Global Warming is Good and the Shocking Hoax We’ve Been Sold

Global Warming: Haew Suwat waterfalls, Thailand

Global warming is great for plant growth. Haew Suwat waterfalls, Thailand. Photo: USMC (PD).

I was an idiot. For years, I bought the lies being pumped out through the mainstream media regarding Anthropogenic (manmade) Global Warming (AGW).

Lies? Yes, and lots of them.

In this article, we are going to look at the simple facts about warming and cooling. We will also look at the political and social movements on this issue and what’s behind them. And finally, we will look at the costs, both financially and politically.

How Much Steam Rises Off of Ice Water?

Global Warming: Sands of Dubai

Global warming will help reduce the deserts, like this one in Dubai. Photo: Peter Dowley (CC BY 2.0) via Wikipedia.org.

To show just how wrong this Global Warming hoax is, consider how much evaporation occurs with ice water. Very little. All that cold has insufficient energy to do much evaporation, thus very little steam rises off of ice water.

In fact, cold water sucks the water vapor out of air. You see this in the condensation around your glass when you have a cold drink on a hot, humid day. You see this in the fog that rolls in over a cold body of water and sometimes even over a snow pack. All that cold is sucking the water out of the air, making it drier, forcing the water vapor into water droplets which eventually fall out of the air.

Cold climate means very little evaporation. This means that during colder climates, there is far less rain. Where there is less rain, there is less plant growth and more desert. More desert means more dust. During the last Ice Age glacial period, Earth was gripped with heavy desertification. This means making more and more deserts. All of this is bad for life.

Warm climate has the opposite effect. Greater warmth means greater evaporation, more rain, more plant growth and fewer deserts and less dust. All of this is good for life.

Global Warming means more life.

Global Warming Has Little to Do With Pollution

Global Warming: Nothing to do with pollution like these sulfur fumes.

Global warming scare promoted as a pollution fix. But global warming has little to do with pollution, like these sulfur fumes pouring out of an Olin Mathieson chemical plant smokestacks (PD), via Wikipedia.org.

Yes, pollution is bad, but carbon dioxide is not a pollutant!

Since this hoax was first perpetrated, we’ve heard lots of buzz words to promote this new mindset—”climate change,” “greenhouse gases,” “carbon footprint” and more. It’s all Madison Avenue gobbledygook. We’ve been sold a raincoat in dry weather.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a natural gas—a gas of life. Plants require it in order to grow. Carbon dioxide is what they breathe in. We breathe out CO2. It’s part of the cycle of life.

Pollution is sulfur dioxide, soot and other industrial chemicals that are not a natural part of the life cycle. Caring about our home planet is good, but the movements associated with this goodness have been co-opted by the bad guys. And since the bad guys have the loud speaker, other voices cannot be heard. When they are heard, they are quickly labeled “kook,” “denier,” and the like.

People have been hoodwinked by the media’s association of “Bad Pollution” with good “Carbon Dioxide.” Industry pumps out lots of pollution—true. Industry pumps out lots of carbon dioxide—true. But pollution and carbon dioxide are not the same thing. Industry also pumps out lots of desirable products—toasters, watches, dishware, furniture, clothing, shoes and more. Somehow, “Evil Industry” is the target. Would it surprise you to find out that evil industrialists are behind this Global Warming hoax? More on that in a minute.

The Global Warming Documentary that Won an Academy Award

Global Warming: Al Gore, king of the hoax.

King of the Global Warming hoax, Al Gore, at SapphireNow, 2010. Photo: Tom Raftery (CC BY-SA 2.0), via Wikipedia.org.

Al Gore won an Oscar for his lie-fest, the documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. Perhaps the fact that it won an Academy Award tells us more about the political leanings of the voters (actors, actresses and other Hollywood artists). It certainly is light on science and truth.

The film portrays Global Warming as bad. Right off the bat, the film proves itself wrong. How? As we’ve already seen, Global Warming is good. Global cooling is bad.

In the film Al Gore shows a graph with climate temperatures skyrocketing in modern times and relatively tame climate before that. We now know about “Climate-Gate” and the fudged numbers by climate scientists to make things look worse. They cooked the books.

Some websites attempt to gloss over the fraud by declaring that such fraud does not change the “scientific consensus on global warming.” What they forget to mention is that science is never done by “consensus.” What they omit is the fact that the “consensus” is itself a lie. Most empirical climate scientists disagree with the United Nations, its IPCC and the “Climate-Gate,” computer modeling “scientists.” That’s hardly a consensus. And when the United Nations’ IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) hijacks scientists’ names to add them to the consensus—against their wishes—then the “consensus” is seen clearly as a marketing scam. One scientist had to take the IPCC to court to get his name removed.

The evidence is overwhelming that they perpetrated scientific fraud. But why?

Global Warming is a Multi-Trillion Dollar Industry

Global Warming conference in Bali

This is the heart of the Global Warming industry. Fighting Global Warming at the United Nations Climate Change Conference held in Bali, 2007:1203. Photo: Oxfam International (CC BY 2.0) via Wikipedia.org.

For all of the rumors about Big Oil being behind the campaigns to deny Global Warming, all one needs to do is to look at the Rockefeller (Biggest Oil) Foundation’s website on climate change. Big oil is not behind the denial; they are behind the scam itself. What better way to swindle the world out of Trillions of dollars? Make the oil companies and other big corporations the bad guys. Gloss over the facts that the chief industrialists and globalists are the ones who started this scam.

Reducing the “carbon footprint” is now seen as the responsible thing to do. That’s as dumb as some actress cutting off her breasts because she might get breast cancer. Perhaps she could also cut off her pretty head, too, because she might get brain cancer. Dumb! Reducing carbon dioxide is a non-issue, because Global Warming is good.

Real climate scientists—those who follow the empirical data and draw their conclusions from that—tell us that Global Warming comes before increases in CO2, not after! In other words, Global Warming is not caused by “carbon footprints.” But past increases in CO2 came after increases in global temperatures.

In fact, during the first big surge in carbon dioxide production in the twentieth century (1940–1975), climate temperatures went down! Scientists back in the early 70s were talking about a global cooling scare.

With the first big surge in carbon dioxide, climate temperatures went down!

Governments are being pressured, more and more, to adopt measures to tax those who emit the greatest carbon dioxide. This is a multi-trillion dollar industry. No wonder so many greedy scientists are fudging the numbers and their climate models. Disaster makes money. If you predict calm, you don’t get squat. The writing on the wall is clear: if you want to make money, predict disaster.

Scares Make Great News—Global Warming is No Different

Global Warming: Like this car bomb terrorism in Iraq, terror sells.

The way Global Warming is being “sold,” it’s downright scary. Like this car bomb in Iraq, people react to terrorism. Boring doesn’t sell anything. Photo: US Army (PD) via Wikipedia.org.

Let’s face it. People like controversy and scares. It stirs the blood. It creates excitement. We all know that a movie without any conflict is deadly boring. The same with news.

“Mild weather. The same as yesterday and the day before that.” Boring.

