I agree with him.
The only thing that will get us out of this mess of a depression is something on the scale of WWII. But this time, it might not be a war.
Given the shambles that NASA finds itself, particularly in terms of manned spaceflight, something has to give.Towards the end of 2012, we're going to come to the 'realization' that there's something on Mars, that needs to be investigated. This is the idea introduced by Arthur C. Clarke in 2001: A Space Odyssey.
This is the extent to which 'Disclosure' will occur.
Let's watch and wait...
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Economics 101 - The Great Lie
This topic is for something I call The Great Lie.
I call it this, because everyone in America, and much of the Western World, has been lied to about some basic facts of life. These facts concern an idea fundamental to Western thought in the Modern Tradition, and that is the idea of progress.
Basically, we're all told things will get better with time. Science advances, society becomes more progressive, and the economy grows, so your standard of living will be better than that of your parents, and that your children will have it better than you did.
Without going into the philosophical arguments for this, I want to point out one simple fact: since the early Clinton Administration, we've been lied to about the growth of the economy.
Want to learn more about basic Economics?
John Williams' Shadow Government Statistics.
http://www.shadowstats.com/
Chris Martenson's Economic Crash Course.
http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse
* I pulled this is off the top of my head for the sake of example. People in the know, please don't shoot me over the specific value of this number.
I call it this, because everyone in America, and much of the Western World, has been lied to about some basic facts of life. These facts concern an idea fundamental to Western thought in the Modern Tradition, and that is the idea of progress.
Basically, we're all told things will get better with time. Science advances, society becomes more progressive, and the economy grows, so your standard of living will be better than that of your parents, and that your children will have it better than you did.
Without going into the philosophical arguments for this, I want to point out one simple fact: since the early Clinton Administration, we've been lied to about the growth of the economy.
 |
| Source: http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/gross-domestic-product-charts |
So, what does this graph show? Simply, it shows the old measure of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) in blue, vs. the new measure of GDP, in red. GDP is used to measure if the economy is growing or shrinking. Basically, the Clinton Admin changed the way GDP was measured, so that the economy looked better than it really was.
What does this mean for you? It means for the last 20 years or so, (look at the blue line) the economy has been declining, and in recession for almost all of the 21st Century. This decline was hidden during the 1990s. The 'average' of the red graph is almost a straight line, showing constant growth, while the 'average' of the blue line shows a steady decline. The red line starts to give up after 2000 and the average can't hide the decline anymore, while the blue line continues the steady decline into negative growth.
So, in practical terms, things have been getting worse. But living with the belief that things get better, many people have had to rely on credit cards and refinancing their homes in order to MAINTAIN a standard of living from 20 years ago!
Don't believe the lies! The mainsteam media wants you to believe that the bubble and housing crisis was purely the result of people being too excited, and greedy, and wanting more and more. Yes, this is true for some people, but many others were living at the same standard they always did, not realizing it was getting harder and harder to maintain that standard.
Why didn't they know? Because a bunch of economists decided to change the methodology of economic measures.
Want to see another one? Here's inflation.
 |
| Source: http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts |
What does this chart represent? It shows inflation, which is the change in prices over time. For example, something that cost $1.00 in 1990 now costs roughly $2.00.* Things get more expensive with time. Look at that graph! Using the old measure, (the blue line), inflation has been approaching 10% for the entire 21st Century.
What does this cart mean for you? Well, the Clinton Administration also changed the way inflation was measured. Before, they'd take a bunch of food, and things people typically need to live (called a basket of goods) and measure how much it cost. Then, each month, they'd compare the cost this month to the cost last month, and tell you how much more expensive things are. That's inflation. They were measuring changes in the cost of living.
But now, with changes in the methodology, they use several techniques to change the measured rate of inflation. I'll explain one of them here, called substitution.
In a free market, people choose how they spend their money. Economists believe that if something gets too expensive, you'll switch your buying habit and buy something else. So if butter gets too expensive, you'll buy margarine. If steak gets too expensive, you'll buy hamburger.
Well, this makes sense. It shows how people behave, and how much money they're spending, right?
