatic sense that is part of the essay's arc, of what a catastrophe all "medicine" is that is based on the male-based, warfare-and-intervention-based paradigm. It is also a dark pather's wet dream, to turn what should be healing into lucrative warfare. The guys at the top are really little more than war profiteers, and have vested interest that everybody keeps playing, like the house in a casino. I have even seen "skeptics" say that medical science is not science at all, but something akin to voodoo, and when the editor of Lancet recently stated that up to half of scientific research is bogus (and it affects medical "science" more than any other), it only confirmed what people like me have known for far too long.

The other track is the data and theory that points to a different paradigm of medicine, which is more concerned with true prevention than intervention, which seeks to keep bodies stay healthy, not "cure" disease. That is where you need to get into the details a bit. My vaccination posts are going to try to straddle both approaches, and in the end, I am going to propose my own hypothesis, which is going to be along the lines of why civilizations collapse and mass extinctions have punctuated the journey of life on Earth. In the end, it is a story of energy and complexity, and how complex life works.

My big essay can be very helpful in drawing the picture, too, and I will refer to it from time to time. There were activities that we could call medicine in animals, such as fish that clean parasites off of others, such as the cleaner wrasse. The motivation for the "doctors" has been the subject of debate for a long time. Monkeys and apes have used their fingers to groom each other, which could be considered a form of preventive medicine, and is part of the array of animal activities called reciprocal altruism. But if an adult animal gets sick, other animals are not going to minister to it. Sick, crippled, or infirm animals don't live long, in general.

Down the human line, there seems to be some evidence of hunter-gatherer bands caring for crippled members, but it was likely rare before the rise of Homo sapiens. The hunter-gatherer lifestyle does not have much energy surplus. When an !Kung woman gives birth to twins, she must decide which infant to murder, as she cannot afford to carry two, and nobody else will step up. The tales of Inuit putting their elderly on ice floes is not too far off from reality, and it was always an economics issue. But when times were good, even hunter-gatherers could provide for the infirm, and some we could call medicine. Shamans, witch doctors, and the like dispensed early "medicine," and it was likely of dubious effectiveness.

With the rise of civilization came professions, but doctors came relatively late, with the first recorded physician in history being Imhotep, an Old Kingdom Egyptian. As women's status declined with the rise of civilization, from that golden age of early agriculture, professional physicians were almost always men. In early Greek medicine, women had relatively high mythological standing, which was later subverted, and the Garden of Eden story shows how women were denigrated in those times. Historically, women administered most medical care, usually to family members, but men ran professional medicine from the beginning. While women healers advocated herbs, nutrition, and sanitation, men physicians emphasized violent interventions, or as my pal Ralph Hovnanian said, "Torture as treatment." The male domination of medicine has had great impact on the path that medicine has followed over the millennia, to the effect that the male paradigm dominates, and in the West, warfare has been waged on anything outside of that paradigm. That is my medical racket essay in a nutshell, but we are going to go deeper, into the trajectory of Western medicine in its scientific phase.

If we leave aside the work of Classic Greeks, which was valuable, the first work of modern medical science is generally considered to be Vesalius's treatise on anatomy, which was published the same year as Copernicus's heretical book. For the next three centuries, medical science slowly progressed, and battlefields were where the techniques of emergency medicine were developed. In general, Western medicine is very good for treating traumatic injury, and very poor for treating chronic diseases.

The Enlightenment saw the rise of heroic medicine, and Founding Father Benjamin Rush was its most famous practitioner. Mercury, bloodletting, and other barbarities characterized that period of "medicine," which is still with us in important ways. But the 19th century is really when the paradigm that guides today's medicine was set, similar to how economics is still stuck in its classical and neoclassical phase.

I'll get into the 19th century with the next post.

Best,

Wade

[Krist]

"creators create with love. Godzilla stepped on me, more than once, but I wish him no harm. I wish him obsolescence."
Thank you for this very good example Wade.