“Climate threatens to destroy civilization!” Exciting.

Whether it’s Global Warming or Global Cooling, someone can create a scare out of it to sell newspapers and get the public motivated into action. Scares will do that. That’s human nature.

What if some people got together to harness that human nature? Conspiracy theory?

There’s another buzz word for you—”conspiracy theory.” What does it provoke in people? Disgust? Revulsion? Disinterest? Embarrassment? Some people have said, “I’m not a conspiracy theorist,” but what are they really saying? They’re saying, I don’t want to be associated with kooks.

But are all conspiracy theorists, kooks? Certainly some are.

What about “conspiracy facts?” With this term we provoke confusion. “Conspiracy” is associated with lies and insanity. But facts are associated with truth and sanity. Is a “conspiracy fact” an oxymoron—a self-contradictory term?

From the mild paranoia that people exhibit around the term “conspiracy,” you would think that there was something kooky about conspiracies. But what’s kooky—the fact that conspiracies don’t exist and some are deluded enough to believe in them?

Well, hold onto your halo. Conspiracies exist! They’ve existed since the beginning of humanity. There are likely thousands of conspiracies every day! Yes, every day! They exist—from the two young brothers conspiring to break into the cookie jar to Wall Street bankers conspiring to bilk Billions from the markets with worthless paper.

Reality check:

  • Has a banker ever gotten greedy?
  • Has anyone ever stolen money or property?
  • Has anyone ever lied to the public for personal gain?
  • Has anyone ever committed murder for their own benefit?
  • Has anyone in a position of power ever committed crimes to gain more power?

You know you have to answer “yes” to each of these. Behind each of these, there might be a conspiracy. When two or more people get together and talk about doing something unethical or criminal, that’s a conspiracy.

To react to the label, “Conspiracy Theory,” with ignorance or blindness, is just what conspirators would want you to do. “Don’t look at us. We’re not robbing the bank. We’re not even here.”

The Global Warming Game to Fool You

Nearly 20 years ago, the climate leveled off. Global Warming ended for the time being. Yet, we still hear lots about reducing the “carbon footprint.” Getting rid of “greenhouse gases.” Being responsible. Doing what is “sustainable.”

If Global Warming is not still going on, then why the continued concern about “carbon footprints” and the like?

Guilt by association. Now, it’s no longer “Global Warming.” The real culprit is “Climate Change.” But since “Bad” has been equated with “Climate Change,” and “Climate Change” has been associated with “Global Warming,” and “Global Warming” has been associated with “carbon footprints,” then bad “Climate Change” is associated with “carbon footprints.” But when the climate cools for twenty years and carbon dioxide levels still rise, who has been lying? Northern temperatures have continued to rise a bit, but southern temperatures have dropped, making the climate change of recent years slightly down in temperature.

But that’s not the only fallacious aspect of “climate change.” Climate change is not bad, either. Climate change has been going on for billions of years. Climate never stops changing.

Taxing something as big as global climate sounds like it could make lots of money. And it is. But who pays for it? You and I pay for it. However, there is an even more dire cost to this Global Warming scam: political control. Those who would perpetrate such a fraud want power more than money. With power, you can do whatever you want.

Being responsible is good. Falling for the manipulation that would use this urge toward responsibility for personal gain is bad. In other words, don’t be played. Don’t react to scare tactics.

The following video indicates just how badly people have been played on this issue.

Global Warming Bottom Line

Don’t be bullied. Don’t jump when someone says, “Boo!” Don’t react. Dig deep; investigate for yourself. Look at all sides of the issue. Look at the motivations behind the scenes. Don’t buy the slander of one group against another at face value. Don’t go by preconceived notions, like “industry is bad” or “the Rockefellers are good because they donate to public charities.”

Global Warming is a good thing, because it brings more rain and more life.

How long did you believe the Global Warming scam? How long have you known better?

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

So, You Have a Real Life Problem

Old man worrying about real life problems

That people worry has become all too common. The solution to real life problems is simpler than most people realize. Photo: Ribeiro Simoes (CC BY-SA 3.0), via Wikipedia.org.

Doesn’t everyone? Some “real life problems,” of course, are more fun than others. For example, the crossword puzzle, deciding where to spend your money, and figuring out whodunit.

Other problems aren’t so yummy, like financial crisis, serious illness, war, insanity and the like.

What if you found a magic wand that solved any problem with the flick of a wrist? Sounds pretty cool, huh?

Magic wand? I found the next best thing. Now, some people wrinkle their nose or shake their head at the mention of religion or religious subjects. Well, tough. If you want to know what this is about, then you’ll have to tighten your belt and suck it up. But, hey, I promise it’ll be easy. Just wave your magic wand.

What’s Religion Got to Do With Solving Real Life Problems?

Jesus solving the problem of walking on water.

With a storm brewing all around him, Jesus could still solve all problems and walk on water. Painting: Amédée Varin (PD), via Wikipedia.org.

Jesus of Nazareth said that all you have to do is know the truth and the truth will set you free. Okay, what does this mean? Sounds like a tall order, but it isn’t, really.

Any problem has a true source. If you pound away at the wrong source, you’re not going to solve the problem. Right? This goes for all real life problems. That makes sense. Some people might blame the government, the president, their uncle, or even God. Does it help? Blame never helps. Guilt can help sometimes as leverage to provoke self into action, otherwise it’s excess baggage. Resentment is even worse.

If you spot the true source of a problem, the problem vanishes. It’s that simple. If you say that so-and-so is the source of your real life problem, and your problem persists, then you haven’t spotted the source of your problem. Yes, it’s that simple.

What about those problems that merely require action? For instance, what about no food in the refrigerator? Hey, all you gotta do is go to the store and get more food. But what if you don’t have any money? Okay, get a job. Yet, if you’ve been looking heroically for a job for months (you have the skills, but the openings are taken before you get there), you now have a problem for which action seems futile.

What to do? Where do you look? Better yet, where do you start?

Genesis 1:26 says something rather peculiar. It talks about God creating man in his own image. Quite simply, this means that man (male or female) was created as a spiritual being with the power of creation. (For a bit more on this, see my blog article on “Humble Confidence.”)

Arm wrestling, like all other real life problems, are a choice.

US Navy Seaman, Denise Williams, and Marine Sgt., Amanda Joseph, take each other on in arm wrestling. All of life’s problems are a choice. Photo: Alan Gragg (PD), via Wikipedia.org.

So, what does this have to do with solving problems? Any problem is a creation. Anything that can be brought into existence can exit the same way it came in—by creation. In a sense, you’re taking responsibility for your creation—taking the reins of that creative act. A creation persists by allowing it to run along on its own as if it has “created itself.” This is sort of like saying, the creation is on automatic. This is the same as God’s day of rest. And you may have guessed it; we’re living in that day of rest—the last 13.7 billion years of it.

If you spot the truth of a problem (a creation), that creation ceases to have persistence. It’s like it has rotated in the time stream becoming paper thin (actually, infinitesimally thin). One moment, the problem is there (it’s “moment” of creation), and the next moment, you’ve moved out of its moment of creation and are free of it. Poof! Your real life problem is gone.

