Wade Frazier

Hi:

The Global Warming “Debate”

Back in 1997, when I began the full-time study that began my second site, I read Julian Simon’s magnum opus, The State of Humanity, after reading an article on him in Wired magazine (which inspired this book, which was predictably lauded by The Wall Street Journal and The Economist), spent months studying the work of his authors, and wrote my first essay of my current effort (and lost the essay due to serial hardware failures). It was an educational experience, to read the work of scientists and scholars who had sold their souls. Simon died not long after I wrote that essay, and likely reaped what he sewed. After he died, he was replaced at Cato Institute by Steve Milloy, who was literally a tobacco company front man who coined the term “Junk Science” to attack research that showed the harm that second-hand smoke caused.

In The State of Humanity were the works of authors who are notorious today as Global Warming “skeptics,” such as Fred Singer (who also attacked second-hand smoke evidence, calling it “Junk Science”) and Patrick Michaels. Michaels was unabashedly on the oil companies’ payroll and getting most of his money from hydrocarbon interests. Michaels works at Cato Institute, too.

Michaels’s article attacked the recent temperature record, and his methods of attack became a staple amongst Global Warming “skeptics.” While not denying that carbon dioxide levels had skyrocketed during the industrial era, Michaels suggested that where global temperatures were taken were flawed, as in near cities and other “heat islands,” which provided a faulty temperature record. He suggested that sulfur dioxide pollution may actually be saving the Northern Hemisphere from warming, stated that the Northern Hemisphere had not warmed at all, and further stated that the only warming unequivocally measured was nighttime warming, and that was a good thing. So, no Global Warming, and what may have happened was beneficial.

Michaels’s work can be seen as a framework that other Global Warming “skeptics” have used. In William Ruddiman’s Plows, Plagues, and Petroleum, he recommended reading Michaels’s co-authored The Satanic Gases as an example of the “value systems” that people bring to the Global Warming issue, in Ruddiman’s chapter on the shameful politicking that currently dominates climate studies. Al Gore, AKA Mr. Environment, went on the road promoting his Global Warming presentation, and he presented ice age data and carbon dioxide levels, and that was misleading, too. The advancing and retreating ice sheets are due to Milankovitch cycles, and the related carbon dioxide fluctuations are an effect, not a cause. All of that Sturm und Drang served to cloud the real issues related to humanity’s epic burning of Earth’s hydrocarbon deposits.

The current Icehouse Earth phase began 35 million years ago, after 15 million years of cooling off from a 200-million-year Greenhouse Earth phase, which was caused by high carbon dioxide levels from volcanism. As with the other Icehouse Earth phases of the past several hundred million years, this one began with ice forming at Antarctica, and nobody is disputing that Earth’s declining carbon dioxide levels are the ultimate cause. There are different hypotheses for the decline, and reduced volcanism is surely a primary variable, but another may be increased carbon burial. One hypothesis has been used for past Icehouse Earth phases, which is mountain-building. Mountain-building exposes rock that then weathers, which sequesters carbon, and India slamming into Asia created the Himalayas, which exposed vast amounts of rock, which has been weathering for about 50 million years, which coincides with the beginning of Earth’s cooling into this Icehouse Earth phase. That is the important dynamic, not annual temperature fluctuations.

As I have written, climate science is young, and today’s skyrocketing carbon dioxide levels are unprecedented in Earth’s history. How it is going to exactly play out, year-by-year, nobody knows, but what everybody can agree on is that Earth will get warmer with that carbon dioxide blanket growing. All but one of the first 15 years of the 21^st century were warmer than any year measured before the year 2000. Those kinds of trends are meaningful, especially as carbon dioxide levels skyrocket.

To dive into the minutia of the recent temperature record is to get lost in the trees and fail to see the forest. While trying to tease the signal from the noise is good work, oscillations and other short-term and regional variables have been seized on and debated, when they are really pretty meaningless. It is the longer-term and larger-scale changes that should be focused on, but the issue has become a huge political football, such as when an American politician brought a snowball into Congress one day, as “proof” that there is not Global Warming, and the man chaired the Chair of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, in one of many instances of the fox managing the henhouse.

Global Warming deniers seize on this and that, like lawyers trying to form a shadow of doubt in the jury’s mind, and the corporate-owned media gives them the floor, as if their interest-conflicted drivel really means anything, so that it can be back to business as usual.

What climate scientists all agree on is that their science is young, and exactly how the warming will play out will be complex, with regional variation, El Niños, La Niñas, and other events creating short-term variation, but that the trend will inexorably become warmer. What the Global Warming models are unanimous about is that the poles will feel it first and the most, as they have during previous phases. Ice forms at the poles in the Icehouse phases, and forests are near the poles in the Greenhouse phases. And just as those models predict, we are seeing vast and startling changes in the ice at the poles. Worldwide, all glaciers have experienced pronounced retreats, and I can see it in my home state. It is very dramatic. People do not need to descend into temperature-reading minutia to witness the trends. That is what has climate scientists terrified, for good reason. Humanity is not toying so much with what happens year-to-year, but we are threatening to turn Earth from an Icehouse phase to a Greenhouse phase in mere centuries. The last transition from an Icehouse to Greenhouse was accompanied by the greatest mass extinction in the eon of complex life, and we don’t want to find out what might happen this time.

Another thing that most Global Warming deniers explicitly state is the economic cost of bringing down greenhouse gas emissions. I have witnessed this in related areas, as their last line of defense to business as usual, to emphasize the immense cost of changing our ways, to encourage us to do nothing. As George Carlin once said, the most powerful force in the universe is inertia. So, those Global Warming deniers are singing a song that, quite frankly, most people want to hear, of “all is well,” and even if it wasn’t, then there is really nothing that we can do about it anyway, so “Move along, there is nothing to see here, or really, nothing that you want to see.”

In summary, there is a huge faux debate about niggling issues, which are designed to distract from the big ones. I was not going to name him while he is still alive, but one of the Global Warming “skeptics” referred to in this post was Brian O’s former colleague, and Brian was angry and saddened that his colleague sold his soul to the oil companies. I just riffled through Brian’s books and found where Brian did name him in his last book, on page 93 of The Energy Solution Revolution, and Brian’s writing deserves to be reproduced here:


“…during autumn 2007, I was invited to appear on the Kevin Smith radio talk show, in which for the first hour, Mr. Smith grilled me that, according to a recent neoconservative think tank Hudson Institute Report, human-induced global warming and climate change are a hoax! During our interview, we could never get beyond being mired in such arguments. We did not even begin to embrace my solutions, or be able to imagine the world in a post-hydrocarbon age.

“One of the most vocal signatories to this appalling “Open Letter” to UN Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon was S. Fred Singer, an atmospheric physicist who had been one of my mentors during my graduate school years in the 1960s and a collaborator on various scientific projects in the 1970s and 1980s. Over the past two decades, Singer took a curiously abrupt turn to right-wing politics. Moving to Washington, he soon joined neoconservative and big-business lobby groups such as the Heritage Foundation, the Global Climate Coalition, and the billionaire Reverend Sun Moon’s scientific advisory panel. Before climate became an issue, about twenty years ago [late 1980s – Ed.], he invited me into Houston and London first-class. (This may have been another example of a carrot dangled before me to “join the club” rather than reject it.) On these occasions, we could really determine where establishment science would go; in service to those who run the world. Like many of his climate-skeptic colleagues, Singer has sold out in promoting his “Moon-to-Moon” lunacy.”


So, it was Fred Singer. In the next paragraph, Brian wrote about a conference to reduce carbon dioxide emissions:


“So what came of the long-awaited Bali meeting? It became a circus in which all nations opposed the U.S.-dominated refusal to support even the modest Kyoto protocols limiting carbon dioxide emissions. The United States, with four percent of the world’s population, emits a quarter of the world’s greenhouse gases, by far the highest per-capita rate of any nation in the world. It was no surprise that the U.S. representative to the Bali climate talks was booed off the stage for American inaction.”


What makes Brian’s work, or mine, surreal is that the solution that makes all those issues and many other go away, almost overnight, is ignored by all sides. Not long before he died, Brian wrote of trying to get his foot in the door at those “progressive” “philanthropist” gatherings, of people such as Richard Branson, and he was always shut out, with free energy entirely off the table, while the “solutions” bandied about were the same tame “solutions” that Brian promoted in the 1970s, before he really woke up.

Next on my list is Peak Oil.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Here is the next subject that I want to cover…

The atmospheric effect of carbon dioxide, of trapping infrared radiation and warming Earth’s atmosphere, is denied by no credible atmospheric scientist that I am aware of. Even the Global Warming “skeptics,” prostitutes that the most prominent are, don’t deny that. I have yet to see a paleoclimate study that denied the leading role that carbon dioxide has played in global surface temperatures, including its hothouse and icehouse phases. But you can find all manner of scientifically illiterate “skeptic” on the Internet making arguments against the role that carbon dioxide plays, but they are usually the equivalent of people making the case for a Flat Earth. Few professional scientists, and no professional climate scientists, even the most contrarian amongst them, are going to deny those very basic issues of physics.

The next issue that I want to cover is the carbon cycle and how carbon dioxide levels have seesawed over the eons, and how carbon starvation is likely going to mean the end of complex life on Earth. For a couple of centuries, a philosophy known as uniformitarianism dominated Earth sciences, which assumes that the only processes that were ever on Earth are the current ones. Today’s scientists have largely rejected uniformitarianism and try to imagine what processes may have existed millions or billions of years ago, with the understanding that they may have been very different from what exists today. They develop their hypotheses and then hunt for evidence that either confirms or falsifies them, and hunting for falsifying evidence is more important than hunting for confirmatory evidence. Only hypotheses that have survived attempts to falsify them graduate to the status of theories.

The carbon cycle is how carbon moves through Earth, including its crust, oceans, atmosphere, and ecosystems. At its most basic level, carbon dioxide is added to Earth’s surface environments via volcanism and is removed from the atmosphere by weathering and the burial of organism remains. Until the rise of complex life, organic burial was largely limited to sandstone, which actually comprises most organic carbon burial. It has been estimated that there is 26,000 times more organic carbon buried in Earth’s crust than exists in today’s ecosystems. This graphic shows the comings and goings of the carbon cycle. Again, no credible scientists dispute those numbers or the dynamics depicted in that picture.

The seesawing of atmospheric carbon dioxide over the eons was due to imbalances in those dynamics. The most dramatic additions have historically come from volcanism. Volcanoes spew out carbon dioxide, among other gases, and the spewing of volcanic carbon dioxide is responsible for ending the previous Icehouse Earth phase. The volcanism was related to the formation and breakup of a supercontinent, Pangaea in that instance. The volcanism that ended the Karoo Ice Age kept on happening, and kept Earth’s surface warm for 200 million years, during the entire reign of dinosaurs.

But the first thing that that volcanic warming did was contribute to the greatest mass extinction in the eon of complex life. Ironically, Charles Darwin made uniformitarian philosophy the heart of his evolutionary theory, and that philosophy made the idea of a mass extinction taboo, and for more than a century, any Western scientist who advocated mass extinctions was risking his career. It was not until the 1970s that the taboo began lifting, and then it was spectacularly blown away by the asteroid impact hypothesis for the dinosaurs’ demise, proposed by a team of scientists led by a Nobel laureate working outside of his field of expertise. Mainstream science has regularly been shaken up by outsiders, and the leading edge of science today is happening between the disciplines, as interdisciplinary and comprehensive works abound, and I used them extensively in the studies that led to my big essay.

The asteroid impact hypothesis is the only known one that can be a single-cause for previous mass extinctions. The others had multiple causes that made Earth hostile to complex life, but volcanism is being proposed as an ancillary cause of the dinosaurs’ extinction, as there was another big volcanic event just before the dinosaurs died off. I’ll follow that controversy with interest, but I think that volcanism is not going to come close to explaining the end-Cretaceous extinction. The asteroid impact was the ultimate cause that dwarfed all else.

To say that the asteroid impact hypothesis is the only single-cause is not quite accurate, as there has been a new one: humanity. Humans have been causing a mass extinction for 50,000 years, beginning with driving Australia’s megafauna to extinction after they migrated from Africa. Nothing else of note has contributed to that extinction. Ironically, as a cadre of corrupted scientists argues against climate change as a way to deflect responsibility from humanity, another scientific clique argues for climate change as a way to deflect responsibility from humanity. Everybody likes defending their in-groups.

The radioactivity of uranium and other metals causes the heat within Earth, and as the radioactivity has dwindled, tectonic plate movements have slowed down, volcanism is dwindling, and long-term carbon starvation will eventually spell the end of complex life on Earth. Current estimates have it happening about a billion years from now, at around the same time that Earth begins losing its ocean because of our ever-brightening Sun. But there has been a blip in the decline, which began about 8,000 years ago, when humans began deforesting Earth to make way for agriculture and civilization.

That blip is represented by those red numbers in that carbon cycle picture, which represent human impacts to the carbon cycle. The most important of humanity’s carbon cycle impacts has been mining and burning Earth’s hydrocarbon deposits. In future posts, I will go into depth on what formed those hydrocarbon deposits, but there is no dispute that mining and burning hydrocarbon deposits have raised the carbon dioxide level of the atmosphere. This is another area where there is no credible dissent.

