"All the world's a stage we pass through." - R. Ayana

Saturday, 28 March 2009

Introduction to the Electric Cosmos

Introduction to the

Electric Cosmos

New Insights Into the Unknown Universe


There is a revolution just beginning in astronomy/cosmology that will rival the one set off by Copernicus and Galileo.  This revolution is based on the growing realization that the cosmos is highly electrical in nature.  It is becoming clear that 99% of the universe is made up not of "invisible matter", but rather, of matter in the plasma state. 

Electrodynamic forces in electric plasmas are much stronger than the gravitational force.

    Mainstream astrophysicists are continually “surprised” by new data sent back by space probes and orbiting telescopes.  That ought to be a clue that something is wrong.  New information always sends theoretical astrophysicists "back to the drawing board".  In light of this, it is curious that they have such "cock-sure" attitudes about the infallibility of their present models.  Those models seem to require major "patching up" every time a new space probe sends back data.

    Astrophysicists and astronomers do not study experimental plasma dynamics in graduate school.  They rarely take any courses in electrodynamic field theory, and thus they try to explain every new discovery via gravity, magnetism, and fluid dynamics which is all they understand.  It is no wonder they cannot understand that 99% of all cosmic phenomena are due to plasma dynamics and not to gravity alone.
    When confronted by observations that cast doubt on the validity of their theories, astrophysicists have circled their wagons and conjured up pseudo-scientific invisible entities such as neutron stars, weakly interacting massive particles, strange energy, and black holes.  When confronted by solid evidence such as Halton Arp's photographs that contradict the Big Bang Theory, their response is to refuse him access to any major telescope in the U.S.

    Instead of wasting time in a futile battle trying to convince entrenched mainstream astronomers to seriously investigate the Electric/Plasma Universe ideas, a growing band of plasma scientists and engineers are simply bypassing them.  A new electric plasma-based paradigm that does not find new discoveries to be “enigmatic and puzzling”, but rather to be predictable and consistent with an electrical point of view, is slowly but surely replacing the old paradigm wherein all electrical mechanisms are ignored.

    This information is excerpted from a web site which is dedicated to explaining the basis of this ongoing scientific shift.  It also presents links to other sites where you can investigate the details of what is happening.

       These pages are designed to be read through in order, starting with the Introduction.  If you do this, the background information needed for understanding any given page will have been presented in an earlier page.  However, each of the topics below is discussed in a reasonably self-contained way for anyone who just wants to pick and choose. 

What is wrong with present-day accepted astrophysics?

 

It is not scientific.  In today's world many people characterize themselves as being 'scientists'. Only those who always carefully follow the scientific method are deserving of that title.  Modern establishment astrophysics fails the test in several ways.

The Empirical Scientific Method

 

Scientists are distinguishable from artists, poets, musicians, and others in that they use what is known as the 'scientific method'.  It is not that 'inspiration' or 'the muse' is not valuable in science, it is - but it is not the starting point of what we call science.  In the process called the scientific method a true scientist will:
Observe nature - carefully record what is seen.
 
Seek patterns in the observed data - put numbers on the data - fit equations to those numbers.
 
Generalize those equations into a word description of the process - this is a hypothesis.
 
Carry out experiments and/or gather independent data to see how well the hypothesis predicts future observations and results. This is called "closing the loop" on your hypothesis.
 
Reject, or modify the hypothesis if the experiments show it falls short of success in these predictions.
 
Only after the results of several experiments have been successfully predicted by the hypothesis, can it be called a theory.
 
If two different theories predict a given phenomenon equally well, the simpler theory is probably the best one.  This principle is called Occam's Razor.
Theories can never be proven to be correct - some other mechanism entirely may be the cause of the observed data.  But theories can be disproved if they fail to predict the outcomes of additional experiments.  Such theories are termed to be falsified. Sometimes the scientific method as described above is called the empirical method.
 