Taking Clues Where I can Find Them

Solving a real life problem by building a bridge

Building a bridge solves a real life problem. The steps are rather mechanical, but they require the same poise demanded by all of life’s real problems. Photo: Pudelek (CC BY-SA 3.0), via Wikipedia.org.

This is part of the “mechanics of creation” I discovered back in the ’70′s. It wasn’t all my work. A crusty old rogue named L. Ron Hubbard discovered many of the things that laid the foundation of my breakthrough. Any of you familiar with that name will recognize the founder of Scientology—a controversial, modern cult.

Yes, I admit that it is a “cult” by certain definitions of the word. These same definitions also apply to early Christianity, early Buddhism, and early Islam. They were all cults at one time, but now they’re established religions. Some ignorant individuals have declared that Scientology is not a religion. I use the word “ignorant” in the simplest, most non-pejorative way. They are simply ignoring the facts, either by not reading the materials of that religion, or by choosing to listen to someone else’s negative description of that religion. Either way, their opinion is not very bright. Why? Because it’s easy to get your facts straight. You simply read the literature of that religion. And yes, it is a religion. Its key activities are designed to address the spiritual component of humans and to awaken that component—the true self.

I’m no longer an active member of Scientology. I’ve graduated, but my most profound spiritual experiences were directly related to Scientology counseling and the writings of Hubbard on the subject. How profound? Creating miracles—full-blown, Moses-parting-the-sea kind of miracles. This isn’t bragging, because you (yes, you the reader) can do the exact same things and even greater miracles. Jesus wasn’t kidding. You are a child of God. All you need to do is wake up. Your problems in life that seem so real are child’s play, when you wake up spiritually.

The Real You Behind the Real Life Problem

Our language is a bit clumsy discussing this subject. English wasn’t built for it. The word “you” that I used in the last paragraph didn’t mean the typical “Jack” or “Jill” you think of as yourself. This is not the ego self. This is not the body. This is the true self behind those beautiful eyes of yours.

I mention Scientology not only because of my own history with that religion, but also because their technology is related to this subject of problems. A religion that uses technology? Oh, that’s different! Yes, it is. The same pragmatic restraint that a scientist uses in the laboratory was used by Hubbard to research the relationship between body, mind and spirit. Rigorous records have been kept of all spiritual counseling—not only when Hubbard was researching, but even today with the thousands of spiritual counselors. The techniques he developed were based on empirical discoveries.

And, guess what? What Jesus said about knowing the truth of something works on all problems. Much of Scientology counseling is based on this simple premise. Though it may not have been plucked from the New Testament, this premise works through Scientology counseling to unburden the spiritual self and allow it to awaken.

The next time you have a real problem in life and there seems no simple action to resolve it, consider this: if you find the true source, the problem will vanish. Once I did this on Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles at the height of rush-hour traffic. The problem manifested itself as snarling traffic that was playing on my level of frustration. I found the picture that I had created which was the source of my frustration. Suddenly, I awoke as a spiritual being. If this ever happens to you (and I sincerely hope it does), you will know that you’re not a physical body. You will feel the presence of God and any frustration will melt away.

That time in traffic, I did better than spotting the source of my problem. And yes, the problem did vanish instantly. It vanished so completely that it woke up the true me (the spiritual child of God—the ancient immortal behind these blue eyes). After I was set free of the problem, I did the reverse. I created a different picture and allowed it into the time stream.

“Allowed?” It’s sort of like “hiding” the truth—letting a creation run off to play as if it were creating itself, and ignoring the fact that I had created it. Like the physical effect inertia, a persisted creation has its own relentless vector of momentum. A persisted creation becomes a cog in the machine of reality.

So, the next time you have a real life problem, if the problem persists, then you haven’t spotted the true source. It can’t be any simpler than that.

What problems are you wrestling with?

Posted in Confidence, Happiness, Spirituality | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

All About Sustainable Development: Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing

Sustainable Development: the source of this sinister plot, the United Nations

UN headquarters in New York City. Long a symbol of civilization’s future, but now one of tyranny. Photo by PerryPlanet (PD), via Wikipedia.org.

What is this about, “sustainable development?” This buzzword is a pet project of the United Nations and their Agenda 21. The 21st century is looking bright, if you can believe their rhetoric. The end result will be a kinder, gentler humanity. Sounds nice.

But is it really?

We are being sold the idea that resources are scarce. This mild form of scare-mongering has gained some traction from the international governing body all the way down to the level of city councils. The concept of “sustainable development” is a modern form of wolves in sheep’s clothing.

I don’t like giving bad news or scaring anyone, but ignorance is far worse than being a little scared. Besides, you’re in control of your emotions. You just need to exercise that ability. Optimally, you should be able to hear any kind of news and maintain your cool.

Is your City an ICLEI City? Ripe for Sustainable Development

Developmental Sustainability: requires surveillance cameras.

The omnipresent surveillance camera. Sustainable development requires Big Brother’s watchful eye. Photo: Txopi (PD), via Wikipedia.org.

ICLEI is an acronym (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives). And since they don’t want people to know it’s international, they focus on the idea that it’s “local governments for sustainability.” Too many people are becoming wary of international initiatives. So, just change the name and everyone is happy.

ICLEI stands for local governments for sustainability. It stands for mass murder and slavery for most of those who are allowed to live. Hold on a minute! That sounds a bit extreme. But if you read the UN’s Agenda 21, you will see that their aims are just that sinister.

Heaven help you if you disagree. The new definition of “consensus” is “destroying the enemy”—maligning you, scuttling your ability to respond, and generally making sure you don’t have a voice. Then, the only ones speaking are all in agreement. This is the 1984, Orwellian, Newspeak form of “consensus.”

This is All About Sustainable Development—the Psychotic Kind

In the psychotic world of selfish corporate thinking, scarcity is enforced in order to maintain a monopoly. Anyone who comes up with effective alternatives are suppressed or killed. More than one inventor has had their notes and property stolen by the American government to protect their friends in the corporate world. “Sustainable development” is only what they say it is.

The death and property of Nicola Tesla is shrouded in mystery. What happened to his notes? What happened to his inventions that could have destroyed industries by giving humanity free energy?

Agenda 21—UN Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing

Sustainable Development: a wolf in sheep's clothing

Here, shepherds are discussing the fate of the varmint they’ve captured. Sustainable development is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It sounds nice on the surface, but the details are dangerous. Drawing: Francis Barlov (PD), via Wikipedia.org.

Agenda 21 elevates nature above man. It includes the “Precautionary Principle” where you are guilty until proven innocent. How anti-American can you get?

“Earth Summit, Agenda 21″ is a 40 chapter document to control the world, based entirely on socialist control mechanisms. Their objectives include,

  • An end to national sovereignty,
  • The abolition of private property,
  • The restructuring of the family unit,
  • Increasing limitations and restrictions on mobility and individual opportunity.