In fact, if a bunch of college kids were given a science project, to come up with a way to quickly increase Earth’s carbon dioxide levels, the winning entry would be to mine and burn all of Earth’s hydrocarbon deposits (or use nuclear bombs to try to open up holes in the crust to stimulate volcanism, but humanity might not survive that science project. ). But humanity might not survive the winning entry, either. Global Warming by itself won’t spell humanity’s demise, but the dislocations that it is already causing could lead to wars that do see humanity wipe itself out. A five-foot rise in Earth’s oceans, which could easily happen within the next century, would displace hundreds of millions of people. Where are those displaced people going to live? The same climate change that causes sea level rises will also cause epic droughts and floods, which will disrupt humanity’s food supplies. What will happen when there are hundreds of millions of homeless and hungry people? My generation will likely get “lucky” and die before we find out the answers to those questions, but today’s children might not be so lucky.

And humanity largely has its head in the sand on those issues. Polymaths such as Peter Ward write about what may be coming, but his is a voice in the wilderness. The next post will be on the Global Warming “debate,” which was fomented by a bunch of hack scientists working for the oil companies and the corporate media, which helped create the illusion of a debate where one does not really exist. TV shows such as Fox News, which people close to me cannot get enough of, attack the idea of Global Warming all day long, parading “experts” to make their case. I had a college-educated Fox News aficionado inform me just the other day that there is no evidence of human-induced climate change. People like that abound in the USA, which is a fairly short step from believing that Earth is flat.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

A few odds and ends this Saturday morning. I provided a DNA test sample yesterday, to see what my genetic ancestry is. My family name can be traced back to Scotland in the 1730s, and that line is probably all white, and my mother’s side is almost certainly all Scandinavian. But my paternal grandmother’s side is where my redneck roots come from, and almost certainly some Indian blood. My wife comes from Spanish “settler” stock, going back to the 1500s, and like my family did, there was complete denial that my wife’s family ever interbred with those “subhuman” Indians (they claim “noble” descent from both Columbus and Coronado – I have their family tree that shows it), but when my wife got her DNA test back not long ago, she had nearly 10% Indian DNA, and I am going to predict that I have about 8% Indian DNA. My wife also had some sub-Saharan African DNA, probably via slave stock somewhere along the way, and even some Ashkenazy Jew DNA, which surprised me. Some Sephardic Jew DNA would not have been surprising for Spanish immigrants, but how Ashkenazy Jew DNA got in there is a mystery. If I have some sub-Saharan African DNA, that will be a rich irony, coming from a family line as racist and bigoted as mine was, which was the true American Way.

Back in 1987, when I was Dennis’s partner, I began fielding the thousands of reactions to the idea of FE that 20 years later led to my layers of the FE onion framework. Fear reactions were always the most plentiful, which included all of the denial reactions, and they took on a wide spectrum of expression. Without exception those fearful reactions projected the idea of scarcity onto a situation of abundance, which is nonsensical, but since all that humanity has ever known is scarcity, such fears are understandable, although they reflect a stunted perspective. To be fair, no humans have ever been able to imagine the next Epoch before it arrived, and it will be the case with about 99.99% of humanity this time, too.

A variation of the fear response is conjuring up scenarios of economic collapse, strip-mining Earth, and wars when FE is introduced. How nonsensical. FE will be like giving everybody a billion dollars, and rich people don’t fight each other over the scraps. Some want a fully-fleshed out plan for an easy transition to the Fifth Epoch, as if any of that means anything before FE is delivered. It doesn’t. In last year’s update to my big essay, I wrote little section on my atom bomb studies. Literally the day after nuking Hiroshima, people began speculating on the potential of nuclear energy, and it became quite the political football for several years. Of course, nuclear fission is a poor way to obtain energy, and it eventually became obvious what a pipedream fission was. The irony is that FE technology likely existed back then in commercial form, but Godzilla kept the lid on it, as he has done to this day.

Sparky Sweet feared a stock market collapse if his FE gizmo was introduced, but Sparky was firmly stuck in the current paradigm, as you can see when viewing a video of his gizmo working, as “proprietary technology” flashes across the screen several times, which announced that Sparky had no idea of what he really had ahold of. That is typical, so there is no reason to get on Sparky’s case. I have never met an altruistic inventor, much less an FE inventor, and I have never heard of an FE inventor with the goods willing to give it away. They are all mired in scarcity, just like everybody else.

All battle plans for enlisting the world’s governments, corporations, and “progressive” organizations in some FE transition plan are hopelessly naïve. There is only going to be denial, derision, and fear until FE is delivered. Only then are people’s eyes going to begin to open, and not before. It is putting the cart way before the horse to get all wrapped up in transition plans and fearful scenarios of abundance. When people envision collapsing stock markets and how energy-revenue dependent organizations and nations will react to FE’s reality, those are just more fear reactions. When FE is delivered to the world, even the stupidest among us will instantly realize that it is game over for the Fourth Epoch and we will quickly achieve Type 1 status. Only if humanity is filled with idiots, from top to bottom, will we fail at safely implementing FE, and I have a higher opinion of humanity than that. I advocate those peacekeeping grandmothers, and the vast wealth that FE will generate will be rather easily distributed. I have noticed that people are so addicted to scarcity they really can’t imagine an effort like mine, in which the most lucrative technology in world history is going to be given to humanity. There will be blueprints, machines, and processes given away so that FE devices will quickly be mass produced, for free, globally, for all of humanity. Capitalism, nations, cities, exchange professions, and all other scarcity-based institutions and ways of life will quickly fade to oblivion, and nobody will miss them, just like nobody, other than dark pathers, pine for the good old days of agrarian economies, potentates, and slavery.

Only megalomaniacs think that they are going to become the Bill Gates of FE, but there are plenty of them, or FE tinkerers who announce that they are the Messiah, etc. The Epochal significance of FE will quickly become apparent to all, and my choir idea is about forming a high-level conversation and framework that will instantly become dominant, but until FE is delivered, don’t expect anybody to listen, especially your social circles, the rich and powerful, the “progressives,” etc. Godzilla is keenly aware of what FE means: the end of his entire ballgame. That is why he has been so avid in suppressing it. So-called “progressive” organizations have been hearing about FE since the 1970s, and without exception, they treat FE as the enemy, as mired in scarcity as they are. It is really hard to avoid at least hearing of the FE idea.

Before FE is delivered, all attempts to enlist the world’s institutions in some kind of FE transition are pointless, but once FE is delivered, they will all pay rapt attention. But not before then. That is just how it has always been, and there is no reason to think that it will be different this time.

To Serg’s idea of social groups of no more than ten people, I doubt it. I think that social organization will look nothing like what we see today. The Internet probably hints at it, as people from across the world can instantly come together for common interests, but once scarcity ends, fear will no longer be the primary operating principle behind human interactions, as they form in-groups. All of humanity will quickly be seen as one big in-group. People will be able to meet in real time, in the flesh, almost instantly. I expect that most people are going to still live on Earth, but nothing like what you see today. When cities, nations, nuclear families and the like become obsolete, what takes their place will be infinitely more enlightened and largely unrecognizable to people today, and if they even glimpse them today, they react with fear. Again, almost nobody has any idea what living in a world beyond scarcity and fear will look like, will feel like, etc., even though some visions of it are pretty straightforward and should be easy to understand in their rudiments. I don’t treat Roads’s visitation as fiction; I know accomplished psychonauts who have made similar visits.

Now my busy weekend begins, as I host my family for Easter (Sarducci’s favorite holiday ), and I may not make many posts until Monday.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

On to scientific literacy and the issues around Global Warming and Peak Oil. This may turn into a series of posts, and I’ll begin with the carbon dioxide issue.

The carbon dioxide issue

We need to go back a ways, to where carbon comes from. Astronomers and cosmologists are unanimous that all elements heavier than hydrogen were formed by the fusion processes in stars. After hydrogen and helium, carbon and oxygen are considered to be the two most common elements in the universe. In fact, of the most important elements to life on Earth, only phosphorus, calcium, and potassium are not represented in the top ten. Life on Earth made do with what was available.

Earth is in what is called the “habitable zone,” which means a planet’s orientation to a star that makes life as we know it possible, and possessing liquid water is one of those requirements, which requires an atmosphere. Earth’s atmosphere is a vanishingly tiny proportion of Earth’s mass, but without it, life as we know it would not exist on Earth.

Earth’s atmosphere is 99% comprised of diatomic oxygen and nitrogen, and the oxygen only exists because of oxygenic photosynthesis. That oxygen also created the ozone layer. Other than those gases, nearly the entirety of the remaining atmosphere is argon, which is a noble gas that won’t react with anything. Water also evaporates and precipitates, and is responsible for most of the greenhouse effect on Earth. I wrote a recent post on why water and carbon dioxide absorb infrared radiation while oxygen and nitrogen do not. Atmospheric molecules of more than two atoms can absorb infrared radiation, and that produces the greenhouse effect that prevented Earth from being a big ball of ice.

While water is ten times as plentiful in Earth’s atmosphere as carbon dioxide is, carbon dioxide is more important than water for the greenhouse function, as its boiling point is hundreds of degrees lower, so it does not precipitate out of the atmosphere like water continually does.

Almost the entire range of electromagnetic radiation is absorbed by some gas in Earth’s atmosphere. The ability to absorb electromagnetic radiation is dependent on the energy level of the radiation and the energy “niches” in the gaseous molecules. It is just like quantum mechanics in that only certain energy levels are possible in the electron configurations, so only certain frequencies of light (AKA wavelength) are absorbed by certain gases.

Fortunately, oxygen and nitrogen are transparent to visible light, otherwise, it would have never reached Earth’s surface and powered photosynthesis, which is where virtually all energy in all life on Earth originates from. Even chemosynthetic organisms rely on solar energy.

Greenhouse gases absorb infrared radiation, slowing down Earth’s energy loss to space, and it is like putting on a blanket when you sleep, as it reduces your body’s rate of heat loss.

Paleologists have been able to piece together the broad strokes of Earth’s development from when it formed about 4.6 billion years ago, soon after the Sun did. The Sun is obviously the greatest variable on Earth’s temperature, but the Sun is in a class of stars that burn very steadily for ten billion years or so. Our Sun is in its middle age, and will steadily burn for several billion more years before it becomes a red giant. If Earth stays in its present orbit, it will be obliterated by then, and life as we know it on Earth will come to an end long before that, mainly from the continual loss of carbon in the carbon cycle (as plate tectonics slows and volcanism wanes, which is the primary source of carbon dioxide being added to the atmosphere) and Earth will eventually lose its ocean. The beginning of the loss of Earth’s ocean is currently estimated to be a billion years or so away, as the Sun keeps getting brighter.

Carbon dioxide concentrations were once many times higher than today’s, and Earth was much warmer. During the eon of complex life, the hothouse and icehouse periods on Earth are thought to rest entirely on the atmosphere’s carbon dioxide content. Everything else is of minor significance.

The ideas in this post are not denied by any credible scientists that I am aware of. The evidence is very robust, and I am not aware of any experimental data that calls it into question. There can be vociferous debate on many issues, such as oxygen’s role in the rise of complex life, but nobody denies the importance of oxygen to complex life today or the role of greenhouse gases in Earth’s climate and carbon dioxide’s central importance. There is really no scientific debate of note on those issues. The sporadic role of methane has been investigated and debated, but no climate scientist that I am aware of will seriously question the leading role of carbon dioxide in Earth’s greenhouse effect.

I have noted that some scientists have sold their souls to the hydrocarbon lobby to cloud the issue, but even they do not dispute the central role that carbon dioxide has always played in Earth’s climate. There really aren’t any other contenders, and it is a pretty simple issue.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

These recent Global Warming and Peak Oil posts have been stirring some things up in various forums that I post to, and touches on subjects that are important for what I am attempting. I feel the need to address them. A key aspect of my effort, which I have devoted the rest of my lifetime’s “spare” time to, and it won’t succeed without it, is to have my little band comprised of people who are scientifically literate. Together, we can help usher in the biggest event in the human journey. But we won’t be able to help if we can’t keep our eye on the ball, get distracted by the daily circus, get sucked in by the blizzard of disinformation that exists on important topics, grind the egocentric axes that feed us, etc.

It wasn’t until early 2003, more than a quarter-century since that voice in my head suggested that I trade my science studies for business studies, and 15 years since my free energy journey radicalized me, that I was introduced to Bucky Fuller’s work and the paradigm that I had been groping toward since my cradle finally crystallized. Ever since, my work has been consciously comprehensive in nature. I resumed my science studies in earnest about then, and starting in 2007, my studies were performed with the specific intention of writing what became my big essay. I’ll not write its like again in this lifetime, and again this year, I will update it for the past year’s studies, similar to how college textbooks are updated. I expect the pace of updates to slow down before long, as the essay gets into the shape that I originally envisioned for it. It is damned close to it today, but there is still some important work ahead of me.

I first published my fluoridation essay in 1998, as a prelude to my medical racket essay. I began studying for that essay way back in 1990, when I was introduced to Rife’s and Naessens’s work, many years after I had already witnessed health miracles that orthodox medicine declared “impossible” and bore the brunt of the medical racket at work. The people who have been steamrollered by the medical racket the worst have generally been MDs and biological scientists, not untrained fringe types.