The Deductive Method

 

As an alternative to the empirical method, there is a method of deriving theories from assumed generalizations about the universe.  This is called the deductive method.  In this process one starts with a "law of nature" or "obviously correct" generalization about the "way things work" and deduces (reasons out - derives) its consequences in detail.  A hypothesis arrived at via this method is promoted to the status of being a Theory if a large enough body of experts 'accept' it.  Thus, in this method, a vote of the experts determines if a theory is correct.  Once such a theory has been accepted it is not easily rejected in light of conflicting evidence; it is, however, often modified - made more complex - and, unfortunately, new data is often selectively chosen to support it.
 
The selection and publication of only the data that support the accepted theory is expedited by the "peer review system".  If the experts who have accepted a given theory control both the funding of future research and also what gets published, there is little chance for conflicting viewpoints to develop.
 

 

 

Pseudo Science

 

Some hypotheses, when presented by august, well established scientists, are given credence without anyone questioning whether the hypothesis has been developed using the scientific method. Yet in most cases it is not difficult to check whether or not the scientific method has been used correctly.  For example, consider the hypothesis that "There are gnomes in my garden that always make themselves invisible when anyone tries to observe them."  Clearly, no conceivable experiment or observation could falsify that statement.  This is evidence the hypothesis comes from a pseudo-scientific source.  Legitimate theories must be falsifiable.
 

The Problem Faced by Modern Astronomy is that Experiments Are Not Possible

 

Because the stars are light years away, we cannot hope to be able to go there and perform experiments on them. Until relatively recently even the planets were out of our reach.  Thus, cosmologists never get to complete the scientific method.  We cannot 'close the loop' in cosmology. But, if we cannot test our hypotheses, how can we reject or modify them?  The answer, of course, is that astrophysicists, more than those in any other branch of science, must be exceedingly careful to continually examine their hypotheses in light of any new data.  It is the contention of the author of these pages that they have not been doing this.
 
Einstein was a purely theoretical physicist - he never went near a physics lab.  He conducted only 'gedankenexperimenten' - thought experiments - in order to arrive at his general theory of relativity (GR).  This is a perfect example of the deductive method at work.  Its use is exceptionally dangerous in an area like cosmology wherein it is difficult to falsify any theory.  Now that the GR Theory is accepted by establishment astrophysics, any new data (such as photographs of the astronomical object known as the "Einstein Cross") are discussed only within the framework of this complicated theory.
 
The images of the four small objects in the Einstein Cross when looked at only from this viewpoint, are considered to be supporting evidence for the GR Theory.  However, they could just as well be interpreted as being evidence supporting a much simpler cosmological theory.
 
Evidence contradictory to the accepted Big Bang Theory, such as images of connections between objects that have widely different red shift values, are dismissed as being mirages.
 

False Assumptions in Astrophysics

 

Most of today's accepted astronomy/cosmology is a set of deductively arrived at hypotheses precariously based on two false assumptions :
Electrical fields, currents, and plasma discharges are not important in space. Only gravitational and magnetic fields are important.
 
If the light from an object exhibits redshift, the object must be speeding away from us.  And its distance from us is directly proportional to that speed.
Both of these assumptions are demonstrably wrong. They have been, and continue to be, contradicted by actual observations of the sky.  Those observations tell us that

The universe is highly electrical in nature.
 
Redshift is more a measure of an object's youth than its velocity.
 
The continued refusal of astrophysicists to re-examine their hypotheses in light of these new observations is the focus of these pages.
 

 

 

Invisible Entities Invented To Patch Up Failing Theories


The theories that have sprung from these faulty, overly complicated mathematical models have given birth to such arcane notions as: curved space, neutron stars, WIMPs (and now WIMPZILLAS), MACHOs, several different types of black holes, superluminal jets, dark energy, and magnetic field lines that pile-up, merge and reconnect.  All of these inventions are fictions put forth by astrophysicists in desperate efforts to defend their theories when faced with contradicting observations.  None have ever been observed or photographed.  Many of them are demonstrably impossible.  But their existence is repeatedly invoked to explain new observations and measurements that contradict the enshrined theories of modern astronomy without resorting to the use of electrical principles.
 