[Wade Frazier]

Thanks Krist. I just hope that he does not step on me again.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

The 19th century was highly important on many fronts. In that century, Europe completed the task of conquering the world that Spain and Portugal began in the late 1400s. The USA stole temperate North America from the Indians and Mexico, and the 19th century began with the heaviest fighting amongst Europeans until World War I, with the Napoleonic Wars. The UK and France continued their imperial competition, as the British conquered and settled Australia (hunter-gatherers, in the Second Epoch, were much easier to conquer than peoples in the Third Epoch), conquered all of India, with catastrophic consequences, invaded China over the "free trade" of opium, and the French conquered Southeast Asia and got some of the South Pacific as an imperial consolation prize. The late 19th century saw the Scramble for Africa, Japan was forced into the international arena by the USA as it began conquering the Pacific, beginning with Hawaii and the Philippines, and Europe lived in a golden age called the Belle Époque in the late 19th century, while genocidal famines swept the conquered lands. The USA had its Gilded Age at the same time, as it swiftly became Earth's greatest industrial power, and the robber barons built their fortunes, led by John Rockefeller. By World War I, the only places on Earth of significance not ruled by Europeans and their descendants were Japan and the declining Ottoman Empire, which was being nibbled at by the imperial powers, such as in the Crimean War, which was history's first industrial war. But the British Navy converted from coal to oil in 1911, and the chief outcome of World War I was Europe dismembering the Ottoman Empire and turning it into controlled oil states, with European puppets on the thrones.

Napoleon jammed the Enlightenment down Germany's throat, Germany began playing catch-up with the rest of imperial Europe, and by the mid-19th century it became the heart of laboratory science. In the 20th century, before the rise of Hitler and Germany's Jewish brain drain, with Einstein being the most prominent refugee, German scientists won more than a third of the scientific Nobel Prizes. On the scientific front, the phlogiston theory of combustion was not overturned until Lavoisier's work in the 1780s, and it was not until Carnot's work in the 1820s that a theory was developed to explain how heat engines worked. The science of energy did not really begin to develop until the last half of the 19th century, and Maxwell's work was seminal, although in FE circles it is understood that errors in interpreting his work is what made ZPE "impossible" in orthodox circles, although in the Above Top Secret world, they know the right answer. Just the other day, I was listening to a clip about an encounter with the man who ran Lockheed's Skunkworks, and he mentioned the flaws in the equations. The Skunkworks is no longer where the good stuff is, and the basic rule is that if you have heard the name, it is no longer important in Godzilla's eyes.

Along with the great advances in the physical sciences, the 19th century was critical in the development of the biological sciences, and like how Maxwell's equations became a dead-end, with the flaws masked to this day in orthodoxy, mainstream biological sciences took turns that were arguably wrong, which it has yet recover from, similar to how economics has been in arrested development since the 19th century. Early in the 19th century, in the USA there was a reaction to the barbarities of heroic medicine, and herbal medicine made a comeback, and those days saw the rise of homeopathy, which I have seen work miraculously. Organized medicine began waging war against those practices with the rise of the American Medical Association. In the halls of science, investigation of life's mysteries rose to new levels, and just what life is and how it came to be were central questions. By the mid-19th century, the issue of spontaneous generation was central. The microscope was a key scientific tool, and its rise was about a generation behind the telescope.

The spontaneous generation debate was finally settled around the same time that the theory of evolution burst onto the scene, which marked its ascent with Darwin's Origin of Species, published in 1859. If you pick up a microbiology textbook today, in the first few pages, you will read that Louis Pasteur settled the spontaneous generation debate with his historic experiments in the 1860s. Nothing could be further from the truth, and in the 1970s a Harvard professor took a sabbatical and wrote a book that showed what a crock the textbook treatment is, but his effort did not make a dent in what is still presented to microbiology students on their first day of class. Pasteur was a theatrical self-promoter who sought riches and fame, and found it. He was a chemist, and seems to have earned his initial fame by discovering molecular chirality, although his path of discovery was murky and he politicized his account in his self-promotion, writing his mentor who guided him to his discovery completely out of his final account.

Pasteur originally subscribed to the spontaneous generation theory, but did a quick about face and performed some theatrical experiments in the Alps, and then theatrically announced his findings to a lay audience in 1864, and that was when he became famous and began hobnobbing with royalty and the wealthy.

In those days, not only did people such as Pasteur rather crudely grope toward precedence and fame and fortune, but scientific issues were often "settled" by contests. Even today's quest for Nobel Prizes mars scientific practice, but it was far cruder in the 19th century, when contests, with rigged juries, decided matters of science. It was in that environment that Pasteur prevailed with his "death knell" to spontaneous generation, and microbiology textbooks repeat the fairy tale to this day.