I am anything but Mr. Orthodox, and scientific literacy does not mean drinking the Kool-Aid of materialism, but understanding the processes and findings of mainstream science, for starters. What needs to come with that is sharpening one’s tools of perception and assessment, so that we are not just watching the salvos of scientific controversy fly, like watching a tennis match, but developing our own informed opinions on those matters, not taking some authority’s word for it or blindly embracing some fringe voices because they are fringe, which I see all the time. There is a mountain of chaff for every kernel of wheat on the fringes, and I am constantly besieged by people who shovel the chaff at me, unable to distinguish wheat from chaff as they leave their critical faculties at the door, if they ever had them in the first place.

I am the biographer of one of the leading scientific fringe voices, who left the orthodox fold after his mystical awakening and could no longer drink the Kool-Aid of materialism, which ruined him as a mainstream scientist, which is typical of my relatively few fellow travelers. But as fringe as he was, he still believed in the process of science, and it is a worthy ideal, just like a truly free press is a worthy ideal, even though the reality is like Orwell and Huxley depicted. Rupert Sheldrake is a wonderful challenger of materialism, which is the religion of this Epoch, and the “skeptics” are all over him, getting him banned from venues where his voice is sorely needed. But Sheldrake also believes in the scientific process, even as he disputes what its findings mean, as he performs his own experiments that falsify materialism. But what Brian and Sheldrake did, or Ralph Moss, is a far cry from what I see dominating the fringes, as either paranoid conspiracist or naïve New Age material abounds. From many years of immersion in both milieus, I came to understand what their virtues and limitations were, and above all, they rarely take a scientific or scholarly approach, but glom onto any shiny object that they come upon that appeals to their predilections, and they end up deluded and often dangerously so. It is really sad to witness, and I have seen many go off the deep end.

Let there be no mistaking my stance: I know that technologies exist on the planet today that turn the physics textbooks into doorstops, and Ed Mitchell’s perspective was close to mine on the UFO/ET issue, and Brian’s life was shortened by his snooping into the UFO issue. So, again, I am far from Mr. Orthodox, but the fringes are filled with what amounts to gossip, and on scientific matters, one can always find a contrarian scientist to challenge the consensus, which can be a noble role to fill, but hypotheses are not evidence, much less proof, and the scientifically illiterate lap that stuff up when it appeals to their beliefs, which is a worthless way to digest scientific material.

Back in the late 1990s, when I had my email address on my site and took on all comers, before I decided that it was not worth my time anymore to do that, I was besieged by fringe claimants, and one body of work I eventually called “hillbilly science,” as it kind of resembled science and scholarship in superficial ways, but the punchline was always along the lines of how the Bible was literally true (a highly dubious notion) or supported other beliefs and folk tales that poor agrarian American white people grew up with. There are even Biblical fundamentalists in those circles who believe that Earth is flat and think that scientific evidence supports it. Never mind that any teenagers with a little gumption can disprove that notion to themselves, there are people, in today’s USA mind you, not some medieval village, who believe that Earth is flat. I heard about a Flat-Earther who is a pal of one of my pupils, and my pupil told me of that Flat-Earther in tones of amazement and resignation.

This post is a prelude to scientific literacy and the Global Warming and Peak Oil issues. Being scientifically literate on those issues does not mean blindly drinking orthodoxy’s Kool-Aid, but understanding the theories, the evidence, and the battles of the hypotheses that abound in such highly charged areas. It also means understanding how and when the national security state, corporate interests, and even Godzilla muddy the waters, and in ways that mainstream scientists are generally naïve to. There needs to be worldliness, too.

Scientific literacy includes understanding what areas are disputed and why, what areas have almost no dispute because the evidence is robust, and where the evidence is more equivocal and the hypotheses more speculative. It takes some work and mental horsepower to become scientifically literate on those issues, but people do not need genius-level IQs to achieve that literacy, but just a love of the truth and a willingness to do the work.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

A reader presented me with some “hacked” climate data, and I analyzed it, for what it is worth, but am going to use it as a spring board for a few posts. I have attached the data, rendered in graphic form, and have compared it to a similar graph on Wikipedia.

The Wikipedia graphic is at the top, and below it is the graphic for the Northern Hemisphere, and the bottom is for all of Earth. I can’t vouch for the data’s authenticity or accuracy, but I am going to make some important points regarding it.

To compare the Wikipedia chart to the “hacked” data, you need to look only at the last half of the Wikipedia data, as it spans 2,000 years, while the hacked data only spans 1,000 years.

The year 1000 CE was the height of the Medieval Warm Period, and the Wikipedia value for the temperature “anomaly” was about -0.2. The depth of the Little Ice Age was about 1600 CE, and the anomaly was about -0.7, or a half degree Celsius between the height of the good times of the Medieval Warm Period and the hellish depths of the Little Ice Age, which is about one degree Fahrenheit. One degree! One degree meant the difference between troubadours plying their trade through Europe during an era of (relative) peace and plenty and the Hell on Earth of the Thirty Years’ War.

Agrarian civilizations simply had no margin for error, as their energy surplus was so thin. If you look at that hacked data, it does not look quite right, but the biggest downward spike in the Northern Hemisphere’s record was in the 1400s, and from top to bottom was about 0.6 degrees. So, the variations for Wikipedia and the hacked data are about the same range. The Wikipedia graph merges several results from different studies, and is going be more meaningful than that hacked data, which gives a misleading level of precision, for starters, going out to four places past the decimal point.

Actual temperature readings are only a couple of centuries old, and true global mean temperatures from direct instrument readings is only decades old, and the “steep” climb from 1800, of about one degree Celsius, or two degrees Fahrenheit, is largely missing in the hacked data. There is no argument that my lifetime is the warmest period in many centuries, and maybe since the last interglacial 100,000 years ago. Every year but one in this century is warmer than any year before 2000 ever recorded.

Not only do the climate models predict it, but the fossil record is very clear that the difference between icehouse and hothouse phases is felt most dramatically at the poles, with forests growing at the poles in hothouse periods and the poles buried under ice in icehouse phases, especially the South Pole, which has had Antarctica at it nearly continuously for 500 million years. I have been literally watching glaciers vanish in my beloved mountains, and my late uncle was amazed at what he witnessed in his lifetime.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Other than some fringe types, there is no debate among scientists that the remains of marine organisms formed Earth’s oil deposits. Until the eon of complex life, there was not much that could make the oil deposits, so the Ediacaran Period produced the first oil deposits of note. The process of oil formation is well known, and it was the “lucky” marine organisms that became today’s oil deposits. Most of today’s oil deposits were laid down during the reign of dinosaurs, during anoxic events along the shores of the Tethys Ocean. For hundreds of millions of years, there was a constant tectonic plate movement that kept creating oceans and then squeezing them out of existence. Before there was the Tethys, there was the Proto-Tethys and the Paleo-Tethys, and each in their turn was squeezed out of existence, as their ancient shores were jammed under the southern rim of Asia. That jamming created sediments that are miles deep, and that is the source of not only Middle East oil, but Texas oil, African, South American, and the like were all created by the same process, as ancient anoxic shores were subducted. The final remains of the Tethys are the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean, Black, Caspian, and Aral seas. There is an “oil window” from about one-to-three miles deep, and if ocean sediments from anoxic events get shoved into that window, then what we call conventional oil can form.

Even after it forms, however, most conventional oil eventually leaks back out into the oceans, and only relatively rare ocean sediments are formed and get trapped in specific kinds of geological formations, just “waiting” to be discovered by oil companies.

Before the science of plate tectonics was developed, beginning in the 1960s, some scientists, Stalinist scientists in particular, theorized that oil was not formed from ocean sediments, but by some primordial processes in the mantle. It was championed in the USA by Thomas Gold, but like so many hypotheses, it has fallen by the wayside as more evidence was amassed. Plate tectonic theory not only helped kill the abiotic oil formation hypothesis, but also the “pole-shift” hypothesis by Charles Hapgood also fell by the wayside, even though Albert Einstein endorsed Hapgood’s work. Einstein died before the rise of plate tectonics, and he surely would not endorse Hapgood’s work if he was alive today, nor would he take Velikovsky’s ideas seriously for a moment. There is a phenomenon called True Polar Wander, but Hapgood’s hypothesis had pole shifts happening a thousand times faster, which no scientist takes seriously today, although plenty of non-scientific fringe types still promote such nonsense.

Most sediments from anoxic events never entered and stayed in the oil window. Going below the oil window completely destroyed the oil and turned it into natural gas, while sediments that never got that deep remained kerogen, which is what oil starts as.

Conventional oil is a particular “grade” of hydrocarbon that exists in formations that can be drilled by the methods developed since the 1850s, when the first commercial well was drilled. Capitalism went into overdrive with oil, as John Rockefeller soon took over the industry by controlling the refining arm of it, and became Earth’s richest human who soon became a “philanthropist.” The world has paid dearly for the “philanthropy” of the rich. The Rockefellers’ malign influence can be felt to this day, in various areas such as medicine and economic theory, and they helped wipe out my companies.

I heard Tom Bearden talk about it in 1998, and I agree, that the oil companies themselves are not behind the organized suppression of FE, although they have plenty to answer for. Corporations are too short-sighted for those kinds of activities, and they would be too easy to uncover, so the suppression originates from higher levels of the game. Fossils, atmospheric data, geological studies, astronomy, and the like are not easily subjected to the kinds of organized suppression that abounds regarding FE, alternative medicine, and related areas. All that the forces of organized suppression have to do is neutralize relatively few people and their disruptive theories and technologies, which are not easily reproduced or implemented, which is typical with such fledgling efforts. If they can be strangled in their cradles, then it is relatively easy to keep such upstarts at bay, and the Big Boys know very well what game they are playing.

But that conspiratorial activity is a far cry from what petroleum geologists and scientists do. It would not be easy to classify excavations, geological findings, and so on. The national security state has covered up plenty of nefarious activity, but they can’t go classify all of the world’s fossil beds, geological formations, astronomical data, etc. But all manner of fringe talking head spins grand yarns with little evidence, and the scientifically illiterate New Age/conspiracist crowd laps it up. There is a boatload of that stuff out there, and one example is the idea that Antarctica was ice free in historical times, based on highly flimsy interpretations of old maps and the like. Hapgood started it, and that invalid hypothesis still has life amongst the fringe crowd.

The evidence is overwhelming that Antarctica began developing its ice sheet nearly 50 million years ago, as Earth transitioned from hothouse to icehouse conditions, and by 35 million years ago, it had healthy ice sheets that have mostly grown since then. It probably shrank a little during the Miocene, but it has been very healthy for the past ten million years, and in the past three, it has been largely as it is today and even larger during the intervals when ice sheets covered the northern hemisphere. The idea that Antarctica was ice-free a few hundred years ago is not taken seriously by any professional scientists.

The abiotic oil idea is nearly in the same dustbin today, although at least there you can find professional scientists, generally with conflicts of interest, advocating the abiotic oil idea, although no professional geologists take them seriously. There is simply far too much evidence that anoxic marine sediments, acted on by very particular geological processes, formed today’s oil deposits, especially with the rise of molecular biology, so that scientists can now construct, step-by-step, how the remains of dead marine organisms were “refined” into what we call oil today.

The Canadian tar sands are not made of conventional oil at all, but kerogen that was never pushed into the “oil window,” so has not been “distilled” into oil. Hence, the processing of those tar sands that occurs today is very energy intensive, to do the work that geological processes did to conventional oil. As I previously mentioned, the energy return on investment (“EROI”) on East Texas oil in the 1920s was more than 100-to-1, in the Golden Age of easy oil. Its EROI was so high because it was close to the surface. The further you have to drill, the lower your EROI. Also, those Hollywood movies of people happily being covered in oil gushers that made them rich were real events, but always short-lived. After that initial pressure on a tapped oil formation was bled off, then it was the task of sucking that oil out of the ground, not just letting it flow into waiting storage.

Sucking that oil out takes energy, and the further you have to pull it up, the more energy it takes. Also, the oil is not just in some kind of pool but is impregnated into the geological strata, in the pores of the rocks. When only about a third of the oil in an oilfield is extracted, the remaining oil is so energy intensive to extract that the EROI drops to one, meaning that it takes as much energy to extract the oil as the oil provides, making the exercise useless.

Also, there are grades of oil. Because sulfur is an essential element in biology (which gives egg yolks their yellow color, and hydrogen sulfide is what makes rotten eggs smell so bad, and human digestive gas), it remains in petroleum. Oil with less than 0.42% sulfur is called “sweet crude,” and is the good stuff that oil companies covet. Oil with greater than 0.42% is called “sour crude.” Sour crude takes more energy to refine, to remove that sulfur. If cars ran on sour crude without the sulfur removed, the skies would be filled with sulfuric acid clouds. As it is, air pollution from burning oil is bad enough, without adding a bunch more sulfur to it.

This is a very brief summary how oil is formed, extracted, and delivered to your gas tank. Next will be the concept of Peak Oil, and then the dregs-scraping activity known today as the fracking boom, which came to a screeching halt in the USA recently, as oil prices collapsed, and Canada’s tar sands operations have suffered similarly.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

This will be a short one, kicking off the Peak Oil and related discussion. The concept of energy return on investment (“EROI”) will be an important one for these topics. The idea of return on investment in financial terms is a pale reflection of the real thing, which is EROI. The financial economy is imaginary and does not deal with reality very well. The financial economy will disappear in the Fifth Epoch, along with money and other primitive constructs.