We continually hear statements such as, "There must be a black hole at the center of that galaxy." (Otherwise we cannot explain its level of energy output.)  "There must be invisible dark matter in that galaxy." (Otherwise we cannot explain how it rotates the way it does.)  "Ninety nine percent of the universe is made up of dark energy." (Otherwise the Big Bang Theory is falsified.)  "Pulsars must be made up of strange matter." (Otherwise we might have to look for an electrical explanation). 

We are also asked to believe that two objects (like galaxy NGC 4319 and its companion Markarian 205) are not connected together even though we have photographs of the connection. So, we are told not to believe in the things that we can see, but that we should believe in the existence of the magic entities that their theories require - even though we cannot see or measure them.
 

 

Astrophysicists Denigrate Outsiders - Then Quietly Adopt their New Ideas

 

There have been several instances in the past when the astronomical mainstream has long rejected an idea that is later accepted.  There is usually no public disgrace for the in-group who were on the wrong side of the issue.  When, after being viciously denigrated, the validity of a new idea becomes inescapably obvious, a few years go by, and then we quietly hear: "Well, Everyone has known for a Long Time that this (the new idea) was always true."  An example of this is Hannes Alfvén's discovery of plasma waves. This relatively recently discovered property of plasmas is now being wrongly used by astrophysicists to explain away all sorts of (what is for them) enigmatic phenomena - such as the temperature inversion in the Sun's lower corona.
 

The Future

 

In a few years, perhaps we will hear: "Well, Everyone has known for a Long Time that quasars are not extremely distant, and red shift is more a measure of the youth of an object than its recessional velocity and distance.  No one said for sure there ever was a Big Bang.  It was just another false theory.   Everyone has known for a Long Time that electric currents flowing in plasmas produce many of the mysterious observed solar and cosmic phenomena."  And we will not hear of machos, wimps, neutronium, dark energy, and broken magnetic field lines from any serious scientist ever again.
 
Time will tell.
 
Will the founders of the Electric / Plasma Universe Theory be acknowledged as having been the pathfinders they are?
 
Or will lesser men quietly adopt these ideas without giving credit to their originators and then claim them to be 'well known'?
 

See the Electric Cosmos Web Site at http://www.electric-cosmos.org/introduction.htm

 

The following pages discuss some of the people, observations, and ideas, that challenge the false assumptions that mainstream science refuses to re-examine. When you read them, remember that any single unanswered challenge of this sort is enough to bring down the pseudoscientific magic show that modern astronomy/cosmology has become - like a house of cards.
 

See The Electric Sky - The New Astrophysics at

 
 
For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati:

@  http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com (or click on any tag at the bottom of the page for direct references – case sensitive)

And see

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com





This material is published under Creative Commons Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com
 

Friday, 27 March 2009

Should nuclear fuels be taken out of national hands?

Should nuclear fuels be taken out of national hands?



HOW do you manage a global boom in nuclear power while discouraging weapons proliferation? Uranium and plutonium are most likely to find their way into weapons via the enrichment and reprocessing of fuel for nuclear power plants. If all of the countries now planning to go nuclear also handle their own fuel cycles, the proliferation risk could skyrocket.

The answer may be to put the fuel cycle entirely under international control. Many governments, international agencies and arms control experts are calling for the establishment of international fuel banks, and eventually fuel production plants, that would pledge to supply nuclear materials to any country so long as it meets non-proliferation rules. The US already supports the idea, at least for new nuclear powers, and last month the European Union (EU) pledged €25 million towards the first fuel bank. Yet this means countries with new nuclear programmes would have to place control of their fuel supply at least partly in foreign hands. Could it actually work?

Last year saw fresh predictions of the proliferation of nuclear weapons, especially in the politically explosive Middle East. The most critical situation is Iran, which has rejected international demands to stop enriching uranium. In a reportreleased last month, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) warned that Iran's uranium enrichment is expanding, and the agency could not exclude military use. Analysts at the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington DC, an anti-proliferation think tank, say the country could have enough for a nuclear weaponthis year. With some nations in the region already nuclear, neighbouring countries could feel pressure to follow suit (see "Nuclear Middle East"). At the same time, many are looking to acquire their own nuclear industries, meaning there will soon be far more weapons-grade material around (see graph at http://www.newscientist.com/articleimages/mg20126903.100/1-should-nuclear-fuels-be-taken-out-of-national-hands.html).