Private property is declared as unsustainable. Also fossil fuels, golf courses, ski lodges, consumerism, irrigation, paved roads, commercial agriculture, herbicides, pesticides, farm lands, pastures, grazing of livestock, the family unit, and the rights laid down in the American Constitution. The whore that is New York holds the seat of this abomination. It is a traitor in our midst. It is a festering sore on the landscape of this once great nation.

The Santa Cruz Agenda 21 committee promoted the ideas of,

  • Not scratching the surface of planet Earth,
  • People to be concentrated into human settlement zones, and
  • Education to focus on environment as a central organizing principle.

President George H.W. Bush (Sr.), while addressing the U.N., said, “It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance.” Treason? What about the pledge allegiance to the flag of America? How can an American president get away with this? Is everyone deaf? Or has everyone gone to sleep?

Sustainable Development: Low-income, highrise housing

Low-income, highrise housing is part of sustainable development. This is from our past, for African Americans on Chicago’s South side. This will be everyone’s future, unless you’re one of the elite. Photo: John H. White (PD), via Wikipedia.org.

“Sustainable” developers of “stack-and-pack” high-rise human “settlement” structures were declared immune from prosecution for any construction defect liability.

This reminds me of the “Monsanto” protections written into law, recently. If anyone is harmed by corporate products, they will have no recourse; i.e. they can’t sue to collect damages. This gives the corporations and the construction companies the freedom to create defective or harmful products, because “sustainable development” takes precedence over the lives and health of our citizens.

Wildlands Project USA places most of the United States into untouchable zones where people will not be allowed. Only tiny “smart growth” zones will allow human activity, where people will live in tall structures, in small living units, with children taken care of by the state. No more family picnics. In fact, it is doubtful that after the first generation, parents will never see their children. And children will always look up to the state for their guidance and “love.”

Their plan is to steal a generation of children and indoctrinate them into the New World Order way of thinking. The children become the new “global citizens” shunning the ideas and beliefs of their parents who are strangers to them.

Deliberate Dumbing Down of the World (including America)

Sustainable Development: police in riot gear.

Police in riot gear will likely be a major part in the transition to the UN’s idea of sustainable development. Photo: Dvidshub (CC BY 2.0), via Wikipedia.org.

UNESCO declared 2005–2014 the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (DESD). “This educational effort will encourage changes in behaviour that will create a more sustainable future in terms of environmental integrity, economic viability, and a just society for present and future generations.” Sounds nice, but the implementation of it is chilling. They go on to say that the curriculum will include the 40 chapters of Agenda 21.

Their aim is to transfer loyalty from the family to the government, similar to the Hitler youth programs. They will teach them about sustainable economic consumption

On the subject of “constructivism,” it says “…students construct [their own] understandings of reality, and [realize] that objective reality is not knowable” (p.10). The subtext, here, is “Why bother? Let the State take care of the thinking for you.”

One school (Wayzata Central Middle School) posted on their sign outside their school, “The aim of education is the knowledge not of facts but of values.” I suppose it depends on what the values are. Personally, I think education should be about knowledge of skills and critical thinking as well as facts and values.

Sustainable Development: Central Park, New York.

Central Park, New York, in Autumn, looking out onto exclusive real estate for the very wealthy. Sustainable development won’t allow anyone but the very few enjoy these benefits. Zero social mobility. Photo: Ed Yourdon (CC BY-SA 2.0), via Wikipedia.org.

One of the rich Rockefellers made it known to the late producer, Aaron Russo, that “Women’s Liberation”—which I had long thought was a good idea for equality—was really a plan to disrupt the family by putting children under the care of the state and to increase the tax income for their private Federal Reserve bank. Suddenly, Women’s Lib doesn’t sound so ideal.

The new “Connected Math” teaches our children in “Standard 3. Mathematics as Reasoning,…” that “…through discussing the problems and their solutions, the students are learning to reason about the mathematics. They learn that mathematics is man-made, that it is arbitrary, and good solutions are arrived at by consensus among those who are considered expert.” So, if a dozen “experts” say that “2 + 2 = 19,” then that’s the new “truth” according to “Connected Math.”

Children are being made mathematically illiterate on purpose!

In the “Education for Sustainable Development Toolkit,” by Rosalyn McKeown, PhD, we learn, “Generally, more highly educated people, who have higher incomes, consume more resources than poorly educated people, who tend to have lower incomes. In this case, more education increases the threat to sustainability.”

This dumbing down of America (and the rest of the world) is not merely the consequence of a bad idea or incompetence. It’s deliberate! Decreasing the intelligence of the world’s citizens is part of sustainable development.

International Committee for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)

Sustainable Development: Slums in Cairo, Egypt.

Slums in Cairo, Egypt, as well as in every other country on the planet, will be cleared out by the “sustainability” people. Its citizens will be eliminated as “useless eaters” — of no intrinsic value to the psychopathic elite. Photo: Mohammed Shamma (CC BY 2.0), via Wikipedia.org.

This is a group created for the purpose of promoting “local governments for sustainability.” Their intent is to establish the policies of Agenda 21 at the local level.

Vice Chair of ICLEI, Harvey Ruvin was asked about the potential conflicts between ICLEI’s Agenda 21 policies and the fundamental liberties proclaimed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. He said, “Individual rights must take a back seat to the collective.” So, if the collective proclaims that Harvey Ruvin must die, he will gladly roll over.

Under the cover of environmental concerns, your rights are being stripped away. The overarching theory behind it is called “communitarianism”—the rights of the individual need to come below the rights of the community. Just ask a community of wolves what’s for lunch when a family of sheep move into town. The sheep don’t stand a chance.

Communitarianism supports the notion that the ends justify the means. In order to obtain a sustainable population, you merely need to murder 6 billion people. Nice!

Dr. Rima Laibow, wife of the former head of American army intelligence, retired General Stubblebine, had one female patient who was a world leader. That patient told her that the “great culling is about to begin” where the “useless eaters” will be eliminated. When the patient was asked why she wasn’t also a “useless eater,” the world leader was left speechless.

Such is the callous and psychopathic arrogance of the elite. Like Marie Antoinette is so often misattributed to have said before she knew she was to lose her head, “Let them eat cake.” Some of the very rich really do think this way. Others are tricked into participating with the evil agenda by others who package it to sound so beneficial for all.

Awareness versus Attention—Beyond Sustainability

Sustainable Development: Think beautiful garden.

Think of a pleasant garden to take your attention off of the evils of “sustainable development.” At least when you recognize evil, you can act with wisdom, rather than react. Photo: Clconroy (licensed), via Morguefile.com.

The key trick in digesting this without becoming an unwitting contributor is in the difference between awareness and attention. It has long been known that whatever you focus your attention on, you get more of. That’s why it’s deadly to fight against something you don’t like.

The optimal way to approach the negative is to be dispassionately aware of it, but to place your attention on something more positive. Feel the prosperity and abundance. Let the psychopaths continue to play their scarcity game, but deprive them of sustenance. Let them know that their plans are not sustainable by refusing to buy their corporations’ products and services. Take your money out of Bank of America and stick it in your neighborhood, independent credit union.