The fact is that by the time Pasteur appeared on the scene, spontaneous generation theory was already on its way out in France. Fermentation was not the only arena where spontaneous generation theory was being contested. The others were regarding parasites, which German scientists largely settled, and Darwin and Wallace's theory of evolution, especially Darwin's idea of descent with modification, leading to speciation.

But Pasteur rode his wave of popularity with lay audiences to becoming the towering figure that he is today, and vaccination is one of the chief outcomes of the Pasteurian paradigm and its germ theory of disease. Back in 1990, as I staggered out of my home town, radicalized (I have not been back, and wild horses could not drag me there), I began to perform the study that became my site today, and one of the early works that I obtained was Christopher Bird's book on Gaston Naessens, whom Bird called the Galileo of the microscope. Naessens developed one of those microscopes that attains resolutions that orthodox optical theory declares is impossible. Bird and I were fellow travelers, and I read all of his articles on Yull Brown in preparation for picking up Yull at the airport for Dennis's Philadelphia show, which to date is history's largest FE gathering. Bird was planning to write a biography on Yull before he died, and Yull described Bird to me as a "good man." Yull was not so good, as we eventually discovered, but Brown's Gas is very real, bizarre stuff, and I when I studied to speak about Brown's Gas at DOE hearings, Bird's work was part of my preparatory materials.

Bird's book was the first time that I heard of Rife's "impossible" microscope, and it was also the first time that I heard of Pasteur's contemporary, Antoine Béchamp. Rife and Naessens never heard of Béchamp, but their research, with their "impossible" microscopes, confirmed Bechamp's key finding, of pleomorphism in microorganisms. Bechamp's story takes some telling, and I will leave that for the next post.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

My family went "health nut" when I was 12, when my father embraced a live food diet, which reversed his artery disease, and I began a fasting regimen, which I still follow today, when I was 17 (and I exposed my early fasting and holistic health influence as a charlatan). Just as I began looking into Naessens, Rife, and Béchamp, I obtained Ralph Hovnanian's Medical Dark Ages, which was primarily written to document the hundreds of trials of dozens of alternative cancer treatments and their success rates. They virtually all had higher rates than orthodox treatment, usually far higher, and all of them have been outlawed in the USA, The Land of the Free. What really bowled me over, however, were Ralph's quotation collages, and my reproduction of some of the quotes is the oldest part of my public writings. In Medical Dark Ages I read of the fate of the booklet that saved my father's life: it was banned in the USA. I was already intimately familiar with aspects of the medical racket, but I was about to get far more educated on the issues, and it is really when looking at the foundations of the disciplines that you can see where they went awry, and in a world of scarcity, those with political-economic impact tend to become rackets, and the more impact, the more they become rackets.

Of all the areas of alternative science and medicine that I have looked into since 1990, the first one I poked into is still about the most impressive to me, and that story begins with Béchamp. Pasteur was a chemist without any biological training, but that was not the case with Béchamp, who was a pharmacist and a college chemistry, physics, pharmacology, and toxicology professor, with plenty of medical and biological training. In the mid-1850s, Béchamp performed epic experiments that definitively ruled out fermentation as a purely chemical or spontaneous process, and he correctly concluded that fermentation was the result of life processes. It spelled the death knell of the fermentation aspect of the spontaneous generation controversy, when Pasteur was still experimenting with soured milk and calling fermentation a spontaneous process.

Unlike Pasteur, Béchamp did not seek fame and fortune above all else, and Béchamp quietly submitted his findings to the French Academy of Sciences, which was where French scientific papers were typically submitted. Béchamp was correct, but his findings were not immediately hailed, as his colleagues doubted them, attributing them to experimental error or misinterpretation. History proved Béchamp right. Béchamp did not play the games that Pasteur did, and left that issue behind after solving the riddle, and he pursued some unexpected anomalies of his experiments. He found that fermentation could be induced by chalk, and the path of investigation led him to microzymas (literally "tiny ferments") and pleomorphic microbiology. He found that those tiny organisms that initiated fermentation, which were smaller than cells seemed to be, were alive (he had already established that fermentation was a life process) and seemed to be the building blocks of cells. It was a radical finding, totally at variance with the cell-based theories of life that continue to this day.