For most nuclear newcomers in the region and elsewhere, the move to nuclear power is largely independent of military concerns. Nuclear power capacity worldwide could almost double by 2030, says Vilmos Cserveny, head of external relations at the IAEA, mainly because poor countries face climbing oil prices and crippling electricity shortages. The problem is that countries that may not have the infrastructure needed to enforce stringent controls will be managing nuclear materials for the first time. Of the nuclear power plants now under construction, says Cserveny, around half are in developing countries, especially in Asia (see chart).

The world does not need more enrichment plants to fuel this expansion; there are plenty, especially in Russia. Of the 30 countries already with nuclear power, only 14 enrich their own fuel - the rest buy it in. However, some countries may be wary of depending on foreign powers for their energy and might want to make and reprocess their own fuel. Every new fuel plant increases the risk that fissile material will find its way into weapons, so the challenge is to find ways to guarantee fuel supplies without countries building their own facilities, says Cserveny.

According to a growing number of analysts, agencies and governments, the solution is internationally managed reprocessing plants. The idea was first proposed in 1946, but no plan has ever been agreed on. In 2003, though, it resurfaced when IAEA chief Mohammed El-Baradei began promotingso-called multilateral nuclear arrangements (MNAs).In recent months, interest from countries that already have nuclear power has increased steeply. "Multilateral mechanisms should offer a real alternative to countries to forego developing their own national enrichment and reprocessing capabilities," Javier Solana, EU high representative, said in Brussels in December.

In a first step towards MNAs, the EU last month granted €25 million towards the creation of an IAEA emergency nuclear fuel stockpile that any country can tap should its commercial supply be cut off due to political disputes. It's not the only proposal to ensure an international fuel supply. In a report for the European Parliament published in December, Ian Anthony of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) documents nine separate proposals from experts and governments. Along with the IAEA fuel bank, there are four for putting existing enrichment plants under international control and four more to build new, super-safe enrichment plants that would be international from the start.


Newcomers to nuclear power could be reluctant to put their fuel cycles in international hands if existing nuclear powers, such as the US, Russia and the UK, continue to control their own. Several proposals call for every nuclear country to join in.
 
In fact, long-standing resentments over the rich world's monopolisation of nuclear technology have made developing countries wary of any effort to ask them to rely on the nuclear powers for their energy security, says Oliver Meier of the Arms Control Association, a think tank based in Washington DC.

Why would they place themselves at the mercy of foreigners for their energy? "Partly because it is very expensive to make and reprocess nuclear fuel," Meier suggests. Spiralling costs are already leading to consolidation in the nuclear fuel industry, so a multilateral future may not be so unlikely, says Anthony. And for nations like Egypt and Iran, for example, a shared fuel source and stringent inspections would mean each could be sure that the other is not quietly proliferating - at least in theory.

To further assuage concerns over shared fuel, Germany has suggested that some countries should cede sovereignty over a piece of territory where fuel cycle companies could build facilities that would then be run by the IAEA. It could even be at Natanz, Iran's enrichment plant, says Meier. This might seem unpalatable to some western governments, but "the alternative, Iran going it alone without inspections, is worse", he says.

Some countries could cede sovereignty over a piece of territory where internationally run facilities could be built. Geoffrey Forden of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology thinksthat Iran should set up a commercial partnership with western and regional governments to put Natanz under joint control. Iran would have to promise not to enrich anywhere else, and accept inspections; the IAEA-operated plant would then make enough fuel for Iranian reactors and those in the rest of the region. Staff would be multinational and chances for subterfuge would be limited. "The plan meets the bottom line on both sides," he says.

 

Nuclear middle east

 

Iranisn't the only Middle Eastern nation that has observers worried about nuclear proliferation. Nine other countries in the region plan to build around 12 nuclear power plants over the next decade. This will produce enough plutonium in spent fuel for 1700 nuclear weapons, says David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington DC, an anti-proliferation think tank. With nuclear weapons already in Israel, Pakistan, India and potentially Iran, there is motivation to acquire them.