What are your thoughts on “sustainable development” and scarcity of resources?

Posted in Happiness, Health, Politics, Relationships, Wealth | Leave a comment

Humble Confidence

Washington and Lafayette had the humble confidence to become heroes.

Washington and Lafayette at Valley Forge. They both had the humility and confidence to become heroes. Painting: John Ward Dunsmore (PD), via Wikipedia.org.

In the history of this world, the most admired individuals have been the heroes. What sets them apart? How are they so special? Some of the characteristics are selflessness, sacrifice, and humble confidence. These are good things to emulate, but they’re not easy. Personally, I have too much ego. Oh, well.

When I first thought of the term, “humble confidence,” it seemed an oxymoron—a self-contradictory term. I had wanted an expression to describe a condition I had experienced and that is the first thing that popped into my mind. It took me a moment, but any discomfort I had for the term soon evaporated.

Defining Humble Confidence

Buddhist monk meditating with humble confidence.

Buddhist monk meditating with humble confidence. Phra Ajan Jerapunyo, Abbot of Watkungtaphao. Photo by Tevaprapas Makklay (CC BY 3.0), via Wikipedia.org.

“Humble,” per the American Heritage Dictionary means,

  1. Having or showing feelings of humility rather than of pride; aware of one’s shortcomings; modest; meek.
  2. Showing deferential respect.
  3. Lacking high station; lowly; unpretentious.

“Humility,” in the same dictionary means,

  1. The quality or condition of being humble; lack of pride; modesty.
  2. Usually plural. An act of modesty, submission, or self-abasement.

Don’t you just love the circular reference between definitions (each definition using the other word to define itself)?

Statue of Jesus Christ, symbol of humble confidence.

Statue of Jesus Christ, a divine hero and the epitome of humble confidence. Photo by Sean Vivek Crasto (PD), via Wikipedia.org.

I can see a hero being modest, perhaps meek (and perhaps not), and showing deferential respect to others. “Lacking high station,” doesn’t work for me. A king can be a hero if he doesn’t let his station go to his head. If he acts as if his kingship is a responsibility, and perhaps acts as if he is a lowly servant of his people, then a king could easily be a champion to his people. “Lack of pride” and “modesty” are compatible with my idea of a hero. So is “submission.” “Self-abasement” also works for me, except when it means “self-humiliation.”

In the dictionary’s comparison of several words (humble, meek, lowly, modest, reserved, retiring and self-conscious), it says that, “meek describes one who is patient, undemonstrative, and submissive or timid.” I can’t see a hero being overly timid, especially about taking responsibility for something that needs to be done.

Examples of Humble Confidence

Drawing from Tale of Two Cities, a story of confident humility

Engraving by Hablot K. Browne for Charles Dickens’ “Tale of Two Cities.” A story of heroism.

In Charles Dickens’ Tale of Two Cities, Sydney Carton takes the place of his look-alike, Darnay, under the guillotine. The story ends with Carton’s last thoughts, “It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.” Perhaps not many of us would do such a thing—perform such self-sacrifice for another. Carton’s actions provoke from the reader either bewilderment or deep admiration. His was an act of profound heroism.

Jesus of Nazareth told his disciples, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13).” This is the ultimate self-sacrifice, and that is exactly what Jesus did when he knowingly walked into his own crucifixion.

I grew up in a Southern Baptist family, but somehow I had a hard time with Christianity. Some parts seemed pretty cool when I was a youngster. The “holier than thou” and “hell-fire and damnation,” didn’t go over too well with me. Sorry, granddad (he was a Southern Baptist minister and missionary to Nigeria, Africa). My father also seemed to chafe under orthodox Christianity. He might read the Bible one week, but then might read about the reincarnation of a yoga, the next. In fact, he seemed to read more Eastern mysticism and New Age literature than traditional, religious works. For me, despite an aversion to the Christian dogma, the miracles and the self-sacrifice were things that were immediately admirable.

Certainly, Jesus’ sacrifice seemed heroic to me. Going around calling himself the “son of God” did not seem too humble, though. Yet, I had much more to learn about this.

Clarifying the Humility

Rock Creek Park, site of a suicide (not exactly humble confidence).

Rock Creek Park near Washington, DC, where one former fellow student committed suicide (the opposite of humble confidence). Photo by dbking (CC BY 2.0), via Wikipedia.org.

Earlier I said that “self-abasement” doesn’t seem what a hero would do if this means, “self-humiliation.” Anyone who goes around in public beating themselves up seems more like a “loser” to me—someone not garnering much respect, because they’re not giving themselves any respect. To be sure, there are similarities in the look of humility and self-humiliation, but that’s only superficial. There’s a very big difference. It’s all in the attitude. Humility is about less ego—less of the self. Self-humiliation is all too frequently a self-indulgence. The most extreme example of this is suicide.

Suicide, in my opinion, is one of the most selfish acts one can do. In high school, my senior year English teacher seemed to admire those who committed suicide. He talked about the subject on numerous occasions. I attempted to disabuse him of this, but my efforts failed. I was particularly concerned about a fellow student—a lovely young woman who always seemed to have running mascara and red eyes. Six years later, I read that the young woman jumped off a bridge in Rock Creek Park, near Washington, D.C. My heart aches even now at the thought of it. And there is also anger at my English teacher for having thought that suicide was so wonderful and trendy. Finally, there is anger at her for having given in to the demons.

If she had been feeling pain, sticking in there would obviously have been a heroic thing to do. Committing suicide in the face of such anguish is a coward’s act, and just as selfish as any cowardly thing. That may seem harsh or unsympathetic (sympathy is overrated, but empathy is golden). The ability to act with courage in the face of such distress is a sign of confidence. Any hero needs this in order to move past things like fear and discomfort.

A self-humiliating person who throws their self in harm’s way, and saves someone else, may be doing it for all the wrong reasons. The motivation may be one of suicide rather than self-sacrifice. Their confidence or lack thereof would play a major part in their decision.

The Other Half of Humble Confidence

“Confidence” is defined, “1. Trust in a person or thing. 4. A feeling of assurance or certainty, especially concerning oneself.” In the adjacent discussion of synonyms, the dictionary says, “self-confidence, self-possession, and self-reliance all imply consciousness of one’s own powers and abilities. Self-confidence stresses trust in one’s own self-sufficiency.” A hero needs at least a modest amount of competence. Incompetence is not very heroic, though a person who overcomes initial failure to win the day can also seem every bit the hero. With competence comes confidence and vice versa.

Someone with humble confidence may feel self-sufficient for some task, but is averse to bragging about it. All too often, I fail there. Bragging is second nature to me. Again, oh well! Perhaps the expectation of the hero is that everyone can do such things, just as Jesus said that anyone can do the miracles he did and even greater things. All one needed was the faith to do them.

Faith is Beyond Belief

The paramitas of Buddhism are all about humble confidence.