As with before, Béchamp quietly submitted his findings to the French Academy, but in 1861, three years after Béchamp had published his findings, Pasteur tried to take credit for Bechamp's discovery on fermentation in a meeting at the Sorbonne, after his theatrical experiments in the Alps the previous year. Béchamp had quietly watched the fumblings of that upstart Pasteur for years, but when Pasteur tried to take credit for Bechamp's discovery at that meeting, Béchamp finally had to speak up, and Pasteur quickly admitted his knowledge of Bechamp's work. In 1864, in front of a lay audience at the Sorbonne, Pasteur again repeated his "discovery" of germs in the air, once again plagiarizing Béchamp, and that was when his reputation was made, at least among the laity.

The scholar who showed Pasteur's behavior to be scandalous, as he vied for wealth and prestige, and showed how Pasteur even committed scientific fraud regarding his rabies vaccine in order to vanquish a rival, is the only mainstream writer on Pasteur who I saw even mention Béchamp, and he quickly dismissed claims of plagiarism, but he did not cite the proper book, IMO. He cited Ethel Douglas Hume's Béchamp or Pasteur, which he disparaged, and he further dismissed the "alternative" medicine's work that followed Bechamp's lead, but the book that he should have cited was Bechamp's, which makes me doubt that he read it. In the preface of his The Blood and Its Third Anatomical Element, Béchamp made the case very clearly of several instances when Pasteur plagiarized him. Pasteur became emboldened by his early successes in plagiarism, and his plagiarism in 1872, of a finding that Béchamp had made eight years previously, pushed Béchamp over the edge. In Bechamp's words:


"Now in 1872 M. Pasteur attempted his boldest plagiarism…This was too much: up to that time I treated the man with consideration; but now he must be properly exposed; first I, then Estor [Bechamp's colleague – Ed] and I together protested energetically."


Pasteur by that time had imperial patronage, nobody wanted to challenge Pasteur (except those he stole from), and that "Teflon effect" regarding Pasteur lasts to this day. Pasteur's experimental ethics foreshadowed Nazi Germany's, but he is treated today as a heroic icon of science and medicine. Pasteur's treatment in mainstream science texts reminds me of how Columbus is treated in mainstream history books, or Washington, as their undeniable crimes are swept under the carpet in favor of glory stories. The lies of omission and commission about Columbus and Washington could be considered "benign" in that they "only" served to bolster the in-group ideology known as American nationalism, but what seems to be the case with the treatment of Pasteur and the paradigm he founded may be far more pernicious: it arguably set microbiological science and the treatments derived from it on a false foundation.

The Pasteur/Béchamp issue could be seen as an innocuous footnote in the annals of science, and mainstream science almost completely ignores Bechamp's contributions, particularly in pleomorphic microbiology, but scientists in the 20th century kept stumbling into the same territory that Béchamp did, and they never heard of Béchamp, but two of them were also armed with "impossible" microscopes that should be used in every biological lab on Earth, but hardly anybody has even heard of them. That story will be told in the coming posts. This is all germane, IMO, to the vaccination issue.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

The issue of Pasteur's germ theory or Bechamp's pleomorphism directly impacts the issue of disease. The germ theory states that there are species of microorganisms that are born and die as the same species. Some species are healthy to the "host" organism, and others are parasitic and/or cause disease. Pleomorphic theory posits that those microorganisms that have different forms during their existence, appearing as one species one day, and another species the next, and even appearing as a totally different kind of organism at another time. If pleomorphic theory is valid, then targeting a "species" of microorganism for destruction would be folly, especially if it was calling one of its pleomorphic stages a "species" and not targeting its other stages. The microbes may be changing form due to their environment, their normal life processes, or other reasons.

This is not a new issue. One of the more intriguing apocryphal quotes is Pasteur admitting, on his deathbed, that his friend Claude Bernard had it right, in that the terrain is vastly more important than the microbe.

Ironically, the first independent confirmation of Béchamp's pleomorphic theory was made at the Pasteur Institute in 1914, where ultraviolet light changed a rod-shaped bacterium into a spheroid bacterium. Soon after that, a biologist was working on the issues of disease, and developed a microscope that was the world's most powerful.

Not only had Bechamp's work never received a fair hearing, but those who ended up reproducing his evidence and theories, either by following his lead or independently discovering it, have never received a fair hearing, either, and that may be the primary point of this series of vaccination posts. In these areas, the scientific and medical establishments have fallen far short of the ideal and have even acted the opposite, acting as inquisitors and hit men in rackets, not as truth seekers. A pal recently sent me a link to this article, which shows how Wikipedia is being used today for racketeering purposes. That is the tip of the iceberg. I use Wikipedia for topics that are the least likely to be affected by the racketeers and other ax-grinders, but warn my readers, and for areas such as alternative medicine and FE, Wikipedia is truly worse than worthless, and I will present some examples in this string of posts, beginning with the inventor of that microscope, Royal Rife.