WRONG! While it may reflect consumer behavior, it's no longer measuring the cost of LIVING, now it's measuring the cost of SURVIVING. Making substitutions of better quality foods for lower quality foods means you're just surviving. There's a big difference. They actually changed what they're measuring, but didn't tell you.
There are other things they do, but this is a big one because it's easy to see how you're being lied to!
As the story goes:
A little before the French Revolution, Marie Antoinette, the queen of France, was told that the peasants couldn't afford to buy bread, because of the heavy taxation.Well, The System is telling the American people is exactly the same: can't afford butter? Eat margarine instead.
She callously replied, "Well, let them eat cake."
Soon after, the French Revolution began.
Want to learn more about basic Economics?
John Williams' Shadow Government Statistics.
http://www.shadowstats.com/
Chris Martenson's Economic Crash Course.
http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse
* I pulled this is off the top of my head for the sake of example. People in the know, please don't shoot me over the specific value of this number.
Economics 101 - The Money Problem
There's a problem with money, and no, it's not the root of all evil.
Money is called a fiat currency, because it's used in place of something of value.
In the old days, people traded goods. Sugar for meat, or horseshoes for people shoes. You made something, and you traded away your surplus for other goods you wanted.
Well, if you grew corn, and the cobbler didn't like corn, you were out of luck...you couldn't get shoes. So, you'd have to trade corn with someone who had what the cobbler wanted, so you could trade that with the cobbler instead.
So, we switched to gold and silver, since everyone agreed that they had value. But gold gets heavy, so after awhile, we switched to pieces of paper that represent the gold or silver. 1 piece of paper can mean 1 cob of corn, or one shoe, or whatever. This is the purpose of money...to make trading easier than trading the things themselves.
But in our modern world, the money has been taken control of in two fundamentally corrupt ways. Compound interest-bearing debt, and the creation of money from nothing. Let me explain:
Let's imagine that we're going to create a new society. Let's make our society 10 people, and each person needs 10 pieces of paper to swap with other people so we can do trade.
But in this society, we can't just make the paper. We're forced to BORROW the paper from a central bank. Where do they get it? The same place anyone would. They print it FROM THIN AIR. Now, we have to go into debt to get that paper, and pay the debt back, with interest.
So we borrow $100 for our society, at 10% interest, and we'll pay it back next year. But when it comes time to pay it back, we owe the bank $110! That's more money than exists in our entire society! We pay back the original $100, but still owe $10 to the bank. AND our society has no money again! So we borrow $110 this time, and give $10 to the bank (for what we owed them) and keep the $100 for our society to use this year.
At the end of the second year, we owe the bank the original $110 (remember, we gave them back $10 instantly and kept $100 for our society), plus $11 in interest for the loan. So we have even more debt! Now we owe the bank $121 for the $100 in our society!
But of course, we only have $100, so we need to borrow the extra $21, just to pay them back. And we need $100 again for this year. It's not hard to see how the Central Bank can come to own and rule a country very quickly using this system.
So, there are two equally important, corrupted aspects of money supply:
Eliminate Interest-Incurring Currency
Earning interest for pieces of paper that say IOU is just plain WRONG. It's the ultimate business, and totally unethical. Government needs to take control of the issuance of money, and make it free for us to use (i.e. there's no cost associated with creating it). So money is a public service provided by the government, and no profit is made from the creation of money. No interest-bearing money creation means no ponzi scheme, and no built-in collapse.
Responsible Control of the Supply of Currency
The amount of money in system effects how well the system can do business. Too much money, and prices go up, and bubbles form. Too little money, and recession kicks in, because nobody can get the money (IOUs) they need to engage in trade. If it gets really bad, they start to barter, but that's the whole reason money was created in the first place...to make barter unnecessary. So the amount of money is very important to make sure the economy runs smoothly. Central Banks create boom/bust cycles by controlling the amount of money in the system.
Many people believe in the gold standard because they believe nobody can be trusted with creating money from nothing. It's too great a power. If you can print money from thin air, then you can do that to buy or control anything. By tying money to gold, you have some 'objective' way of controlling how much money is created. This is a separate debate.