If the newcomers acquire fuel production and reprocessing facilities then the risk of material finding its way into weapons will rise sharply. Inspections might prevent this, but only eight countries in the region - including Iran - have signed the International Atomic Energy Agency's most stringent inspections agreement, known as the Additional Protocol. Only four countries enforce it. Egypt says it will never sign. Both it and Turkey reject a proposed moratorium on enrichment and reprocessing in the region put forward by, among others, Sweden's Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission.

Meanwhile, Gulf states have decided it makes business sense to sell their ever-scarcer oil and buy nuclear power for themselves. In December, the US agreed to sell a nuclear reactor to the United Arab Emirates. Both sides say the UAE will forego enrichment and sign the protocol. Yet it's unclear whether the signed deal stipulates this, says Henry Sokolski, who serves on the US Congress's anti-proliferation commission.

07 January 2009 by Debora Mackenzie

From issue 2690of New Scientist magazine, page 6-7. Subscribe and get 4 free issues.
For similar stories, visit the Energy and Fuelsand Weapons TechnologyTopic Guides


For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati:

@  http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com (or click on any tag at the bottom of the page for direct references – case sensitive)

And see

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com





This material is published under Creative Commons Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

Thursday, 26 March 2009

Light At This End of the Tunnel: Prosperity and Plenty are Here and Now

Light At This End of the Tunnel
Prosperity and Plenty are Here and Now

comsorting by you.

The left and right forepaws of a primordial Beast conspired to control the direction of human progress long before the dawn of the last ‘Enlightenment’. The same tenacious will has manipulated the puppet strings of emperors, kings, popes, czars, presidents, rajahs, commissars, chief rabbis and head mullahs for millennia.

The serious frowns and toothy smiles on the faces of the clonal glove puppets are familiar to us all. Their egocentric marionette lips mouth serious lies to us every day, from the ubiquitous filtering screens that masquerade as windows on our world.
Half the human tribe believes the half-truth hand signals of the right-hand puppet while the other half barracks for the left – the perpetual dichotomy of a pointless Punch and Judy show that distracts and detracts from the real Royal Game, played by puppetmasters behind a veiling curtain.

Everyone goes about their daily lives under the same cloud of confusion, spanning all the world’s skyscraping horizons in a dark thrall of mundane habituation. Children are packed into roles and set loose in the world carrying a meagre toolbox of trinkets, without ever knowing who or what they really are - without even being taught where most of their bodily organs are, or knowing what they do.

The more fortunate citizens of quasi-democratic societies are convinced they’re free because they get to vote for Punch or Judy on one loud bright day in each handful of years before returning to the daily grind. Most are happy to keep their heads down and keep their workaday lives trundling along a series of treadmills, caught in the self-tied binds of family responsibilities and social expectations. Meanwhile, the time of their lives runs away through the endlessly swept, washed, vacuumed, blow-dried, polished sterile hourglasses of utterly materialistic lives.

Women and men proceed from cradle to grave and back again with eyes wide shut; most eventually forget they’re alive at all and mistake momentary whistle-stop work breaks for long holy days of peaceable contemplation and licit chances to vent a little steam. Somnambulant domesticated primates focus through half-mast eyelids on a vanishing point of prosperity and peace, a tenuous mirage that continually recedes from tunneling visions. Self-mutilating naked apes tear down the forests that birthed them and burrow more deeply into the fabric of the world to escape the harsh glare.

People get on with the ‘job’ of life and forget why they chose to be born here and now, in the best of all possible worlds. By the time most human hominids make it through the gauntlet of terror that channels their free-spirited hearts and minds into the blunt slotted cogs of adulterated adulthood, they’ve already given up seeking ultimate truth or meaning and pay lip service to fabulous regional lies of control freak religions and the idiosyncratic ideologies of hopelessly outdated forebears.