Monks line up at Phutthamonthon Buddha. Their “paramitas” are all about humble confidence. Photo: Tevaprapas Makklay (CC BY-SA 2.5), via Wikipedia.org.

“Faith” and “belief” have been used interchangeably, but I propose defining them as distinctly separate states of being—also, attitudes. “Belief,” as I see it, is a level of confidence with varying degrees of doubt. This could be anywhere from zero confidence right up to, but not including, perfect confidence. I reserve that slot—100% confidence—for my definition of “faith.” This new “faith” is discontinuous in nature. It is separate from the continuity of various grades of “belief.” This new “faith” is like the Buddhist “one hand clapping”—a one-sided coin—that contains no hint or possibility of doubt. The Buddhist paramitas (or “perfections”) also speak of this “discontinuous” state. Paramita generosity, wisdom and compassion are perfectly what they are with no hint of selfishness, stupidity or indifference, respectively. They are the godly ideal.

When one exercises confident humility, one suppresses or eliminates the continuity-based ego self. All that is left is the discontinuity-based true self—the immortal.

When Genesis says that God created man in his own image, this provokes many images—all of them indistinct. So, what does this mean?

When, a chapter later, Genesis says that God created man, again, what gives? This time, man is created from the dust of the ground.

The image of God is one that is spiritual in nature. God is a spiritual being with the power of creation. That makes his children spiritual beings with the power of creation. Okay, but what about this “dust of the ground” stuff? Would that be Homo sapiens? Would the sons of God be immortal, spiritual beings clothed in Homo sapiens flesh? Arguably, the dual nature of man is one of the most important subjects of the Bible. In fact, it is an important theme in most, if not all, religions.

It’s hard to talk about some of the experiences I’ve had without sounding a bit like the braggart. Well, tough! The message is too important.

When I experienced humble confidence, one of the most vivid things I noticed was a complete lack of the ego self. As I said, ego is continuity-based. It is a cog in the machine of physical reality, just like emotions, the clothes you wear, and the body you think of as “you.” They are all subject to the laws of physical reality. They are subject to vectors of force. They are vulnerable.

George Washington and men en route to Valley Forge. Symbol of humble confidence of heroes.

Washington and men on the way to Valley Forge. I’m no Washington, but I can understand his humble confidence. Painting: William Trego (PD), via Wikipedia.org.

My Own Personal Experience with Humble Confidence

In 1977, while living in Los Angeles, I experienced a major miracle. More accurately, I created one. You see, I had been creating minor miracles for four years. Most of those acts of primordial “magic” were done while largely asleep, spiritually. I had discovered the mechanics of creation and had used them on numerous occasions. Invariably, the results were instantaneous. Only I would know that, because only I would know the moment each creation had been allowed into physical reality (unless there happened to be any mind readers around).

So, what was this major miracle? Frustrated in rush-hour traffic, one smoggy, late afternoon, I realized that I had been creating my own frustration.

Heads up, everyone! Just a friendly reminder—you are fully responsible for what happens in your life. That’s a big one-zero-zero percent (100%)! Don’t quibble with it. Don’t justify or try to squirm out of it. There is no insanity plea or “twinkie” defense. And don’t “blame” it on karma. You create your own karma. Karma is there for a reason—to help you wake up, spiritually. But the source of that creation is you.

Upon realizing my own culpability in creating my frustration (and creating the things toward which my frustration was directed), my “hurry” no longer mattered. Traffic could do whatever it wanted to do. I was no longer vulnerable to it.

The next moment, I pictured what would be a more desirable situation—wide open spaces and smooth sailing all the way to my destination. The creation was easy. (And each of us is creating constantly throughout our lives. As children of God, it is our nature to create. The only thing is, we are rarely impressed, because our creation is usually a maintenance of the status quo—reality.) Allowing that creation into the time stream, I had perfect confidence of the result. With ego completely missing, my humility was profound. The next moment, the car directly in front of me moved into the already crowded lane to the right. Left and right, cars moved into those lanes, leaving the lane in front of me entirely empty. Within moments, the dream was realized.

Over two thousand cars and their drivers participated in that realization. It wasn’t for me—the “me” called Rodney Carl Martin, Jr. I could have cared less about getting to my destination sooner. My frustration had vanished. The only important thing to me right then (and ever more, now) was that of awakening the god within.

Calling myself a son of God—or a “baby god”—seems to have ego written all over it. And, yes, ego tries to take over that bit of apparent puffery. Part of the difficulty is putting ego behind one’s self—one’s true, immortal self. Returning to humility, again and again, is getting easier. I have tasted perfect confidence, yet, at times, it seems as elusive as a dream. And yet, I continue to dream.

What examples do you have from your own life of “humble confidence?”

Originally published as “Humble Confidence,” 2008:0919–13:32, and as ” Stuck with Making Life Work? Try This,” 2011:1115–07:07 at blog.ancientsuns.com

Posted in Confidence, Happiness, Spirituality | 4 Comments

Now is so Passé

Buddhist monk contemplating the now

Buddhist monk in meditation contemplating the now and other things. Photo by Tevaprapas Makklay, CC BY 3.0, via Wikipedia.org.

So many people talk about living in the “now,” instead of the past or the future. But I’m here to tell you that “now” is out of style. It’s old fashioned.

“Now” is the aggregate summation of yesterday. It is the end product of all those old vectors of momentum that have collided to produce what we see, hear and feel as this current moment. “Now” is riddled with the past. It has the stench of the “past” running through every fiber of it.

So, what should we be looking at? If “now” is passé, where should you be dwelling, if not the past, present or future?

Your zone of creation—that’s where it’s at. This is you tapped into the Source of all things. This is you being friends again with the Big Kahuna—the Head Honcho of this universe. This is you being at one again with who you really are.

Living in the “Now”

Einstein - great thinker on the idea of now, time and space

Albert Einstein spent a lifetime contemplating now (time) in relation to space, energy and mass. Photo by Oren Jack Turner, PD, via Wikipedia.org.

Living in the “now” is like being a slave to the past. Certainly, you have to acknowledge what’s happening now, otherwise you’d merely be living in a delusion. But you’re bigger than that. You’re bigger than the “now.” Your zone of creation is what powers the future.

The problem with most people is that they look to the “now” to get their input for creating the future. They create by “default.” They’re running on automatic. Their creation reinforces the status quo and by doing so, they become a cog in the machine. Not a pretty sight, that.

If you want change, you have to be willing to get outside your comfort zone.

“Comfortable?” you ask. “I’m not comfortable with debt and heartache. Debt is not in my comfort zone.”

Certainly, we’re not talking about physical comfort. We’re talking about spiritual comfort. We’re talking about the product of your decisions. You have decided that you are more comfortable “feeling” worry and concern. It’s your decision. You decided to be here where you are now. Your comfort zone is not something you consciously wish for yourself, but you have to take responsibility for it. Blaming it on circumstances or the government will only cripple you.

Moving Beyond Now

When you reinvigorate the joy of dreaming, your dreams cannot help but move toward you. The thrill of savoring your dream’s details opens the door to their accomplishment.