One last thing about money in the US:
The US dollar is the "Reserve Currency". Basically this means that the US forced the world to use its money to buy and sell oil. This means the Federal Reserve can print lots of money to fight wars, pacify its citizens, and buy anything it wants, without making the money worthless. Countries are forced to buy US dollars to buy oil, or other goods. This creates additional demand, and keeps the US dollar stronger than it would otherwise be.
Want to learn more about Money and Economics?
The Money Fix - A Documentary on Monetary Reform.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/money-fix/
Chris Martenson's Economic Crash Course.
http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse
Money is called a fiat currency, because it's used in place of something of value.
In the old days, people traded goods. Sugar for meat, or horseshoes for people shoes. You made something, and you traded away your surplus for other goods you wanted.
Well, if you grew corn, and the cobbler didn't like corn, you were out of luck...you couldn't get shoes. So, you'd have to trade corn with someone who had what the cobbler wanted, so you could trade that with the cobbler instead.
So, we switched to gold and silver, since everyone agreed that they had value. But gold gets heavy, so after awhile, we switched to pieces of paper that represent the gold or silver. 1 piece of paper can mean 1 cob of corn, or one shoe, or whatever. This is the purpose of money...to make trading easier than trading the things themselves.
But in our modern world, the money has been taken control of in two fundamentally corrupt ways. Compound interest-bearing debt, and the creation of money from nothing. Let me explain:
Let's imagine that we're going to create a new society. Let's make our society 10 people, and each person needs 10 pieces of paper to swap with other people so we can do trade.
But in this society, we can't just make the paper. We're forced to BORROW the paper from a central bank. Where do they get it? The same place anyone would. They print it FROM THIN AIR. Now, we have to go into debt to get that paper, and pay the debt back, with interest.
So we borrow $100 for our society, at 10% interest, and we'll pay it back next year. But when it comes time to pay it back, we owe the bank $110! That's more money than exists in our entire society! We pay back the original $100, but still owe $10 to the bank. AND our society has no money again! So we borrow $110 this time, and give $10 to the bank (for what we owed them) and keep the $100 for our society to use this year.
At the end of the second year, we owe the bank the original $110 (remember, we gave them back $10 instantly and kept $100 for our society), plus $11 in interest for the loan. So we have even more debt! Now we owe the bank $121 for the $100 in our society!
But of course, we only have $100, so we need to borrow the extra $21, just to pay them back. And we need $100 again for this year. It's not hard to see how the Central Bank can come to own and rule a country very quickly using this system.
So, there are two equally important, corrupted aspects of money supply:
Eliminate Interest-Incurring Currency
Earning interest for pieces of paper that say IOU is just plain WRONG. It's the ultimate business, and totally unethical. Government needs to take control of the issuance of money, and make it free for us to use (i.e. there's no cost associated with creating it). So money is a public service provided by the government, and no profit is made from the creation of money. No interest-bearing money creation means no ponzi scheme, and no built-in collapse.
Responsible Control of the Supply of Currency
The amount of money in system effects how well the system can do business. Too much money, and prices go up, and bubbles form. Too little money, and recession kicks in, because nobody can get the money (IOUs) they need to engage in trade. If it gets really bad, they start to barter, but that's the whole reason money was created in the first place...to make barter unnecessary. So the amount of money is very important to make sure the economy runs smoothly. Central Banks create boom/bust cycles by controlling the amount of money in the system.
Many people believe in the gold standard because they believe nobody can be trusted with creating money from nothing. It's too great a power. If you can print money from thin air, then you can do that to buy or control anything. By tying money to gold, you have some 'objective' way of controlling how much money is created. This is a separate debate.
One last thing about money in the US:
The US dollar is the "Reserve Currency". Basically this means that the US forced the world to use its money to buy and sell oil. This means the Federal Reserve can print lots of money to fight wars, pacify its citizens, and buy anything it wants, without making the money worthless. Countries are forced to buy US dollars to buy oil, or other goods. This creates additional demand, and keeps the US dollar stronger than it would otherwise be.
Want to learn more about Money and Economics?