Many toiling wage slaves become convinced they follow the orders of a superior caste of apes, following the dictates of an unseen Divine Plan that extends far beyond their humble purview. By their thirties they’ve sold their immortal heritage for transient handfuls of inedible monetary pottage and are carefully brainwashing their own bright free children to follow in their well-won footsteps, on a pointless, endless rat run to nowhere.

There’s no time for true contemplation - or meaning - in lives that are fully engaged in meaningless work and other trivialities for most waking hours. How much freedom can there be when humans act like robots, leaping from their beds and back again like rigidly programmed jack-in-the-boxes, springing in time with artificial mechanical tides and staggering onto the bright beach of alleged wakefulness to the tunes of alarming clocks? Industrial chaos despoils the world with every flick of a switch and flush of a toilet as purblind monkeys saw away at the branch of the Tree of Life that sustains them, before racing out to its eroded nether branchlets for a quick bite to eat and a nap.

This workaholic tableau has been in place for so long that it appears to be a ‘normal’ way of life, but the madness has actually only existed for an eye-blink century or two in the enduring existence of all humankind. The few who question the dictates, follies and outrageous lies of the (post) modern world are deemed freaks, weirdoes, hippies, rebels, ferals, anarchists, ignoramuses, infidels or Luddites (labels which this author often wears and bears, along with the badge of honour of being regarded a foolish clown while he replants seeds, vines, shrubs, vegetables and trees around the pristine waters of a beautiful subtropical paradise, repairing the ravages of yesterday’s ‘progress’).
photo

The Ultimate Question

Yet the same question inevitably arises in everyone’s life, at a sudden turning point or an unexpected fork in the road. One day every child or adult ponders the primal question as hearts and minds spontaneously spring open in an impassioned moment of insight and understanding - what am I here for?’; and a horde of shysters and self-deceivers always lurks ready to reply, clutching a multitude of costly services in their manikin hands.

A truly satisfying and accurate answer to the ultimate question can only arise from within – from the cyclonic still centre at the core of one’s being, within and beyond the concealing illusory veils of belief, faith, education, ideology and culture - beyond the reach of puppet or master in the inviolate sanctuary of each immortal soul.

There’s no time but the present – no future to look forward to, no past to remain immersed within. There’s only an infinite now. Putting off the time of your life until you’re too old to enjoy it makes little sense to wise elders of tribes who dwell within the ebb and flow of lunar cycles and the endless revolutions of the seasons. A tree can take a thousand years or more to grow to maturity – but only if the seed is planted today.

There are many solutions to the apparently intractable dilemmas facing the human tribe, but truly illuminating answers require appropriate questions. To sow and reap an organic crop and work with living things is a very different path to working the factored illusions and imaginary growths of dark satanic mills, or their carefully falsified ledgers. Working with life is an art that can take many incarnations to master. The fault in today’s social systems and rustbucket technologies lies not in the puppets, but in their master – and the master is you.

You are a divine immortal with mortal amnesia, possessed of the power to make, break or remake the universe. The whole wide world you experience is a result of unmastered desires and unexamined willfulness that you have unknowingly created beyond the narrow torchlight of your daily consciousness.

Ask not ‘for whom?’ we work, or even live - we do everything for and to ourselves, creating personal realities from the tattered old cloth of yesterday’s futurism. Our dreams are influenced by all the dreamers and decisions that have preceded this moment in time, and truly new and ®evolutionary ways of seeing, thinking and living are required if we’re to make the collective leap to a survivable future.

To imagine that you live your life ‘for the children’ is no answer at all; it merely puts off the real question for another generation to ponder. Besides – you are your great-grandchildren. Ask not ‘how?’ we are to survive and thrive, unless you’ve first examined a more fundamental question. We plant the seeds of our destiny every day; the Tree of Life’s most fruitful new seeds lurk inside the kernel of the question ‘why?’

There are many solutions to the intricate problems besetting these glorious yet seemingly doomed new millennial civilizations, yet none are of use unless we first stop and ask, ‘Why?’ Why are you here? Why are you alive? Why are you doing what you do? There’s little point in attempting to change course and avoid the apparently foregone apocalyptic conclusion of all our hell-bent actions if we don’t first stop and take a look around. We don’t just need to pause to smell roses and coffee, but must come to a full emergency stop and end to this one-pointed period of oblivious servitude to a carcinogenic fantasy of eternal illusory growth.