I’ll cut right to the chase on Peak Oil. Only about a third of the oil in an oilfield is extracted. The rest stays in the ground. The reason is that the EROI falls to around one for that remaining oil, which means that it takes as much energy to get it out of the ground as the energy that that oil provides, which makes the exercise pointless. In East Texas nearly a century ago, the EROI from those oil fields was more than 100-to-1, in the Golden Age of Oil. The EROI of oil extraction around the world has fallen ever since. In 1990, global oil EROI was about 30, is less than 20 today, and may fall to 10 in the next several years. Conventional oil will be entirely depleted long before this century ends.

The pioneers of the EROI concept estimate that an EROI of around 10-to-1 is the minimum required for running a civilization, and we are coming close to it already, at least for oil. The Peak Oil idea is that peak production for an oil well is reached when about half of the exploitable oil is extracted. Then the curve of extraction declines down to where the method of extraction cannot get any more. What makes EROI go down is that the oil near the surface does not take much energy to extract, and the deeper you go, the EROI declines. When converted to money terms, it can mean extraction cost per barrel. The only reason why the USA has a military presence in the Middle East today is that it has the world’s last easy oil, with a cost of extraction of a few dollars per barrel. Iraq had the world’s largest oil reserves, with the highest EROI, that was not subjected to corporate control (along with Iran). That is why the USA murdered millions of people there, and any other “reason” provided is pure obfuscation and distraction.

The so-called fracking boom in the USA was all about oil with an EROI of around three (or direct costs of extraction of $40 per barrel or so, and fully amortized costs of up to $80 per barrel, which is why those fracking operations are all going bankrupt now, with $40-per-barrel oil). It is not conventional oil, which is what the father of the Peak Oil idea, M. King Hubbert, wrote about, and is the low-quality dregs that all declining societies scrape on their way to oblivion, as they run out of energy. Canada’s tar sands are more of the same: an environmental catastrophe in the making with an EROI of less than five.

Time for work.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

One last note before I get to Peak Oil. On Global Warming, humanity’s playing with Earth’s carbon dioxide levels is not toying with a proximate cause of our current ice age, but the ultimate cause of the past 35 million-year Icehouse Earth phase. We are risking turning Earth from an Icehouse Earth to a Greenhouse Earth, and doing it in a few centuries. Nothing remotely like it has ever happened before on Earth, and the last transition from an Icehouse Earth to a Greenhouse Earth resulted in the greatest extinction of complex life ever. That is what terrifies climate scientists and biologists. We are engaging in an experiment with the only inhabitable planet for light years in every direction, have our toes over the edge of the abyss, and almost nobody knows or cares, as the horizon of their awareness rarely extends past their immediate self-interest. Shudder. Of course, it does not have to be this way.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

On to Global Warming. In the 1860s, John Tyndall performed the first experiments with gases and what photons they absorbed. Water and carbon dioxide were strong absorbers of light’s infrared frequency. Different gases absorb different frequencies due to the energy needed for their electrons to jump into higher orbits, also called quantum leaping, and for complex molecules, it can be the energy needed to reach a new state of vibration or rotation. Earth’s atmosphere is largely transparent to visible light, radio waves, and infrared radiation, and it absorbs most of everything else. Different gases absorb different frequencies. While water vapor absorbs more infrared radiation than carbon dioxide does, it is wildly variable and only stays in the atmosphere for about a week before it comes back out in precipitation. Carbon dioxide lasts for more than a century.

Carbon dioxide is the most important gas for determining Earth’s surface temperature, not water. In every paleoclimate study I have seen, carbon dioxide is considered the primary variable in determining global climate, from hothouse periods to ice ages, and models of carbon dioxide levels over Earth’s history have been developed and refined as more data is collected and the models become more sophisticated. Just what levels of carbon dioxide existed in the past is a matter of intense scientific investigation, but no scientists are debating what the overall effects were: when carbon dioxide levels were high, Earth was in hothouse conditions, and when it was low, Earth was in an ice age. There is also no debate that Earth’s mechanisms have been sequestering carbon in Earth’s crust faster than volcanism has been spewing it back out into the atmosphere, which is why Earth has been in an icehouse phase for the past 35 million years.

There is very little debate amongst scientists on those issues, as they are well established. Those so-called greenhouse gases act on Earth’s atmosphere the same way that sleeping under a blanket does, in that they slow down the loss of heat, keeping you or Earth’s atmosphere warmer than without it. Nearly two centuries ago, a French mathematician discovered what would later be called the greenhouse effect. Scientists began measuring the climate effect of humanity’s burning hydrocarbons back in the 1800s. There is nothing new about the idea of human-induced climate change, and there is really no debate amongst scientists that increasing the key greenhouse gas is going to warm Earth. The only debate is how fast it will happen and what oscillations and localized effects will accompany it. In paleoclimate studies, what became clear was that the equatorial regions were relatively unaffected by icehouse and greenhouse conditions; the polar regions had the big changes. In the late Permian, Mesozoic, and Eocene, forests grew near the poles. During the ice ages, any land near the poles was buried under ice sheets. In at least one instance, almost the entirely of Earth’s surface was buried under ice, in what has been called “Snowball Earth.”

During our current ice age, carbon dioxide levels have oscillated between 160 and 280 PPM, corresponding to cold and warm periods. However, carbon dioxide level changes are not a cause for the changes, but an effect of them, as Earth warms, those polar regions in particular off-gas carbon dioxide. Although falling carbon dioxide levels are the ultimate cause of our current icehouse period, the cause of the advancing and retreating ice sheets are oscillations in Earth’s orientation to the Sun, in what have been called Milankovitch cycles. Other proximate causes have been the oceanic current changes largely due to moving continents.

The Antarctic ice sheet began forming about 35 million years ago, which marks the beginning of our icehouse period. Today, scientists think that carbon dioxide dipped below 600 PPM when that ice sheet began forming, and as it oscillated over the next 35 million years, the trend was always lower, and Earth kept getting cooler. The biggest extinction in the Age of Mammals was when Earth changed from hothouse conditions to icehouse ones. Animals living during the past 35 million years were well adapted to Earth’s icehouse conditions, which is why scientists who propose climate explanations for the extinction of the megafauna are wrong. There have been no climate events in the past 35 million years that would have precipitated a mass extinction of all of Earth’s large land animals except for those in Africa, where humans evolved and the megafauna learned to avoid them (and to a lesser extent, Asia). Humans did it, and humans are responsible for the recent skyrocketing carbon dioxide level, which now stands at 400 PPM, when the natural trend predicts that we should have about 240 PPM today and should be slipping back into continental ice sheets forming. Scientists think that humanity may have already delayed the next ice cycle by 10,000 years with what has already been pumped into the atmosphere by burning the hydrocarbons that have fueled the industrial age, and some wonder if that ice age will return at all. At the end of William Ruddiman’s Plows, Plagues, and Petroleum, he wrote, “It is even possible that we will never return to that now-overdue glaciation.”

By the early 1970s, scientists began predicting what we are seeing today, as carbon dioxide levels skyrocket and Earth keeps getting hotter, with new temperature records set nearly every year in this century. There really is no debate amongst climate scientists that Global Warming is real, and the only debate is what the regional effects will be, whether we will have runaway conditions, how fast the ice sheets will melt and what the resultant sea level changes will be, and so on.

Until a professional biographer joins the fray, I am Brian O’Leary’s biographer, and Brian was a planetary scientist whom NASA asked to go to Mars, for the only human officially put in such a position. Brian was an atmospheric scientist and one of the early voices on Global Warming, and one of the leading Global Warming “skeptics” was once Brian’s colleague. The man sold his soul to the hydrocarbon lobby. Brian told me of his anguish and anger back in 2001, as I had been following the “debate” for a decade by then.

The elite corruption of science goes way back, as science and capitalism make for poor bedfellows. The general rule of thumb is that the more wealth and power invested in the outcome of scientific investigation, the more that corporate interests and the global elite will meddle, often using the world’s governments as tools of promotion and suppression, and the media that they own provides the propaganda. The most spectacular and pernicious instances are conjoined, which is the suppression of the ET presence and their technologies, which include antigravity and free energy. The elite will become obsolete if those technologies are used by the public and they know it, hence history’s greatest act of organized suppression.

But the elite have also been actively mischievous in many areas of health and medicine, where toxic industrial wastes receive surreal makeovers into “medicine” and other violent and lucrative interventions are invented that do more harm than good.

Brian was far from the only hip astronaut on those issues. Back in the 1980s and 1990s, when the alarm bells really began to go off on Global Warming, the oil companies in particular began buying up scientists with souls for sale to begin a “skeptical” debate on whether Global Warming was real. In the early 1990s, there were less than a dozen of them. Around the same time, tobacco companies mounted an offensive against the evidence of the harm that smoking caused to bystanders, and they literally coined the term “Junk Science” to discredit the scientific evidence, in one of the most blatant instances ever of corporate propaganda.

Today, the so-called Global Warming “debate” is little more than those hydrocarbon lobby shills, their dupes, a little tribe of scientific contrarians that can be found in all scientific fields, and a compliant media. The recent Fox News T&A who challenged Leonardo DiCaprio’s Oscar acceptance speech is par for the course these days, and the “debate” is nearly all smoke and mirrors designed the lull the masses back into complacency and easy manipulation, and it almost always works. I have watched people embrace certain death rather than question their indoctrination. At first, it was hard to believe, but now I realize that it is normal. The vast majority of humanity is unwilling and unable to escape the shackles of their conditioning. The masses shuffle along to the drumbeat, herded like lemmings, but the “smart” are captured by more subtle means. Materialism is the religion of this Epoch, and it has captured almost all scientists and the “educated,” who are those who most vociferously deny free energy’s reality or desirability.

After getting both barrels of those crazed reactions of denial and fear for several years while he played the Paul Revere of Free Energy, Brian began openly wondering if humanity was a sentient species, and I sadly understood his query.

Those are quite the minefields to walk, but whether Global Warming is real or not, and whether it has anything to do with humanity’s prodigious burning of hydrocarbons, is not one of those areas, unless people get duped by the spectacle of the “debate” today that was fomented by the oil companies and friends, and a compliant public who wants business as usual and being relieved of any responsibility for their actions. This has been the human condition for the entirety of the human journey, and could be called human nature. To some degree, it is, but it does not have to be like this.

Next up will be Peak Oil.

Best,

Wade

Hi Greg:

The Climategate stuff is mostly a lot of ado about nothing. None of it is really relevant to the core issue, which is that carbon dioxide traps radiation coming from Earth’s surface and warms it. End of story. All the Sturm und Drang over the past generation was led by a cadre of scientists who sold their souls to the hydrocarbon lobby, and who have purposely confused the issues. Of course, they sing a song that the public wants to hear, of business as usual, which is a typical human failing. Climate scientists without conflicts of interest or playing contrarians are terrified by what is happening, and I don’t blame them. And, of course, I am all about the permanent solution to that mess and many others, but almost nobody on Earth is paying attention, as they hack at branches if they hack at all.

Off to work.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

This will start a series of posts on Peak Oil, Global Warming, and related topics. To begin with, what is temperature? It is a measure of molecular motion. When molecules move faster, they get warmer. All matter above absolute zero emits photons. Most is at wavelengths too large to be seen with the human eye, but as matter gets warmer, the photons are more energetic (have shorter wavelengths), and they eventually get powerful enough to be seen with the naked eye. Warm up metal in a fire, and it can get what is called red hot. Get it hotter still, and it can become white hot. Hotter still, and it begins emitting photons beyond the range of visible light, and ultraviolet, x-ray, and gamma rays can be emitted. Those wavelengths are damaging to any living organisms, as they break molecular bonds, and the strongest can strip electrons from atoms and make them ions, which is why they are called ionizing radiation, which is deadly to organisms.

That was a lot to pack into a paragraph, and my big essay covers that territory at a more leisurely pace. The force of gravity attracted hydrogen into the star we call the Sun, and when hydrogen gets squeezed hard enough by gravity, nuclear fusion begins, as hydrogen nuclei (protons) fuse to form larger nuclei (helium, etc.), and all of the elements on our planet heavier than hydrogen, which is nearly all of Earth’s mass, were formed in stars via fusion processes. The Sun is a large star, in the top 5% of star sizes in our galaxy, and is in the “sweet spot” of stars, in which it burns very stably for several billion years before its life begins ending, as the fusion processes begin to end. The Sun has burned very stably for several billion years and will for several more before it becomes a red giant. It burns about a third brighter than it did a few billion years ago, and will continue to do so.

Obviously, the Sun is the source of Earth’s warmth. The radioactive materials below Earth’s surface contribute relatively little to Earth’s surface warmth, but they power Earth’s tectonic activity, which is critical for the chemical makeup of Earth’s atmosphere, and the most important is the carbon cycle. Carbon is vital for life on Earth, and because carbon dioxide is a three-molecule gas, it traps infrared radiation (just below the visible wavelength of light) coming from Earth, and that trapped energy raises Earth’s temperature. In every paleoclimate study I ever saw, carbon dioxide has always been the most important gas for raising Earth’s temperature. If not for the carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere, Earth’s surface would have been a block of ice since Earth’s early days. If Earth stays in its present orbit, complex life will not be able to live in Earth in about a billion years, and not long after that, Earth will become as sterile as the Moon.