The Money Fix - A Documentary on Monetary Reform.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/money-fix/
Chris Martenson's Economic Crash Course.
http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse
Monday, July 04, 2011
Some Ideas from Bruce Lipton
Need to jot these down, and this seems as good a place as any:
Scientific materialism has offered four tenets in the dominant basal paradigm that, until recently, have been accepted and regarded as indisputable scientific fact:
Scientific materialism has offered four tenets in the dominant basal paradigm that, until recently, have been accepted and regarded as indisputable scientific fact:
- Only Matter Matters--the physical world we see is all there is.
- Survival of the Fittest--Nature favors the strongest individuals, and the Law of the jungle is the only real natural law.
- It's in Your Genes--we are victims of our biological inheritance and the best we can hope is that science finds ways to compensate for our inherent flaws and frailties.
- Evolution is Random--life is basically random and purposeless, and we got here pretty much the same way as an infinet number of monkeys pecking on an infinite number of typewriters over an infinite amount of time might produce the works of Shakespeare.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Really Awake?
Conspiracy theorists unite!
Well, not really. More of the same: a video that's over an hour long, with people talking about how 'awake' they are:
"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!"
Unfortunately, what I see here are a bunch of people talking about how they're not stupid, and know what's going on (whether it's conspiracy theory, truth, or something else). Fight the New World Order or whatever....but what I'm seeing is just more division between us and them, awake and asleep, the good and the bad. I still argue that the number one mechanism at work in the world is the attempt to keep people isolated and afraid.
If fear and love really are only two emotions in the universe, the 'awake' seem to be functioning mostly on fear. The truth of the plot of one-world government, financial collapse, Nirbiru, or depopulation though Agenda 21, none of this really matters. These are all externalities. The only thing that matters is your response to these things.
Take anthropogenic global warming. If you believe in it, you react with fear. If you don't believe in it, you react in fear of a conspiracy or agenda. In both cases, those who are in power get the desired response: fear and division.
If you're living in fear, and feel divided between us and them, then you can't focus on loving compassion, and bringing the right energy to this world.
Because in the end, the only thing that can save us is love....
Anyways, if you're interested, here's the video:
Oh yes, I almost forgot. One of the most famous of all statements in philosophy was made by Descartes:
What he meant by this was that the ONLY thing he could EVER KNOW to be unquestionably true, was NOT that he was awake, but that his consciousness exists. He knew it exists because it's there to question (i.e. think about) his own existence. "I think, therefore I am."
What I'm arguing is that I CAN'T BE SURE I'M AWAKE. In fact, I can NEVER KNOW if I'm awake. I can only know that I'm questioning.
Socrates said it a different way:
Well, not really. More of the same: a video that's over an hour long, with people talking about how 'awake' they are:
"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!"
Unfortunately, what I see here are a bunch of people talking about how they're not stupid, and know what's going on (whether it's conspiracy theory, truth, or something else). Fight the New World Order or whatever....but what I'm seeing is just more division between us and them, awake and asleep, the good and the bad. I still argue that the number one mechanism at work in the world is the attempt to keep people isolated and afraid.
If fear and love really are only two emotions in the universe, the 'awake' seem to be functioning mostly on fear. The truth of the plot of one-world government, financial collapse, Nirbiru, or depopulation though Agenda 21, none of this really matters. These are all externalities. The only thing that matters is your response to these things.
Take anthropogenic global warming. If you believe in it, you react with fear. If you don't believe in it, you react in fear of a conspiracy or agenda. In both cases, those who are in power get the desired response: fear and division.
If you're living in fear, and feel divided between us and them, then you can't focus on loving compassion, and bringing the right energy to this world.
Because in the end, the only thing that can save us is love....
Anyways, if you're interested, here's the video:
Oh yes, I almost forgot. One of the most famous of all statements in philosophy was made by Descartes:
I think, therefore I am.
What he meant by this was that the ONLY thing he could EVER KNOW to be unquestionably true, was NOT that he was awake, but that his consciousness exists. He knew it exists because it's there to question (i.e. think about) his own existence. "I think, therefore I am."