So long as you look at dreams with regret, worry or some other negative emotion, you are not living the dream. Some worry that living the dream is living in a delusion. They caution themselves and others to “get real” or “be reasonable.” But they miss the bigger picture. Every big breakthrough in civilization occurred by someone being decidedly “unreasonable.” They looked beyond the traditional way of looking at things and imagined a solution outside of the current “box” of thought. Einstein’s dreams led to Relativity and Christ’s faith led to miracles.

Creating Miracles

A beautiful now with double rainbow

A beautiful “now” with two rainbows. Photo by Nicholas A. Tonelli, CC BY 2.0, via Wikipedia.org.

My marriage had ended a decade earlier, but I had been in no hurry to find someone new. After ten years of being single and no dating, I decided to make a change. This time, though, I would do it right. I started with a list of desirable traits, but I held only a few of them as mandatory. Which ones? She had to be spiritual and honorable. She had to place great value on telling the truth and she had to know she is a spiritual being in possession of a human body.

I looked far an near. I looked on the internet, because it allowed me to search a great number of traits with relative ease. Of course, my two key traits would have to be verified through getting to know the person. But a year of searching left me with no one and feeling no closer to my goal.

Then it struck me that I had been going about it all wrong. I had spent a year feeling lonely and frustrated only to have that feeling build my future. Like the old saying goes, you can’t make a silk purse out of a pig’s ear. Rotten feelings cannot build a beautiful future.

In late April, 2007, I decided to feel “in love.” I decided to practice this feeling in every way I could.

The realist would say, “this is merely living a lie—wallowing in a delusion.” But the realist is wrong.

What’s the difference? The person living in a delusion is unaware of reality. Let that thought sink in for a moment.

So long as you are aware of reality, you’re not living in a delusion. This is one key difference between delusion and creation. The other key difference is that of awareness vs. attention.

  • In a delusion, awareness is on the delusion, while attention is on reality.
  • In creation, awareness is on reality, while attention is on the object of your desire.

Why this distinction between awareness and attention? Because awareness is perception (effect) and attention is creation (cause). Awareness is conscious thought, while attention is subconscious feeling.

For two weeks, I practiced “feeling in love.” I would go to the grocery or hardware store and pull out my cell phone as if answering it. “Hi, sweetheart…. No, nothing this evening…. That sounds great. What time?… Okay, my darling. Eight o’clock. I’ll see you then. I love you. Bye for now.”

Who was I talking to? My nameless lover. The girl of my dreams. The woman I’m going to marry. Doing this in public made it all the more real. No one knew I was talking to an inactive phone.

On May 5, 2007, she contacted me! Through one of the websites of which I had become a member, she left me a note. Hundreds of hours of chatting and less than six months later, we were married. I had quit my lucrative job as a software engineer and had moved to the Philippines to be with her.

Don’t Live in the Now

Yes, the “now” is passé. It is so “yesterday” wrapped up in a ribbon of vivid reality. With the “now,” you remain a cog in the machine of physical “truth.” You don’t want that.

Living strictly in the “now” is like being a passenger in the back seat, but no driver—only the grooves and bumps on the road to give your vehicle direction. By slipping into your zone of creation, you take over the wheel and direct your vehicle with conscious certainty.

Instead of being a victim of the past, start living the reality you want to live. Even if it isn’t visibly there yet, start living it, now. Do it in comfortable pieces, if you must. Take one thing at a time and practice it until you are comfortable with your new life. When an opportunity shows up, move on it. Keep your awareness on reality but your attention on the dream.

Make it a good dream and a brilliant reality.

Okay, now what success stories do you have to tell about changes you’ve made in your life? What questions or challenges do you want to share?

Posted in Confidence, Happiness, Relationships, Spirituality | Leave a comment

Spiritual Answers in a Physical World — Nature vs. Spirit

Why talk of spiritual answers in a physical world? Recently, I saw a video interview with neurosurgeon and author, Eben Alexander, M.D., about his book, Proof of Heaven, A Neurosurgeon’s Journey into the Afterlife.

In case you’re interested, here it is:

In it, Dr. Alexander challenges his own prior worldview, discussing the fine points of an experience which is rich in details and thoroughly unbelievable to a secular scientist or naturalist. Dr. Alexander gives spiritual answers for something that baffled his understanding of how the mind and the brain work.

Dr. Alexander’s brain had shut down, according to him. During that time, he experienced a journey to a spiritual realm—to heaven itself.

Is Science Against Spiritual Answers?

The video intrigued me so much, I searched for more information on Dr. Alexander, his background and his new book. The Wikipedia article caught my eye, particularly the skepticism of the doctor’s critics.

Sam Harris, also a neuroscientist, “found his account ‘alarmingly unscientific’.”

Wikipedia goes on to say,

“Neurologist and writer Oliver Sacks agreed with Harris, saying that ‘to deny the possibility of any natural explanation for an NDE [near-death experience], as Dr. Alexander does, is more than unscientific — it is antiscientific.’”

What Sacks says is particularly revealing about a prevalent, but ignored bias in science. Yes, bias. Say Dr. Alexander allows for the possibility of a “natural” explanation. Would Mr. Sacks allow for the possibility of a spiritual one? Probably not, because spiritual answers wouldn’t be “scientific.” Or would they?

How could Mr. Sacks explain Moses parting the sea, or Jesus and his disciple, Peter, walking on water? Don’t believe in miracles? I’ve seen similar miracles in my own lifetime. To me, the only explanations would be spiritual answers instead of “natural” ones.

What if the truth is that Dr. Alexander’s experience was entirely spiritual and not physical. What if all attempts at achieving a “natural” answer are inherently futile? Would that mean that science is impotent in some areas?

I grew up with logic and mathematics. While others were good in sports or music, I thrived on advanced algebra and trigonometry. But logic and mathematics are not the answer to everything.

It may be logical to hold a grudge when someone murders your closest family members, but forgiveness is a superior position. Resentment is a ball-and-chain that traps you in the past. Forgiveness sets you free.

Why is it Important to Protect Spiritual Answers?

Not everyone has the right spiritual answers. In fact, it’s quite possible that all interpretations of spiritual answers are wrong. Just look at how many denominations Christianity has. Even Judaism has its sects with opposing viewpoints.

More than protecting spiritual answers from a secular world, it’s also important to protect our freedom to pursue spiritual answers from the overtly religious who might otherwise force their worldview on others.

The world is becoming increasingly polarized and divided. That’s not a good thing.

There are many concerns we each share with our fellow human beings. That should be enough to keep us together, moving toward a common goal of understanding, freedom and responsibility. But forces are at work in our society that are actively dividing us—secularists vs. the religious, fundamentalists vs. new agers, Democrats vs. Republicans, and more.

Increasingly, we find people using hateful language like, “religion is the source of all evil.” And I thought it was supposed to be “money.” In the final analysis, it seems that every endeavor of man has the potential for evil—not just religion or banking. The root of all evil is selfishness—ego. Ego is right and everyone else is wrong. Ego is entitled to government handouts, but no one else is entitled. Ego is “patriotic,” but unwilling to defend liberty itself.