In the eon of complex life carbon dioxide levels have seesawed, which gave rise to hot periods and ice ages. The hothouse Earth period that the dinosaurs thrived in began ending about 50 million years ago, because of continually declining carbon dioxide as volcanism declined (as Earth’s radioactive activity declines), and we live in an ice age today. For the past million years, continental ice sheets have grown and receded like clockwork, due to Earth’s orientation to the Sun, and until human activities began altering Earth’s atmosphere, beginning eight thousand years ago with the rise of agriculture, Earth would already be heading back toward the growth of the ice sheets. Climate scientists estimate that humanity has already delayed that new glacial episode by 50,000 years or so, primarily due to the hydrocarbon age we are in, as we burn Earth’s hydrocarbon deposits with abandon.

While in every scientific discipline some scientists play “devil’s advocate” and challenge the consensus, which can be a noble role, most Global Warming contrarianism has been engaged in by scientists who sold their souls to the hydrocarbon lobby. I have never seen a credible challenge to the idea that increasing the atmospheric carbon dioxide will inexorably lead to a warmer atmosphere. The idea is unassailable. That said, climate systems are incredibly complex and climate science is a young discipline. But every Global Warming naysayer that I have seen, for those who were not on the payroll of oil and coal companies, seizes on either short term oscillations or regional data, which is meaningless as far as being used for a challenge to the idea of Global Warming. The ultimate cause of Earth’s surface temperate is well known, as is the cause of our current ice age, and all of the Fox News talking heads cannot make it go away.

A related issue is where did those hydrocarbons come from? As with the causes of Earth’s surface temperature, there is no credible challenge to the idea that Earth’s coal deposits were formed from swampy forests in which fallen trees did not decay before they were buried in sediments, and most of Earth’s coal deposits formed before any life on Earth had evolved the means to digest lignin, which makes up the wood in trees. On the Internet, you can find all manner of challenge to the idea of why coal formed, often at tabloid sites that the scientifically illiterate swarm to. But no credible scientist takes those ideas seriously.

Similarly, Earth’s oil deposits were formed by organisms that were buried by sediments before they could be decayed by other organisms, and the oil was formed from marine sediments that formed during anoxic events during the eon of complex life, with most of it formed during the reign of dinosaurs. Stalinist scientists played with the idea that Earth’s oil deposits did not form from dead organisms, but from some primordial process in Earth’s mantle. However, with the rise of plate tectonics and the molecular sciences, in which scientists can trace, atom-by-atom, how organic material from dead organisms became Earth’s oil deposits, other than some interest-conflicted contrarian fringe, no credible scientist seriously considers that Earth’s oil deposits formed from anything other than marine anoxic events.

This is a prelude to my coming series of posts on Global Warming, Peak Oil, and related topics, but it is time to begin another busy day at the office, and my work hurricane will not abate for several more days.

Off to work.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Quickly, before I rush out the door to work, 30 years ago today, I met Dennis. Where does a life go? If you had asked me a couple of weeks before that fateful day what my “friends” had in store for me, I would not have believed it. If you would have told me what I was about to learn, I would have thought that you were crazy or a grand xxxx. I often sit back and think about it, and how surreal so much of it was. Dennis is going to be 70 in a couple of months. He should not have reached 70, and should be dead dozens of times over. But he was on a mission, and it was more than an honor to be part of it, although I will be licking my wounds for the rest of my life. No regrets, however. It was all part of the journey.

Off to work.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

I am in the middle of a 60-hour week, so my time is limited. I just responded to a question on the Anthropocene, and replied below.

The Anthropocene is kind of interesting, and I’ll agree with Ruddiman that humanity’s noticeable impacts were early, but I’ll say that they began even earlier than his 8,000 years ago with the beginning of agriculture, to 50,000 years ago, when humans began wiping out all the megafauna. It began a mass extinction, which usually forms the boundary of geological periods, and there were also massive vegetation changes, not only the huge fires that humans set, but those vanished megafauna had keystone species effects, too.

It is interesting that both ends of the eon of complex life are getting recent geological naming effort. The Ediacaran is the first new named period in over a century, and here comes the Anthropocene. We already have the Holocene, which is kind of human-independent, but not really. It is supposedly because of the ice age glaciers receding, but this is really just a blip, but as Ruddiman has made the case, humans have probably already delayed the next ice period by 50,000 years or so with Global Warming, so there really is a significant geological effect of humans, although it is the end of the Holocene, not the beginning, where humans will really get the “credit” for this epoch.

It can be an interesting debate to follow. I recently read a planetary scientist lamenting Pluto’s recent demotion from being a full planet. He complained that astronomers made that political decision, not planetary scientists. Pluto is round from gravity and has pronounced geological activity. That makes it a planet in that scientist’s eyes. Of course, he led the mission to Pluto, so has a little bias. Brian was arguably Earth’s most prominent planetary scientist for a time, with his Martian credentials, so this is another interesting subject for me.

Time to rush off to another busy day.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Before I get to the Peak Oil posts, a little on current events. I recently wrote about Gary Vesperman. He has been at it for a long time, and I recently received an email from him that announced his clean energy exhibit in Las Vegas. His presentation is here. Just as he did not get his facts straight when writing about Dennis, as I perused his presentation, I saw an apocryphal quote allegedly from the commissioner of the USA’s patent office, which is almost certainly false. There are plenty of examples of that self-satisfied arrogance to choose from, and Gary cites real quotes, too, but he could have done better fact checking. Do sloppy presentations like that do more harm than good? Gary means well, but there is plenty of disinformation out there, and although the pursuit of FE does not pay, IMO, FE activists must have a fidelity to the truth and the most faithful rendering of the facts as they can, if they want to make a dent.

Gary and I seek different audiences, as he goes for mass awareness, but factually deficient presentations are going to be of dubious benefit, and I did not like Dennis’s bluster on stage, either, which is partly why I am not with him anymore.

During the past several months, I have been reading of rapists among the Islamic refugees pouring into Europe, driven there by the USA’s oil wars. Swedish women are now being advised by the authorities to not travel alone on the streets after dark, as many Islamic refugees have no compunction against assaulting women. I have had to listen to American men criticize the chaos in the Middle East, and the rape stories are just more fodder for them. It reminds me of that famous John Milton quote, “They who have put out the people's eyes reproach them of their blindness.” Islamic people were well on their way to industrialization until the West overthrew their governments, put reactionary puppets on thrones, destroyed entire nations, and kept those people backward, and now we get to criticize their primitive nature.

Women’s status was low in all agrarian civilizations. That was just the nature of the beast. Spanish men picked up Islamic machismo from their “reconquest” of the Iberian Peninsula, and they were rapists extraordinaire for centuries in the New World, which is where Latin America’s huge mestizo class comes from. Give today’s men a chance, and about a third become sadists. It is just the state of the human animal. It does not mean that being a sadistic rapist is some kind of ideal, but it is part of our heritage, going up our evolutionary line for several million years or more.

But when bonobos had their food supply double, they ended the practice of murderous male rule, and bonobo societies are more peaceful than any human society ever was. Chimps did it, but humans can’t, as I hear from FE naysayers so often? The Industrial Revolution’s demographic transition has ended many barbaric practices. All social behavior is economically conditioned. Live in a world of scarcity and fear, and the most fiendish behaviors can emerge. Live in a world of abundance, and other behaviors can come to the fore. I was raised during the human journey’s greatest era of prosperity, and I am not complaining, even though I was still steeped in racism and bigotry while growing up. Behaviors that I witnessed only a generation ago in corporate offices are hard to imagine today, such as patting women on the butt. Yes, I saw that daily a generation ago, and in the 1980s, I saw a warehouse wall that was plastered with Playboy centerfolds, and the women on my audit team had to walk by them. Of course, sauntering past a dead body on the sidewalk makes events like that pale to insignificance, but even in an “enlightened” nation such as mine, sexism, racism, and bigotry were very obvious, even lauded. The practice is dying out, or going underground, but as the American middle class is getting squeezed out of existence, we are seeing great dysfunction daily, with daily mass shootings, etc., and the crazed antics of the Republican Party today is a sordid sight. They courted the wacky right for many years, and it has now devolved into a parody.

OK, off to Peak Oil and related subjects.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

I don’t have the time to do justice to it, and I envision a series of posts on it, but I read this article yesterday on the oil glut, and the end of Peak Oil theory. I was surprised to read Klare writing it, as he is one of the resource depletion prophets, and I have cited one of his books before. The current oil glut has nothing to do with Peak Oil theory.

There is only so much conventional oil in the ground, humanity passed peak extraction rates on it in recent years, just as about half of the oil was extracted, which is exactly what Peak Oil theory predicts. The recent American and Canadian oil “booms” were not about conventional oil, but mining the dregs of Earth’s hydrocarbons, and are environmental catastrophes in the making. In Hubbert’s original theory, he did not predict the end of civilization with Peak Oil, but that as oil ran out, we would transition to nuclear energy. That has not gone too well.

In the big picture, the price of oil is meaningless. In this century, conventional oil will be completely depleted. That is the big picture, not blips in the supply and demand curves as the dregs are mined, and, of course, mining and burning hydrocarbons might bring on humanity’s demise.

All the blind money-printing by the world’s central banks fueled this malinvestment boom in mining the dregs, and it is currently collapsing as the fracking industry and tar sands operations are going bankrupt. But it’s going to be worse if they get going again. It is all so short-sighted. I was looking at my energy posts, and I really have not dealt with the issue yet, not in any depth, so here they come, in the coming week or so.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

I have a busy day and week ahead of me, but briefly, my recent post on mainstream science touched on the search for the unified field, AKA “Theory of everything,” and one of those directions is string theory. So-called “quantum gravity” is one term used to describe the attempt to unite relativity with quantum theory. It is a subject that minds keener than mine have been wrestling with for generations, but members of the choir should at least be familiar with the rudiments. As I have written plenty, there is technology and related data that likely blows all of those cosmological theories out of the water. IMO, until the ET presence is officially acknowledged and scientists can freely interact with them, until the toys in Godzilla’s Golden Hoard come into the open and can be studied by mainstream scientists, and until consciousness is acknowledged to be something far beyond a mere epiphenomenon of brain activity, mainstream science will be playing a small game, its findings are going to be highly provisional, and many of today’s mainstream theories and paradigms are going to collapse like a house of cards in light of those revelations. That said, there are many virtues to the scientific approach.

The data points that I have amassed on my journey cannot be viewed from the cubicle, papers in Science and Nature, surfing New Age/conspiracist sites, or watching YouTube clips. While such venues can cover some of that territory, there is also so much disinformation, naïveté, dogma, and paranoia in those places that it is a very tall task to winnow the wheat from the chaff, and I don’t recommend that path to the truth. There are better ones, but it takes talent, hard work, and a love of the truth to walk them. Personal integrity is always the key, which means the willingness to relinquish one’s in-group conceits for a broader picture, which almost nobody is willing to do, as adherence to their in-group ideologies is how they survive. It is all part of the FE conundrum.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Today is a chore day, but my work hurricane will have a small break later this month. I will likely begin revising my big essay then, but it will be a leisurely exercise that may finish in the spring, but it might be later this year. I am in no rush.

This will be some odds and ends on recent reading and events. The current election cycle in the USA is the tawdriest spectacle of my lifetime, as republican candidates discuss genital size and other lofty topics, and on the other side, there is no stopping Hillary, who personifies the endemic corruption in our system. If Bush the Second was our Caligula, what will Trump be? Shudder. But the retail political system is not where the power is. It is mostly for show, to provide the illusion of a democratic system. All American presidents since Kennedy are puppets and know it. The American presidency is largely a ceremonial position with little real power, particularly on the truly important issues. Even the American people are catching on, and the discontent is rising to the surface of the USA’s besieged middle class. But as Brian O told me not long before he died, electoral politics is a dead-end, and he would have known.

This situation, in which the retail situation is an illusion designed to dupe the masses, is far from restricted to electoral politics. The media is a disinformation mill. When people think of economics, they usually think of money, which is all flash and no substance, literally. Money is nothing more than an accounting fiction, and all exchange-related professions and institutions will vanish in the Fifth Epoch.

Technology is similar. The toys in Godzilla’s Golden Hoard make today’s most advanced retail technology resemble a caveman’s club and turns the physics textbooks into doorstops.

Retail spirituality is organized religion, and I doubt that I need to convince many of my readers what an abomination it all is, and has been since the beginning. The real thing lies vastly beyond the mind-controlling nostrums of professional priesthoods.

It is like this in all areas of human endeavor, where garbage is purveyed as the good stuff.