What I'm arguing is that I CAN'T BE SURE I'M AWAKE. In fact, I can NEVER KNOW if I'm awake. I can only know that I'm questioning.
Socrates said it a different way:
All I know is that I do not know.
So before I go around telling everyone I'm awake because I believe an alternate theory of something, I should spend a little more time thinking about what being awake really is.
And if you don't understand what I mean, think of it this way: if Keanu Reeves broke out of the matrix, how could he know he was in 'real life'? What if the matrix was just running in a second matrix? And what if that matrix was in a third matrix? How many matrixes (no, I'm not going to write matrices) are there? It can go on forever....So, you have to come to the conclusion that you'll NEVER know if you're in the matrix or not. But you CAN know that you're aware of that possibility, and that's all you can really know!
Ultimately, you're left with the conclusion that everything is just really in your own mind, and that nothing external can really be identified as true, or real. When you understand this, you can start to focus, not on the things outside of you, but the things within you....
And this is the only hope of escape from the matrix: that no matter what conditions are imposed on you from external 'reality', you can remain true in your core understanding of the inherent 'falseness' of these external things, and instead focus on the internal.
And, if you can get that far, the only truly important 'internal' thing you can look towards is loving compassion. Learn to feel love and compassion (positive emotions) for all things external, regardless of their external effect on you, and you have found God.
And this is the only hope of escape from the matrix: that no matter what conditions are imposed on you from external 'reality', you can remain true in your core understanding of the inherent 'falseness' of these external things, and instead focus on the internal.
And, if you can get that far, the only truly important 'internal' thing you can look towards is loving compassion. Learn to feel love and compassion (positive emotions) for all things external, regardless of their external effect on you, and you have found God.
Wednesday, June 08, 2011
Bodyworlds and Meat Bags
Yesterday was my birthday, so Danielle and I went to Bodyworlds & The Cycle of Life, which is showing in Taipei this summer. I've always wanted to go to Bodyworlds, so this was my chance!
It was pretty darn good, I must say, although sometimes you forget you're looking at actual people, and not just models. There was a bust of a man with all his skin and everything still intact, and that was pretty real. He was bisected down his center line so you could examine his brain, mouth and nasal cavity. Also, I'm not sure the exhibit did as good a job as it could have, at really presenting the concept of "Cycle of Life". Sure, we saw plastinated fetuses, and diseased body parts (if the 'healthy' and 'smoker' lung comparisons don't get you to quit smoking, nothing will), but I didn't get a strong sense of continuity, as much as an anatomy lesson.
Particularly, I would have liked more details on the specifics of the specimens (or plastinates, as they're called) like age, gender, and cause of death or other pathology. I'm not interested in "personal tragedies", but the specific pathology of the individual specimen. One plastinate, in particular, was extremely interesting. From what I could tell, this person had an artificial hip, knee joint, shoulder, a grafted jaw, and two steel reinforced bones. I would have really like to have known more details. Was this blunt trauma (a car accident) or part of a degenerative process? Another platinate was claimed to have arthritis, but I had difficulty seeing the specifics.
Regardless, these are small complaints. Overall, the exhibit is excellent, and I would suggest it to anyone interested in the human body, biology, etc.
However, the exhibit really got me thinking about our physical body, and the nature of a spirit, or consciousness. I find it pretty hard to believe that these 'chunks of stuff' are all there is to being human. I just can't believe in the reductionist model that says everything a person ever is, can be fully encompassed and explained by the meat bags (as Bender puts it) I saw yesterday.
It also got me thinking a bit more about abortion. When you see actual fetuses (a.k.a. human beings) in various stages of development, you have to wonder about the ethics of deciding to terminate that life. Congressman Ron Paul is against abortion. He's also an OBGYN who has delivered over 4000 babies. When he speaks of watching a doctor pull a fetus out of a woman, and put it in a bucket to be disposed of...well, that speaks volumes to me.
NEways, as Osho so wonderfully points out, there's a difference between knowledge (i.e. having a moral stance based on imperative or some intellectual idea) and knowing (i.e. experiencing something in the reality of it). In this case, Ron Paul knows something which I suspect I'll never know, and I defer to him.