IMO, there is no argument that Rife's microscopes really obtained the "impossible" resolutions claimed for them. Surviving micrographs prove it. But more than that, when he invented his microscope, electron microscopes had not yet been invented, and his microscopes were undisputedly the most powerful on Earth. His San Diego laboratory became a scientific Mecca, and newspapers such as the LA Times covered his microscope before the medical racketeers got involved, led by the greatest quack of the 20th century, Morris Fishbein, who was the face of Western medicine for a generation, but never practiced medicine a day in his life, failed anatomy at a dubious medical school, and his greatest claim to fame was designing "research" to make medical claims for cigarettes, and his greatest triumph was spearheading the campaign to promote an asbestos cigarette filter. Truth can be stranger than fiction.

Fishbein mounted a "War on Quacks" during his tenure as the face of modern medicine. Oh, the irony. He followed in the footsteps of his mentor, another quack who helped turn Western medicine into the racket it is today. Between them, they were the editors of the Journal of the American Medical Association for a half-century, as the Journal ran cigarette ads and committed other atrocities. The AMA was in bed with the cigarette companies until the 1980s, when the conflicts of interest were so blatant that the AMA became a laughingstock. Then cigarette companies used the Reagan administration to force open Asian nations to American tobacco companies, and they specifically targeted women and children to addict to their deadly product, and it worked. If you want to call that evil, you would be correct, IMO.

The medical racketeers are very active at Wikipedia, dominating all articles on alternative medicine (most such "editors" are likely on the payroll), as the medical establishment portrays all alternative practitioners as quacks, even if they were Nobel Laureates, such as Linus Pauling. I really don't want to deconstruct the lying Wikipedia articles, but if you look up Rife and Naessens, you will see that Rife' microscope is decried as "impossible" and the smear on Naessens does not even mention that he has a microscope. It would be like smearing Galileo's claims on Jupiter's moons without mentioning that he has a telescope that can see them, which is why Christopher Bird called Naessens the Galileo of the microscope. It is like calling Dennis a crook without mentioning that he put the world's best heating system on people's homes for free, but his assailants not only pulled that off, but made up other Big Lies in their presentations, even Dennis's so-called "allies" in the field, and I have had to hear incredibly naïve and irrational defenses of that criminal activity over the years, as everybody repeats the Big Lies, like they were under the spell of some Jedi mind trick. I will present the evidence, and readers can see for themselves how Wikipedia and the medical establishment treat the subjects.

Rife made several of his microscopes, and like Naessens, tried to make it so that his microscopes could be mass-produced cheaply, at a high enough resolution so that others could travel the same paths of discovery. Those men were the very opposite of some inventor playing the proprietary technology game. There are really two technical issues regarding both men's microscopes, and one can be difficult to understand, and the other is easy.

According to orthodox optical theory, the wavelength of visible light limits the resolution of optical microscopes. The wavelength of visible light is about 4,000 angstroms, which limits the resolution to about 2,000 angstroms, or 1,500 diameters. Naessens's microscope achieves a 150 angstrom resolution and gets 30,000 diameters. He tried to patent his microscope, but was defeated when he tried to explain how it achieved those resolutions using orthodox optical theory. Scientists don’t know what light is, and the wave/particle duality of light, electrons, and other subatomic "particles" still baffles them, and is the big "skeleton in the closet" of quantum physics. So, declaring the resolutions "impossible," when looking through the lens proves the "impossible," is idiotic, and the same problem that Galileo encountered. But as important as those resolutions is that they are achieved optically (AKA using photons). Electron microscopes achieve far smaller resolutions, even smaller than an angstrom, but electron bombardment from microscopes will kill what it looks at, so electron microscopes used in microbiology can only see snapshots of death. Rife's and Naessens's microscopes saw movies of life.

How hard it is to understand that movies of life are going to discover life processes in the subcellular milieu that snapshots of death cannot? You might be amazed at discussions that I have had with scientific establishment people who deny that simple logic. It was surreal at first, but I have now seen it many times on my journey, and it can be particularly bizarre when denying Washington's fraudulent plan to swindle the Indians out of their land, the USA's "Grand Finale" bombing of Japan as it was surrendering after being twice nuked, and other undeniable events. It is all there, in black and white, in the perpetrators' own hands and their handiwork is even sometimes celebrated, and still it is denied. Never underestimate the human ability to stay in denial, no matter what people's eyes tell them.