On to where scholars get in over their heads. I was recently asked about Smil’s work, and I wrote about his work a few years ago. After being asked about him, I picked up one of his books, seeing if I was recalling it right, and I was. Smil is supposedly Mr. Energy, but he dismissed Richard Wrangham’s Cooking Hypothesis, stating that whatever energy gains that cooking might provide may be outweighed by the loss of other nutrients, which showed that Smil knows almost nothing about nutrition. Caloric intake is about 80% of nutrition. Get enough energy, and all other nutritional problems are minor. This is well-known in the field. For Smil to get it so wrong was just another deficiency in his work. He is really not much of an original thinker, but more like an academic compiler.

But even scholars that I admire can get in over their heads. I often find myself picking up Ward Churchill’s A Little Matter of Genocide, which was his magnum opus and cost him his career, and he is still at it. Reading his recent interview reminds me of Dennis’s appeal process, as all the way up the chain to the USA’s Supreme Court, the prosecution’s defense to charges of misconduct were always immunity and statute of limitations. Essentially they stated, and the courts agreed with them, that it did not matter how many crimes that they committed in their pursuit of Dennis, as they played for the home team. That is how the American “justice” system works, unlike the Hollywood version that most people, even Americans, are familiar with.

Churchill’s book is an awe-inspiring piece of scholarship and clear thought about highly charged matters. But he was in the Vine Deloria school of thought in dismissing the work of Paul Martin and others on the megafauna extinctions. Deloria did not know what he was writing about, nor did Churchill. While defending Indians against European/American depredations is noble work, no need to fancifully interpret the scientific evidence. Historians and activists mixing their politics and science is a dangerous combination.

It is not easy to leave one’s in-group biases aside in a pursuit of the truth. Not many can do it.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

I was raised to be a scientist, almost from the cradle, and grew up as a relatively normal baby boomer, in a Southern California beach town. I had my mystical awakening at age 16, the same year as my cultural awakening and when I first got my energy dreams. Little did I know it, but my mystical awakening led to my ruination as a mainstream scientist before my career really got going, when that voice in my head first spoke up. About five years before my mystical awakening, a migrant farmworker had his mystical awakening, with a shotgun in his mouth, ready to pull the trigger. Five years after I had my mystical awakening, a professional scientist of high standing had his mystical awakening while performing the same exercise that I did, and it ruined his career, too. All of us then began on our paths that led to the pursuit of free energy, although they were anything but direct routes.

When I encountered fellow travelers, and there aren’t many of us, their stories were similar, of a mystical awakening in either their late teens or early 20s, when they were scientists or scientists-in-training, and it led to their FE journeys, and none of them were easy. Have no doubt, free energy technology is on the planet today and is likely older than I am, which most of my fellow travelers came to know as a mere side-effect of their journeys. As always with such technological breakthroughs, practice will precede theory, and scientists in thrall to their conditioning and “skeptics” with death grips on their armchairs are not going to help, which is also normal.

I am not into numerology like others are, but I have noticed that the “six” years have been significant in my life. In 1966, I toured my father’s “office” in NASA’s Mission Control Room. In 1976, I came of age, graduating from high school during the USA’s bicentennial celebration. In 1986, I preposterously met Dennis after that voice in my head spoke up again, after I felt backed into a corner. Then my wild ride began. In 1996, I signed back up with Dennis again, and in 2006, he invited me to the White House, which spurred the end of my monster of a midlife crisis. We will see what 2016 brings into my life, and I can tell that my “friends” have been very active in recent years, to the extent where I wonder just how much freedom is left in my life, as I keep getting bizarrely synchronous events served up for me.

After my radicalizing days with Dennis, I hit the books and explored vast scholarly and scientific territory. I soon encountered the “skeptics” and studied their work. It turned out that my future colleague, Brian, used to be the closest colleague of the arch-materialist and leading “skeptic” of his time, Carl Sagan. After Brian’s mystical awakening, his path was nearly the opposite of Sagan’s. Little did I know it during my studies, but I eventually became a target of the leading free energy “skeptic,” as he hurled his lies in all directions, stalked me on the Internet, and tried to scare off anybody involved with me. He was featured on several national TV shows that smeared Dennis. When I became Brian’s biographer and got his NASA biography published, one of the leading space “skeptics” tried to debunk Brian’s Martian credentials. In my experience, the debunkers of psychic abilities, free energy, and space matters were all connected by their fierce defense of the Establishment, and they all either lied or left rationality far behind as they donned their “skeptical” robes.

I resisted my journey’s primary lesson every step of the way until I had it beaten into my head in no uncertain terms: personal integrity is the world’s scarcest commodity, and anybody attempting anything of significance on Earth who does not recognize that fact does so at their peril. More than 99% of humanity does not see past the horizons of their immediate self-interest. So it is, in a world of scarcity and fear, and judging that situation is as counterproductive as denying it. It is just what it is: the state of the species. But just because that is how humanity is today – and believe it or not, it used to be far less noble, going back up our evolutionary line several million years, and the human journey is one unending tale of bloodshed – it does not mean that it cannot change. The Industrial Revolution brought immense changes to the human condition and journey, as the previous Domestication Revolution did, and industrial societies are far more humane than the previous ones. Forcing people to murder each other is no longer the ultimate imperial entertainment. So-called “progress” has been made, although it is nothing to get too excited about. Lying is still the order of the day in retail politics, as imperial machinations kill millions of the innocent who sit on something that the West covets, especially oil, but it extends to minerals and other resources. The West stole all of the good land long ago.

Carrying Dennis’s spears was the educational experience of my life, without which I would likely not have anything worth saying, and carrying Brian’s spears was also a time of learning. Carrying their spears was among my life’s greatest honors, but as extraordinary as they were, and as well-intentioned and heroic as you could ask for, especially Dennis, I eventually realized how futile our efforts were. The masses are not going to help the biggest event in the human journey manifest, although they will be its greatest beneficiaries. I had to eventually admit it, even though Dennis and Brian never stopped trying the populist route.

My journey to my current approach was primarily a life-risking and life-wrecking odyssey of trial and error, followed by periods of reflection and study, thinking about why our approaches repeatedly failed. When I began writing that letter to Brian in 2009, and I finished it with my approach to FE without risking lives, Brian understood that I was doing something different, as did Dennis, when I talked with him about it in 2013.

Mine is the love and sentience approach, and is probably similar to what Bucky Fuller would be trying if he was still alive. I am searching for needles in haystacks and know it, but for all of the limitations of this medium called the Internet, it also has an unprecedented reach, and my approach might have a prayer of success in finding and training the people that can help the biggest event in the human journey manifest. I wrote the training manual and have devoted the rest of my life’s “spare” time to finding and training those people, who I know are very rare. I like my chances of making a dent before I cash in my chips, but time will tell. It may help only a little, it may help a lot, but it won’t hurt anybody, as long as enthusiastic newcomers can refrain from proselytizing to their social circles. That is where the primary risk to the choir is, not what the Global Controllers do.

The so-called “skeptics” are little more than Dominican inquisitors defending their Epoch’s religion, which is materialism, and their attacks on psychic abilities, the ET presence, and free energy are all about preventing the next Epoch from manifesting, when you strip away their lies and obfuscations. They serve Godzilla’s interests, no matter how unwitting their efforts might be, and a lot of it is not so unwitting, but just drawing a paycheck and licking the hand that feeds them. There are plenty of psychopaths (AKA dark pathers) in Godzilla’s employ, keeping the Epochal threat of free energy at bay, and what amazed me the most was how easily they manipulated people into slitting their own throats, sometimes literally.

The masses will not imagine the next Epoch until it is placed in their laps, and that is normal. It does no good to deny or judge the situation; it is just what it is. My goal is to drop the next Epoch in their laps, and new horizons of the human journey will then beckon, instead of the fast train to oblivion that we are currently riding.

This will wrap up this series of posts.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

As the clouds of my nightmare of a midlife crisis began waning in late 2006, I began emerging from my self-imposed silence. Over the years, many forums have discussed aspects of my work, and in early 2007, I decided to join some of the conversations. I was kind of shocked at what a xxxxx-haven the Internet had become during my five years of relative silence. Not only did Mr. Skeptic arrive, he hardly need to fling his lies and attacks, as I was attacked in pretty much every forum that I ever joined. It had been 20 years since I became Dennis’s partner, so my skin was pretty thick, but nothing productive was happening as I was subjected to xxxxx attacks, virtually all by anonymous cowards.

I found that New Age/conspiracist forums were a very mixed bag. On one hand, they usually did not deny FE’s possibility or desirability or that organized suppression is real, which are hurdles to awareness that few can negotiate. But New Agers were usually scientifically illiterate, did not practice any discernment, often believing anything, and they were generally naïve and looking for some kind of guru to follow, while conspiracists were usually paranoid, combative, and delusional. In 2007, I joined one of the premier conspiracist forums and stayed there for several months. The trolls quickly arrived, as forums like that are their playgrounds. I was able to use an “ignore” feature, so I did not need to read their tripe. Trolls got only a few posts before I put them on ignore, but I found that it really did not help, as my threads degenerated into xxxxx fights, so my posts were lost in the haze of battle. But I kept at it until the trolls began ganging up on me and that forum banned me, not the trolls, which lends weight to the idea that that forum is intentionally a disinformation mill. One xxxxx camped on my thread for months, fighting anybody who posted there.

One New Age dude joined that forum to invite me into his own, which was a harmless New Age one, and he even devoted a section of the forum to my work, similar to how Universal Spectrum has, but in the month when I went quiet, emotionally and mentally preparing for my first public interview, that New Age dude erased that entire section of the forum devoted to my work! I never even heard from him. He just erased it. Mr. Skeptic joined that forum, and I imagine that he did what he could to poison the water from behind the scenes. I was kicked out of that conspiracist forum at about the same time, and I decided that the only forum that I would join again would be mine, and in 2007, I began studying with my big essay in mind, although I did not write it until I took a career break in 2013. Here is another big essay preview essay. I find it to be an interesting document in my evolving perspective, as I prepared to write that essay.

Also, by the end of 2007, the relentless pace of my high-tech job since 2003 took its toll. I burned out and never really recovered until I took my career break in 2013 to write my big essay. A planned six-month sabbatical turned into my losing my job and a two-year break, the first sixteen months of which allowed me to do justice to my big essay. I’ll not write its like again in this lifetime, and it will be the centerpiece of all of my future efforts. Like a college textbook, I will revise it periodically and plan to revise it this year, for the reading I have been doing over the past year. The revisions will likely slow down to less than annually before long, as the essay rounds more fully into what I intended it to be. It can definitely stand on its own as written today, but science is always on the march, and I am always reading. I have some important changes to make to it.

I am trying to recall just how it happened, but Brian and I began communicating again, in early 2007. It was initially fairly innocuous, and in the summer of 2007, I published one of my better essays, which was another preview, in ways, of my big essay, and the first written with my big essay in mind. Brian said that it was the best essay that he had seen in years, and we again began to collaborate. Brian shared that he had been booted out of NEM not long after I resigned, and cried on my shoulder a little. I’ll say that Joel and Jeane were not part of the mutiny. Brian offered to send me evidence of what happened, but I really didn’t need to see it. I had lived through mutinies in the past with Dennis, and people were constantly trying to steal our companies. After the Ventura experience, nothing about human behavior could surprise me again.

Brian was living in a self-imposed exile in South America, after fleeing the USA in fear of his life. He got skin cancer, which was cured by an American whom the FDA kidnapped from Ecuador in 2009, in standard medical gangster style. In early 2009, Bill Ryan and Kerry Cassidy interviewed Brian and me. It will likely always be my favorite interview, because Brian was part of it. Just as I was preparing for that interview, the Feds struck against Dennis, and he was in the news again. I later discovered that Bill did the interview more because he read my work several years previously than because of my relationship with Brian, although I am sure that it helped.

A few months after that, Brian asked me to help him write a proposal for the DOE. After begin run out of my previous home by the Love Israel cult, our landlord lost his job at Microsoft in the economic mayhem of 2009 and evicted us to sell the house. I literally wrote my contributions to that proposal while I was boxing up my library for the move. I wrote the “Big Picture” and “Further Obstacles and Opportunities” sections. That Big Picture section could be considered an embryonic outline of what became my big essay several years later.

The FTC under Obama was in the process of running Dennis out of the USA, and Brian wanted to test how the DOE would respond to a proposal like ours? Been there, done that. I think that our proposal reflected Brian’s self-admitted codependence with Washington D.C. It was no surprise when they instantly rejected our proposal.

Also, in 2009, I began writing a letter to Brian on the lessons learned during my journey. It took me a year, on and off, to finish it, and the public version is this essay. Soon after I finished it, Brian asked me to write his NASA and Wikipedia biographies, and that was another adventure. NASA stonewalled me and I had to go straight to the astronaut corps to get it published, and the astronauts treated me graciously and better than I expected. But a famous “skeptic” tried to debunk Brian’s Martian credentials immediately after his NASA bio was published, which led Brian to giving me his Werner von Braun and Alan Shepard anecdotes, in case I had to do battle with the “skeptics” and NASA. At Wikipedia, the “editors” kept modifying the moon hoax section (which has thankfully disappeared), which led to Brian writing what truly became his last word on the issue. Nobody from the moon hoax crowd helped me get it hosted someplace “notable” enough so that Wikipedia’s “editors” would stop erasing it. Fortunately, some years later, more credible editors removed the section us unsourced conspiratorial gossip, and I can live with Brian’s Wikipedia bio as it stands today.