Hopeful dreams of utopian equity have been portrayed by many creative geniuses and leading lights of bygone ages, and simple, equitable solutions have already been exhaustively detailed for every problem we face in the new millennium. These idealistic plans have all been promptly suppressed, or twisted into the daily living nightmares of industrialists and warmongers. Technologies that promised to erase senseless and desensitising toil were employed instead to round up people who lived free lives amidst the wide green world and enslave them and their children in toxic workplaces and newly created suburban cell blocks. Today’s false dichotomy of bosses and workers was born in the blinding crucible of a planetary slag heap, as unions and boardrooms conspired to squeeze as much from the body of Mother Nature as they could, as quickly and carelessly as possible.

Bold new ideas, theories and functioning technologies wait in the wings, ready to lift us from the pit we’ve dug for ourselves. Yet unless we all change the courses of our individual dreams and activity-riddled lives, any solutions we employ will fail. Careless and desperate attempts to dig ourselves out of this global quagmire will only serve to propel us more deeply into the wasteful crap of new unexamined byproducts, which will automatically arise from humankind’s carefully entrained cyclic greed. Helping to keep the dreadnought ships of warrior states on an even keel will only ensure their weaponry kills the planet a little quickly and more efficiently.

We may long for the oversight of a wise new ship’s master, but all regimental minds bent on command are fractured by the same internal flaws and self-blinding inconsistencies. Though they imagine it is they who pull the strings, all leaders become trapped in the webbing of their follower’s concentrated expectations and become puppets in thrall of myriad spinning fates.

The wills of these ‘bosses’ are represented by so-called ‘conservative’ parties, whose sectional interests are always best served by maintaining the status quo – and by keeping Spaceship Earth on current course toward an iceberg of extinction. They prefer to ignore the juggernaut’s undeniably monumental presence while they concentrate on counting tomorrow’s ill-gotten gains; that’s the only ‘life’ they know.

The workers are served by more ‘progressive’ politicians whose primary interest is to ensure that the planetary despoils are divided up a little more evenly before we hit the ice. Left wing labourers are scarcely interested in arresting the blind march of growth - and cutting back their own pay packets or consumerist lifestyles.

Only youngsters, students and the still fledgling Green movements around the world represent the true interests of humankind as a whole – by standing up for the Mother of us all, and placing planetary needs above the greedy anthropocentric whims of bosses or workers. And yet voting just isn’t enough. We cannot persist in the belief that making our mark once every three or five years can make a real difference to the self-ordained doom we sense descending on us all. What are you going to do about it? Only direct action can really help. Only by thinking globally but actually ACTING locally can really help us change course at this late date – and before we can act with truth, peace and honour we must know the answer to the question ‘why?’

All the rivalrous short-sighted factions born within the industrious human hive of the insectile industrial era have had their day. They know all the novel answers to ‘how’, ‘where’, ‘when’ and ‘who’, but have no real solution to the fundamental dilemma of ‘WHY’? The dawn of a new Enlightenment is beginning to glow behind the wiser eyes of a new generation, who can easily see that the clay-footed heroes of their co-opted parents are wearing no clothes.

The young and young at heart can see through the screens. They smile or giggle at tribal fables of gods and devils, and recognise the deities and demiurges of superannuated ideologies struggling for futile supremacy behind the tired eyes of their robotized elders. Many are beginning to ask the single correct question. How about you? It’s never too early or late to open your eyes – all three of them. There are a number of versions of the only true question; they have many, many true answers, and none of them involve any god or goddess but you.
Why are you here? Why are you alive?

- R.Ayana

P.S.:   While you’re answering that question, why not plant a tree today?
Turn On. Tune In. Opt Out!

Images -  author's

For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati:

@  http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com (or click on any tag at the bottom of the page for direct references – case sensitive)

And see

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com





This material is published under Creative Commons Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com