Rife would sit for 24-and-48-hour marathons at his microscope, which was how he stumbled onto similar pleomorphic dynamics that Béchamp described. Movies have been made of pleomorphic dynamics, and one scientist stated that with those movies, it is increasingly difficult for the medical establishment to ignore the findings, but it still does. This phenomenon is far from confined to science, and invalidates the conceit that scientists are somehow of the pure faith, of finding the truth where they can. It is like Chomsky and Herman's analysis of the media, in how the media can pretend that it is free and truth-seeking, but only within a very narrow range of parameters, and questioning their commercial/imperial assumptions is beyond the pale, even considered crazy, as they cannot see beyond the paradigm of their in-group ideology. One might say that they are incapable of it, which brings up the question of whether they are truly sentient beings. But it is more like they simply refuse to acknowledge what is so obvious so that they can have a somewhat clear conscience.

Rife's microscopes are nearly a century old, one was sold on EBay several years ago, and Naessens invented his microscope before I was born. It would be like the Wright brothers flying through the air for a century, not only ignored, but man-powered flight being called "impossible" the entire time. The Wright brothers were "only" ignored and ridiculed by the scientific establishment for five years, which was open-minded, compared to what Rife and Naessens endured.

Rife began building his microscopes before 1920, and kept improving them, and by the 1930s his microscopes were something to behold, and scientists beat a path to his door, to see for themselves. Rife was able to use his microscope to develop an electromagnetic treatment that cured disease, particularly cancer, and that is when Morris Fishbein and his cronies got involved. Back in those days, not only was Fishbein promoting the single greatest cause of cancer, cigarettes, but he tried to buy up and monopolize the cures. Who wants to argue that his right and left hands did not know of each other?

Fishbein began that practice with Harry Hoxsey, and when miracle cures began happening with Rife's treatment, Fishbein's cronies tried to buy into Rife's company, and when they were rebuffed, they bankrolled a lawsuit to steal the company, which bankrupted it and drove Rife to drink. I have been there. When you go through the American legal system's meat grinder, even when you "win," you lose. Fishbein and friends wiped out Rife, and when another man tried to resurrect the effort a decade later, he was kangarooed into prison, in California of all places. I have seen and heard of more racketeering activity in California than anyplace else on Earth, be it medical, energy, or what have you, and I doubt that it was only because of what I lived through. California is the heart of darkness, but gets promoted by Hollywood and the media as the place to be. One of Rife's prominent allies was Millbank Johnson, another MD who treated patients with Rife's device, and just as he was going to publish his findings, he died, of poisoning. What a coincidence. The same time that Johnson suddenly died in 1944, another scientist had an article published in Smithsonian, which is where those surviving micrographs come from. After that article was published, the scientist had his windshield shot in a failed hit attempt. Those events happened as Fishbein's "War on Quacks" was going into overdrive. It seems to have certainly been a "war."

Fishbein worked out the same town at the same time as Al Capone, and used similar tactics. I have seen Fishbein compared to Hitler, as far as all the death and suffering that he was responsible for, but I will be gentler and call him the Al Capone of modern medicine.

Aside from all the horror inflicted by Fishbein and friends onto pioneers whom they could not buy out (don't expect that any of that will make it into Wikipedia anytime soon ), what is fascinating about Rife's story is that he independently verified Bechamp's findings without ever hearing about him, and had the microscope to prove it. Rife documented that there were only about ten different classes of "germs," and that they changed form based on environmental conditions (see Barry Lynes's The Healing of Cancer, pp. 120-121.). Rife was one in a long line of scientists who independently confirmed Bechamp's findings, and they all had hell to pay. Wilhelm Reich died in prison after one of his experiments successfully treated cancer. The Fitzgerald Report, submitted to the U.S. Congress in those days, confirmed the racketeering of Western medicine in cancer treatment, and even Harry Truman called the AMA "just another mean trust."

Next up will be Naessens, and then I will get into vaccination. It is all closely related.

Time for chores.

Best,

Wade

[Fiberglut]

Wade, I'd be extremely interested in any commentary you might have on George Merkl.

Best,

Fiber