Right around the time that I finished with Brian’s Wikipedia biography, I saw my work being discussed in Bill’s forum, and I joined up. Bill learned the same lesson that I did, that forums of the anonymous were a complete waste of time, as anonymous cowards spewed their flames everywhere they could. So, I joined a forum years before I intended to, and writing there has been one of the joys of my writing “career.”

A couple of years later, I built my own forum (with Ilie’s help! ) for the purpose of mounting my choir. It is starting slowly, as expected, but I have devoted the rest of my life’s “spare” time to developing it. If Bucky was alive today, he would probably be doing something like it. The biggest event in the human journey will not happen overnight, forums of the anonymous will get nothing of significance done, and it is worth at least one man’s life to try an approach never attempted before. Brian and Dennis immediately recognized that I was doing something different, and we will see how it goes.

I’ll wrap up this series of posts soon, but for now, I have to rush off to another long day in the office.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Here is a little post on scientific literacy and my work. The past couple of weeks, I have been reading a special edition of Scientific American, titled Physics at the Limits, parts of which will make it into my updated big essay, when I do that this year.

I wrote my big essay with the level of scientific literacy in mind that can digest a magazine like that. Many of the scientific papers that I cite in my big essay were published in Science or Nature, which are the house organs of mainstream science. Writing papers for those magazines has to be done so that scientists from all specializations can understand them, and the lay public can also digest them, although it takes a little more work for them to. Papers and articles in publications like those avoid too much technical jargon, are not pages of math, etc.

Mainstream science, like anything else, is not a be-all, end-all, but is a highly important aspect of human endeavor, and if people want to know anything about how the world works, some scientific literacy is required.

That issue of Scientific American is a mixture of reports on experiments, such as a neutrino detection experiment in Antarctica and powerful X-ray lasers that can photograph atoms, black holes, time travel, the limits of the human brain, the funkiness of quantum physics, ever more attempts to weld together quantum physics and relativity (chasing after the elusive unified field), and articles that call into question trends in science, such as multidimensional cosmology that is purely theoretical, with no data at all to support or refute it. That kind of theorizing is not really science as we know it, but more like philosophy. Dark matter and dark energy have never been observed, but are theorized to comprise most of the universe. Science gets kind of shaky when it begins relying on unobserved phenomena. Quantum physics is so weird that one article suggests that everything is really happening in our minds, not so much the “real” world, if there really is such a thing. One trend is to chase something called quantum gravity, and I cite one such paper in my big essay, in which its upshot is FE. The field/particle duality dogs physics to this day, and the central role of consciousness in our reality is still beyond the pale of mainstream science.

One purpose of digesting a magazine issue like that is to help achieve the realization that anybody who says that the “laws of physics” preclude FE don’t know what they are talking about. Mainstream science is a long, long way from figuring it all out. I have written plenty on the virtues and limits of mainstream science, and will update that section of my essay a little in this year’s revision. Scientific American is certainly not the ultimate publication, far from it. I also picked up the current edition of Scientific American, as it discussed some new human-line fossils found in South Africa. That is a fascinating and key area of interest for me, and the new find is a great example of the conflict between science and show business, and how distorting the funding issue is. But notorious “skeptic” Michael Shermer has a regular column in Scientific American, and Scientific American has the dubious distinction of semi-ridiculing the reports of the Wright brothers’ early flights, calling them “fabled,” and dismissing reports of their flights because the editors could not read about it in the newspapers. The Smithsonian Institution then engaged in a campaign for generations to deny the Wright brothers their precedence. It was scandalous.

Soon before he died, Brian said that the blindness of mainstream science, the kind that denied and ridiculed the Wright brothers, is worse today than it was a century ago. I treat mainstream science similarly to how I do the media. I still read it, while also understanding its limitations. There is no such thing as a free press or a purely pursued science. They have distorting influences on them, largely in the realm of wealth and power. The ET/FE cover-up is history’s greatest, and until those and related issues come into the light, and until consciousness is acknowledged to be something far beyond a mere epiphenomenon of brain activity, mainstream science will be playing a small game. Ed Mitchell was on the right track, as was Brian.

I have spent many years digesting fringe science, and it also has its virtues and limitations. Most of it is invalid, but not all, not by any means. FE, antigravity, and other technologies sequestered in Godzilla’s Golden Hoard will turn today’s physics textbooks into doorstops, but it won’t make the scientific method invalid for what it is good for. As Bucky Fuller noted, scientists are naïve as a group, and they wear blinders just like any conditioned in-group. One of mainstream science’s greatest conceits and failings is the notion that Black Science and technology does not exist. I know better. At the same time, all manner of airy fairy notions parade as science, when they aren’t. Again, in that recent Physics at the Limits edition, one article cautioned cosmologists from getting too carried away with their musings on the multiverse. Pure, untestable theory is not really science, but more like fantasy, no matter how many equations depict it.

One thing that comes through in reading that Physics at the Limits edition is how dominant Einstein still is. With his theories more than a century old, his grip on physics is now half as long as Newton’s was. Einstein expected his theories to one day be proven wrong, and entanglement is part of the quantum strangeness that made Einstein uneasy. Even though Einstein was one of the fathers of quantum theory, with his explanation of the photoelectric effect, he was very unhappy with the “god plays dice with the universe” aspect of quantum theory.

One aspect of Einstein’s general theory of relativity was that time and space are not only relative, but dependent on the mass in them, which is only a form of energy, so the idea that everything our universe is dependent on energy, even time and space, is not so farfetched.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Here is a little more on Dennis. I wrote a little about his rising through the ranks of contenders, gradually coming onto Godzilla’s radar. He was on the radar of all the big players, eventually, and when I was his partner, we periodically heard from the so-called White Hats. When Dennis improbably survived being kangarooed into prison and the officials doing their best to get him killed by the inmates, he rapidly rose through the ranks, and one day, I may be able to reveal some of the White Hat attention that Dennis received after surviving prison.

But the Black Hats also got very active, and I nearly went to prison during my second stint with Dennis, as an elaborate sting operation was mounted. When Dennis was finally run out of the USA by the feds, they learned the lessons of their predecessors who failed to neutralize/murder Dennis, and their legal attack was designed to neutralize Dennis once and for all, at least in the USA. Even when the gangsters who run Ventura County had Dennis hogtied and in solitary confinement, he was still able to legally defend himself. In 2009, the feds went after Dennis’s business entity, not him personally. In doing so, when their legal attacks crippled his company, it cut off his cash flow (they did the same in Seattle and Ventura), but by only going after his business entity, when he ran out of money, the game was over. A person can go pro se, defending themselves without having an attorney, but businesses can’t, and when the business runs out of money and cannot defend itself any longer, it essentially becomes a default judgment, and that is how the FTC prevailed, just by throwing enough lawyers at it long enough, with media smears, etc., and then they won by default. Part of the settlement forced onto Dennis was his agreement to never do business in the USA again in the energy industry. Part of me was impressed with their cleverness. Some very talented people work for the forces of darkness, and selling one’s soul can pay well, for a time.

The Rockefellers and Rothschilds also got involved in those days, and Dennis and the Rockefellers go way back, which is not surprising, given their investments in the current energy paradigm. That they identified themselves by name means, to me, that they are no longer at the top, if they ever were. Mr. Skeptic heaved his slime at anybody near him, getting on national TV several times, as he made a career out of attacking Dennis, and then quietly disappeared from the scene after Dennis was run out of the USA, very similar to how Bill the BPA Hit Man slunk away after Dennis was taken out. And, of course, those in the FE field, instead of studying Dennis’s journey as a prerequisite to even dipping their toes into the FE milieu, tell Big Lies about him, which is then parroted by everybody, so the lessons of his incredible journey are lost on the current generation. That is partly why the FE field is still in a state of arrested development.

Over those years, in the oughties after my midlife crisis finally ended, until Brian died in 2011, I began interacting with the public again, met with some FE activists, and even hosted some in my home. Almost without exception, they were all naïve, challenging me on issues of fact regarding my journey with Dennis, as they seemed incapable of comprehending the reality of the milieu, as they could never get past the tinkering inventor stage or scientists spinning their FE hypotheses. Those are beginner’s levels of the game, and Godzilla is not threatened in the least by them. But Dennis was a horse of a different color. Nobody ever played at Dennis’s level for as long, but FE newcomers cannot seem to even imagine the situation, as they lived in denial of Godzilla’s existence, failed to understand that Dennis was something different, thought that Godzilla could be snuck past, etc. As undeniably great a man as Brian was, he never came remotely close to playing at Dennis’s level. There is nobody on Earth like Dennis.

My coming posts will chronicle my activities since I emerged from my midlife crisis, which helped further shape my current approach. I joined forums that were discussing my work (and the trolls swarmed), Brian came back into my life, and beginning in 2007, I performed my studies with what became my big essay in mind, although I had no idea how big it would become until I began writing it. Some of the story has been told before, but there will be some new revelations.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

A little more on Rwanda. So-called human rights groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights watch are farces, and Human Rights Watch is an outright imperial tool. Amnesty is a little better, but falls far, far short of a legitimate human rights organization. The greatest human rights violation on Earth is war. Nothing else comes remotely close. When the Nazis swung from nooses at Nuremburg, the American judge, a U.S. Supreme Court justice who presided over it all, stated that the ultimate crime that the Nazis committed was “breaking the peace,” and that justice famously stated:


“To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”


Bush, Cheney, and Rummy should have swung a thousand times for Iraq. As Uncle Noam has stated, every postwar president, beginning with Truman, should have swung from a noose, if the standards of Nuremberg were applied. But winners never face war crimes trials; only losers do. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have never once challenged the “supreme international crime” committed constantly by the West, but they follow around the invaders like remora and give a veneer of legitimacy to the kangaroo court “war crimes” courts that the invaders set up.

Way back in the 1990s, I expressed my dismay to Uncle Ed that Amnesty International was supporting that kangaroo court tribunal at The Hague, which eventually put Milosevic behind bars, where he died, and Ed agreed that it was scandalous. He said that no international human rights organization on Earth was worth a damn, but were all, to one degree or another, imperial tools, kind of like the Peace Corps and missionaries.

Ed has written for many years on the kangaroo court “war crimes” tribunals that the USA has set up to prosecute its targets, and the one established for Rwanda was more of the same. Not one Tutsi has ever been prosecuted by that war crimes tribunal, even though they have now slaughtered millions of people, largely Hutus. Several officials resigned in disgust or were forced out when they failed to play along with kangaroo court, and even then, not one single Hutu conviction was ever for “conspiring to commit genocide” against the Tutsi, which is the framing narrative of everything that the West hears about Rwanda. So, nobody was ever convicted of the primary crime that the war was supposedly about, even in kangaroo court. That is because the entire narrative was a fabrication from the beginning.

The dominant narrative is one huge lie, and the invaded and victims of genocide become the fantasy perpetrators in the West, while actual perpetrators (the invaders) then invade neighboring nations with impunity and murder millions, while the West not only turns a blind eye to it all (when not literally cheering it on – Ed calls those “constructive bloodbaths”), but the butcher himself is held up as some great statesman and humanitarian. It is really no different from making Hitler into some kind of saint, but the USA does it all the time with its puppets, from Central American butcher-dictators to Suharto to Pinochet to Kagame. It is the standard American formula, and it works on the primary target of the lies, the American people, who, like Roman citizens, only care about how much plunder rolls in, and they really don’t care how it was acquired. We don’t have arenas were the victims of our imperial adventures are forced to murder each other for “entertainment,” but it really is not that much better. In our arenas, poor black men (the descendants of slaves, who are still second-class citizens) risk their lives to bludgeon each other in the USA’s favorite sport, and the more violent the games, the better.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

Another short one, before I rush off to work. This weekend I read Uncle Ed’s Enduring Lies, which is about our propaganda system and the Rwandan genocide. Ed will be 91 next month, and his books of late have had help from David Peterson. Ed has been at this for a long time, exposing imperial propaganda. The gist of Enduring Lies is that Rwanda had a long colonial history, and like all agrarian societies, it had a small professional/elite and a mass of peasantry. The elites were called Tutsi, and the peasants Hutu. It was not much different from the high castes in India, which formed a similar proportion, around 10%, of the population. That proportion goes back to the beginning of civilization. When Europe conquered the world, they often made that ruling class a sub-class below the imperial overlords, who got the chips for exploiting their countries on behalf of the conquerors. It was the USA’s model for Latin America, the UK’s model for India, Iraq, and so on.

You will see many broadsides against Ed’s work on the Internet, and virtually all of them misrepresent his work. His work always focuses primarily on how our propaganda system works in dealing with our international depredations, and does not overly focus on the dynamics in the target nations, other than to note that the USA and UK invariably support their ruling class pawns. His Wikipedia bio is badly marred by the attacks of imperial hacks, which is standard in the heavily biased Wikipedia.

The gist of the Rwandan situation was that in the wake of the African overthrow of imperial rule in the 1960s, the ruling class Tutsi no longer had it so easy, and a peasant revolution drove the Tutsi from rule in a revolution between 1959 and 1961. Many Tutsis fled the country and lived in places such as Uganda. They rose to power under Idi Amin, and Tutsi officers tried to overthrow Amin and the successor who overthrew him. Before long, they were plotting a “Reconquest” of Rwanda, and one of their leaders was Paul Kagame. Rwanda and neighboring nations were former French colonies, and Ed paints the picture of the USA and the UK seeking to supplant French influence with their own, to exploit the region’s rich mining potential, especially in the Congo. Kagame trained in the USA, at a school similar to the School of the Americas.