It was pretty darn good, I must say, although sometimes you forget you're looking at actual people, and not just models. There was a bust of a man with all his skin and everything still intact, and that was pretty real. He was bisected down his center line so you could examine his brain, mouth and nasal cavity. Also, I'm not sure the exhibit did as good a job as it could have, at really presenting the concept of "Cycle of Life". Sure, we saw plastinated fetuses, and diseased body parts (if the 'healthy' and 'smoker' lung comparisons don't get you to quit smoking, nothing will), but I didn't get a strong sense of continuity, as much as an anatomy lesson.
Particularly, I would have liked more details on the specifics of the specimens (or plastinates, as they're called) like age, gender, and cause of death or other pathology. I'm not interested in "personal tragedies", but the specific pathology of the individual specimen. One plastinate, in particular, was extremely interesting. From what I could tell, this person had an artificial hip, knee joint, shoulder, a grafted jaw, and two steel reinforced bones. I would have really like to have known more details. Was this blunt trauma (a car accident) or part of a degenerative process? Another platinate was claimed to have arthritis, but I had difficulty seeing the specifics.
Regardless, these are small complaints. Overall, the exhibit is excellent, and I would suggest it to anyone interested in the human body, biology, etc.
However, the exhibit really got me thinking about our physical body, and the nature of a spirit, or consciousness. I find it pretty hard to believe that these 'chunks of stuff' are all there is to being human. I just can't believe in the reductionist model that says everything a person ever is, can be fully encompassed and explained by the meat bags (as Bender puts it) I saw yesterday.
It also got me thinking a bit more about abortion. When you see actual fetuses (a.k.a. human beings) in various stages of development, you have to wonder about the ethics of deciding to terminate that life. Congressman Ron Paul is against abortion. He's also an OBGYN who has delivered over 4000 babies. When he speaks of watching a doctor pull a fetus out of a woman, and put it in a bucket to be disposed of...well, that speaks volumes to me.
NEways, as Osho so wonderfully points out, there's a difference between knowledge (i.e. having a moral stance based on imperative or some intellectual idea) and knowing (i.e. experiencing something in the reality of it). In this case, Ron Paul knows something which I suspect I'll never know, and I defer to him.
Monday, June 06, 2011
The Use of Depleted Uranium Ammo
Danielle and I watched a fantastic but disturbing documentary the other night. Beyond Treason is about Gulf-War syndrome, and the US Military's willingness to medically experiment on its own troops (with or without their knowledge or consent). Clinton's Executive Order 13139 gives the President the ability to force-vaccinate military personnel, without their consent. Hundreds of National Reserve pilots have already resigned (i.e. given up the chance to fly totally cool fighter jets) rather than be vaccinated.
Surprisingly, there are more US casualties from the Gulf War than from the Vietnam War. Like with so many other things, the change methodology used to measure causalities between the Vietnam and Gulf Wars has hidden this fact from the public.
But far more disturbing is the US Military's continued use of depleted uranium (DU) ammunition which makes troops sick, causes all sorts of birth defects, and leaves a land contaminated with nuclear reside for all eternity. So, the use of DU ammo will create environmental toxicity that cannot be cleaned up and will last forever.
Why would any army ever use such weapons, which slowly kill the people who use them and the people who live where the weapons are used? They render the land where they're used uninhabitable. This seems completely insane to me? What's the point?
Surprisingly, there are more US casualties from the Gulf War than from the Vietnam War. Like with so many other things, the change methodology used to measure causalities between the Vietnam and Gulf Wars has hidden this fact from the public.
But far more disturbing is the US Military's continued use of depleted uranium (DU) ammunition which makes troops sick, causes all sorts of birth defects, and leaves a land contaminated with nuclear reside for all eternity. So, the use of DU ammo will create environmental toxicity that cannot be cleaned up and will last forever.
Why would any army ever use such weapons, which slowly kill the people who use them and the people who live where the weapons are used? They render the land where they're used uninhabitable. This seems completely insane to me? What's the point?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)