The Tutsis in Uganda invaded Rwanda in 1990, and after several years of solidifying their presence, they assassinated the Hutu president and launched a war of conquest which only took a few months. Kagame was then installed as dictator, and immediately began invading neighboring countries, especially the Congo. Several million people have died under Kagame’s onslaught. He makes Suharto and other late 20^th century butchers pale in comparison, but like Suharto, Kagame performed his genocides with American support, so he is portrayed in the West as some great statesman and humanitarian. The recent 20^th anniversary of one of Kagame’s more egregious slaughters passed without notice in the West, while the propaganda machine revved up for the 20^th anniversary of the Srebrenica “massacre.”

In Enduring Lies, Ed shows how the Western propaganda system literally turned reality on its head, in which the propaganda fairy tale was that Hutu genocide of the Tutsi was planned, which Kagame’s forces ended, so ending the Hutu “genocide” against the Tutsi was Kagame’s great feat. I recently wrote about Kinzer’s Overthrow and how poor it was, and he wrote a book that was outright hagiography of Kagame. It is not often when our propaganda system can literally turn reality on its head, but it is pretty easy to do in foreign lands that the average imperial citizen has no awareness of, and frankly does not care about, especially when the victims of our imperial machinations are not white people.

Best,

Wade

Hi:

One of the greatest solaces of my journey has been hiking in the mountains and being in nature. I may find the time and inspiration this year to update that photo page, maybe significantly. I have been leading backpacks since I was 19, and for a decade or so, I led trips in early September (and still do, when I can), which is perhaps the best time of the year here in Washington State, as the bugs and (relative) crowds are gone, the berries are ripe, and the weather usually cooperates. In 2001, I took my second trip to White Pass and came out of the mountains on September 9^th, after two wonderful days in glorious meadows, and I spent several hours one day picking blueberries. It does not get any better than that, other than having my wife with me while picking. Two days later, the dark phase of my midlife crisis began, and that 2005 trip to Lyman Basin was the most emotionally “up” that I had felt since 9/11. For various reasons, 2006 was a rough year for me, and I looked forward to my 2006 trip to White Pass, where I the last felt emotionally up. My 2001 and 2006 White Pass trips bookended the worst years of my midlife crisis. I took my nephew there in 2013, and he is probably hooked for life.

A few days before that trip, Dennis arrived at my home, unannounced, to invite me to the White House. I was at work when my wife called, telling me that Dennis was at our house. I had not seen him or talked with him since I saw him wrestling with that cameraman in the spring of 2001. An ominous feeling arose as I left for home, to see what Dennis was up to, which I knew would be significant. He did not show up just to say hi.

My brother was at my home, as I took him on those epic backpacks in those days. When I arrived at home, Dennis was sitting at my desk, talking to my wife and brother. I gave Dennis a big hug, stepped back, and asked why he was there, and in far from an “I am interested” manner. Dennis replied that he wanted me to come to Washington D.C. for an eve of the election demonstration of his technology, sponsored by the White House. Dennis said that he also wanted me to be on the board of his new company, as the only board member who was not a family member. I still did his companies’ tax returns every year, in collaboration with his wife, which was an annual chore that I dreaded, and in a couple of weeks I would spend a weekend doing them once more. I instantly declined all of his initiations. Dennis and I are closer than family, but if it had been anybody else, I would have probably told them to get the hell out of my house, and my demeanor was not far from it. My wife and brother instantly got the message and left, and I then spent the next several hours with Dennis. Once he realized that I had no interest in getting involved with him again, he left it alone (at least for that meeting! ), and we spent the rest of the day and evening discussing various topics.

As I have written plenty, the few who have played at our level generally all know that FE and related technologies are already on Earth today. That knowledge just comes with the territory, and was partly responsible with Dennis’s “FE or Bust” approach from 1986 to about 2001, while also hawking wares such as Brown’s Gas machines in the meantime. Back in 1974, when I got my first energy dreams, it was initiated by the stir around Mr. Mentor’s engine, which was estimated to get 200 MPG in the situation of a mail truck. Before I met Dennis, I knew of the situation around high-MPG carburetors (and had it made very clear to me in 1996 by our insurance guru at my trucking company, who worked with the executives at the holding company’s headquarters), so squeezing more energy out of a gallon of gasoline was very familiar territory to me.

What was Dennis going to demonstrate in Washington, and have tea with Bush and Cheney afterwards at the White House? A carburetor that got 100 MPG. High-MPG carburetors are nearly a century old, and were always wiped out, bought out, or frozen out by Detroit. I suppose that if anybody could take a run at it, it would be Dennis. I was never too interested in what Dennis was doing on the high-MPG carburetor front, but I talked with people who knew, and there were indeed people getting 100 MPG with Dennis’s technology. It was real, but relied on a retrofit kit, which was going to be far from failsafe, but Dennis sold the kits with less than a 2% return rate. It really worked, which did not surprise me, but even if the White House wanted it, other, far more powerful interests were certain to intervene. They eventually did, but in my home in August 2006, I really didn’t care and wanted no part of it.

We spent a pleasant evening, and then Dennis was off to see his family in Yakima. A few days later, I hiked to White Pass, and my brother took the photograph that Bill Ryan chose as the one for my Camelot interview (Bill’s favorite places include meadows, too). I generally use that photo in the forums I am in, and may update my forum photo this year, for my ten-years-older look.

It is always good seeing Dennis, at least until luring me back into his operation was finished, but when he comes into my life, however briefly, it is like a hurricane roaring through. His visit brought my anguish to a head, and my wife once again began insisting that I get professional help. I once again went to a trauma specialist, 15 years since my previous visits. It worked, and by the autumn of 2006, my nightmare of a midlife crisis finally began receding. It was like walking around with a spike in my chest for about seven years, and was the greatest sustained emotional agony of my life.

A few years later, Dennis was in the news again. The feds attacked him. That was new. Dennis had been an FBI informant many years ago, risking his life to do so. The USA’s Attorney General called Dennis “squeaky clean” in 1988, and while the sting operation in 1996 had federal involvement and we heard that Clinton hated Dennis, the feds did not strike. But in 2009, under Obama, they did. I read the FTC’s charges, and they were artful deceptions; they were obviously experienced liars. Their attack was accompanied by a national TV show that smeared Dennis, which featured the psychopathic xxxx, Mr. Skeptic. Several national TV shows smeared Dennis over about a decade, and all featured Mr. Skeptic while I never heard from the people doing the shows. Not that I would have ever consented to being part of their disinformation projects, but that they never even contacted me said all that I needed to know.

The MO in 2009 was the same one that I saw in Seattle and Ventura, in which media smear campaigns accompanied dishonest or even criminal attacks by government officials. In every instance, the media and government acted in concert at the behest of private energy interests who tried to rid themselves of the threat that Dennis presented. The Seattle and Ventura attacks also used agents provocateurs in the inside (1, 2), but I don’t know if they used one in 2009. I think that Dennis and his wife might have been too wise for that in 2009.

But unlike the other attacks, the 2009 version was at the national level. While I read the FTC’s charges, I thanked my lucky stars that I did not sign up with Dennis in 2006, as the feds would have arrived at my home with a subpoena, for starters. They did it to one of Dennis’s sidekicks, who kind of replaced me in Dennis’s organization, who later told me that he nearly soiled himself when they served him the subpoena.

I am going to skip ahead several years to the next and so far last time that I saw Dennis, in 2013, when I did a 9,000-mile Bucket List road trip and saw Dennis and his family in New Jersey, which was the highlight of the trip and, of course, Dennis once more tried to get me involved with him. It was far from my intent – I just wanted to see him and his family; his daughters see me as “Uncle Wade” – but Dennis treated me like a historian, which I suppose I am, and he spent most of a day telling me his story over the past several years, laying document after document on me. I had seen him do that with others before, but that was the first time that he did it with me.

Dennis told me part of the story in 2006, and I heard the rest of it in 2013. Dennis still kept barnstorming the USA, promoting FE, and he was also developing that carburetor in 2006. He began interacting with some big players. One of Detroit’s auto companies eventually tested dozens of Dennis’s carburetors, but then bigger interests got involved than a mere CEO of a Fortune 50 auto company.

In the wake of invading Iraq, Bush made speeches about “being addicted to oil,” and how America could become energy self-sufficient and not need Middle East oil, and the fracking boom in the USA was partly a response to that. When Bush made those speeches, the man writing them was his energy advisor. I have a video at home on current energy issues, Bush’s energy advisor was interviewed in it, and he looked like a southern choir boy, an academic at a southern university who Bush tapped to be his energy advisor. In that man’s case, he seemed genuine, which is an anomaly that you can find at those levels, where amongst sharks like Cheney and Rummy, some academic choir boys could be found.

Sometime in early 2006, during Dennis’s barnstorming tour, Bush’s energy advisor attended a show. Not only did he attend, but he signed up for FE, along with his entire family, and approached Dennis afterward, excited about what he was doing. Dennis did not just fall off the turnip truck, and he told Bush’s energy advisor that he trusted him as far as he could throw an elephant, but the advisor was unfazed and soon went to Dennis’s New Jersey facility and hung out for a couple of days, seeing what Dennis was working on. Dennis could not dampen the man’s enthusiasm. Dennis built an FE prototype in those years that I eventually saw, and it produced ZPE effects when it got up to 2,000 RPMs, which is typical, but Dennis’s 100-MPG carburetor was market-ready. Bush’s energy advisor arranged that eve of the election demonstration of Dennis’s carburetor. I never really cared enough about it to ask, but between the time that Dennis invited me to the White House and that demonstration, somebody killed it, and it was likely initiated from levels far above Bush.

Dennis was not about to be dissuaded, and in early 2008, he had a booth at an international energy conference in Washington D.C. where Bush was the keynote speaker. The second day of the conference, the exhibit area was closed for an hour so that Bush could tour it before his speech. Bush’s energy advisor was with him, and he told Dennis that during the hour that Bush toured the exhibit, he spent a half hour at Dennis’s exhibit, with his eyes bugging out. You can see Dennis’s exhibit at that link above. Dennis told me that Bush’s energy advisor was pulling for Dennis until the end, but bigger interests were involved than a puny sitting president.

Just as Dennis was flying high, working with a Detroit auto company that was testing dozens of his carburetors, he ran an ad in USA Today, which he had been advertising in since our days in Ventura. But a full-page ad in a national newspaper was a new horizon for Dennis. The day or two before the ad ran, Dennis’s wife answered their home phone and on the other end was Mr. Big. His is perhaps the most legendary name amongst the global elite, and he called Dennis to ask about the ad. Dennis’s wife is completely unfazed by the rich and powerful, and called across the house to call Dennis to the phone, to talk to Mr. Big, who proceeded to ask Dennis about that ad, which had not yet appeared to the public. Dennis was unfazed, too, and replied that the ad for his 100-MPG carburetor was just that. Knowing Dennis, he probably offered to put one on Mr. Big’s car for free. I later heard from a reliable source that Mr. Skeptic tested one of Dennis’s carburetors and the MPG nearly doubled, but his “job” was to lie about Dennis, so not a peep was heard from Mr. Skeptic on the test that he ran.

But not long after that oligarch called Dennis, the wheels began grinding, which resulted in the FTC’s attacks in 2009, that smearing national TV show, and that Detroit company suddenly got very cold feet and then said that they had never heard of Dennis! Dennis had that auto company CEO’s advisor on tape, in front of 800 of Dennis’s dealers, telling the crowd that the automobile company’s testing of Dennis’s carburetor was going well (I have the video of that meeting), but when the word came out from some lofty place, the auto company suddenly disavowed all knowledge of Dennis, as if he had been erased. Brian experienced something similar, if not quite that high-profile. That is part of the surreal world that you can enter when you play at those levels.

That is what happens when the Big Boys get involved, people who own American presidents, but even they do not play at Godzilla’s level of the game. That man who is oligarchy personified can’t live much longer, and I may reveal his name when he dies, but I still may ask Dennis if I can.

During my 2013 meeting with Dennis, he told me about many of his adventures, and when he would fly high, billionaires, “philanthropists,” politicians, and the like would swarm him, but none of them were really interested in helping Dennis, but looked for ways to coopt his work, etc. There are probably no truly “rich philanthropists” active on Earth today. It is a huge deception, foisted on the masses to provide the appearance that the big capitalist winners really care about anything other than their empires. It is a very old MO.

When I saw Dennis in 2013, I told him a little about my current approach, of love and enlightenment, and he immediately recognized that I was doing something different, as Brian also did, soon before he died. They were really the only two people on Earth whose opinion that I respected on this issue. Both were very intrigued by it, which really emerged from a generation of life-risking and life-wrecking trial and error, of a process of elimination of all of the failed approaches. I certainly did not come to my approach overnight, in some flash of insight, but it came very slowly over many years, and in my next posts, I will back up and resume the story of my midlife crisis finally drawing to a close and what activities that I engaged in, which further shaped the path to my current approach.

Best,

Wade