Only spiritual answers can solve our problems, because the source of all our problems is the antithesis of spirit—ego.

Scientists who are also naturalists, use ego rather than logic, when they condemn spiritual answers or refuse to accept them as a possibility. Science works quite well in a created world, just as it does in a naturalist’s world. But the things of spirit are lost in the world of cogs and wheels. Miracles are impossible in an entirely deterministic realm. But I’ve seen dozens of miracles. I wouldn’t want to lose the freedom to pursue spiritual answers. I wouldn’t want to put intolerant naturalists in charge of deciding what’s wrong and what’s right. We need to protect spiritual answers as well as scientific ones. I don’t like the idea of a biblical literalist deciding what goes into our science textbooks.

I think free speech is a good thing. America used to have it, but U.S. legislation has become increasingly tyrannical—the unpatriotic “Patriot Act,” the NDAA (with its indefinite detention clauses for American citizens), HR 347 (which makes free speech a felony in some instances), and the president’s “Kill List” which includes American citizens on it. American Congress has repeatedly attempted to censor the Internet with bills like SOPA, PIPA, CISPA, TPP and others.

What are your thoughts if someone were to impose their viewpoint on you? What if the government banned your worldview and made it illegal?

Posted in Happiness, Spirituality | Leave a comment

How to Survive the Biggest Pyramid Scheme in History

Pyramid Scheme?

Dollar pyramid - symbol of the biggest pyramid scheme everThe U.S. dollar. Yes, that’s right. The Federal Reserve note is a debt-based currency and Congress and the private Federal Reserve are burning through them at an ever increasing, and non-sustainable rate. The American national debt was a frightening $5 Trillion before 9/11. With President Bush, it virtually doubled in 8 years to $10 Trillion. Then, with President Obama, the national debt skyrocketed in 4 years to $16.3 Trillion, further accelerating the rate of indebtedness.

But is it right to call the Federal Reserve System a pyramid scheme?

Wikipedia tells us,

A pyramid scheme is a non-sustainable business model that involves promising participants payment or services, primarily for enrolling other people into the scheme, rather than supplying any real investment or sale of products or services to the public.

The Fed creates money out of thin air and supplies this newborn fiction to banks and they are permitted to loan out ten times this new money at interest. This practice of loaning more than you have is called “fractional reserve lending.” Don’t you just love those fancy terms? And wouldn’t you love to have that ability for yourself? I suppose only if you liked getting rich by doing nothing at all.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has suggested raising the limit on “fractional lending” so that banks can loan an infinite amount of money for every dollar they hold in reserves. Or they could have zero dollars in reserves, too, and still loan out any amount.

So, each bank is adding to the pyramid scheme by suckering more people to borrow their debt-based currency. The “promise to pay” implied in every dollar is becoming more and more difficult to live up to. And this erosion is devaluing existing dollars. In fact, the devaluing has been going on ever since the Fed took over, a century ago.

The Federal Reserve System is a privately-owned Central Bank—owned by private banks who are, in turn, owned by private individuals. It is about as “Federal” as “Federal Express.” Try taking a filming crew into property owned by the Fed and you will be asked to leave their private property. Filming in a truly Federal building is perfectly okay, because it is public property. The Fed isn’t.

Each dollar is a “promise” of value, plus a percentage of debt. You have to pay back the dollar, plus interest. The problem is that there is never enough money in circulation to pay back all dollars and the accrued interest. Such a system is non-sustainable. Eventually the amount of debt will exceed the existing quantity of currency in circulation (if it hasn’t already).

And someone is pushing on the accelerator of this runaway train, pumping up the level of debt at faster and faster rates.

Debt is a form of slavery. And because the American public can never pay off their debt, they became, in 1913, debt slaves to the private Federal Reserve System and their owners. Gee, and you thought this was the land of the Free and home of the Brave.

Great Depression dust bowl, deepened by the Fed's great pyramid scheme

South Dakota, 1936, during the Dust Bowl of the Great Depression — a financial slump only deepened by the great pyramid scheme of the Fed and its policies.

The “Fed” was touted as a way to ensure bank runs and other problems like that of 1907 would never happen again. Did it work? How about the economic problems of the early 1920s? How about the Stock Market Crash of 1929 and the subsequent Great Depression. Instead of increasing the money supply to help the nation bounce back, the Fed tightened the money supply, deepening the Depression to an extreme. So much for the “Fed” solution.

Another great “solution” pushed on the American people in 1913, was the private income tax. If you still use a written, paper check to pay your taxes, they come back stamped deposited in the “FRS” (Federal Reserve System). Who owns this Central Bank? No one really knows for sure (unless you’re an insider), but G. Edward Griffin’s book, The Creature from Jekyll Island, offers some clues. Would you believe the Rockefellers, the Rothschilds and people like them?

But it isn’t just the money they’re after. It’s the influence. Washington listens to the Fed, but the Fed doesn’t have to answer the tough questions. In fact, retired representative Ron Paul had to create a bill just to force the Fed to reveal what they were doing with all of our money—not just a monetary audit, but revealing the policies they set and the deals they make with foreign Central Banks. The bill passed through the House by an overwhelming majority. The then current Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, blocked the bill from being discussed in the Senate, so it died with the end of the last Congress. You people in Nevada should elect a different Senator. But if it’s another Corporate Party stooge, then we haven’t gained anything for America.

Leaving bankers to govern the ethics of bankers is a bit like employees deciding how much work they have to do for the week, or letting the foxes control their entry into the hen house. All things being equal, selfishness takes over.

Pyramid Scheme Set to Collapse, or Alarmist’s Hysteria?

Crystal ball -- not needed to see how this pyramid scheme is going to end

You don’t need a crystal ball to see how this pyramid scheme is going to end. Just look at history. Photo: Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff, CC BY-SA 2.5, via Wikipedia.org.

Wouldn’t it be nice to have a crystal ball? You could pick stocks by the minute and win with every upswing and downturn. Hook that crystal ball into a computer and have the whole thing run on autopilot. Sweet! Don’t you think the owners of the Central Banks could benefit from this kind of manipulation? When they influence the value of stocks and precious metals, I’m sure insider trading does not apply to them.

Without such niceties, we’re left to look at the facts we have available to us. For instance, American public debt is skyrocketing and unsustainable. Given the fact that a debt-based currency can never be paid off, we’re left with the reality of an ever-increasing debt load which will keep increasing until the country is bankrupt. Just imagine what that will do to international finances when the dollar becomes worthless.

One possible solution is to create a competitive currency—a silver-backed dollar or a gold-backed dollar, like we used to have. Start paying off the Fed’s debt-based dollars and wean the country of that form of currency. The value of Fed dollars keeps going down, and I would not be surprised if gold-dollars held a constant or increasing value.

But this solution, by itself, would not be enough. We would need to eliminate the insane spending of the Federal government.

Imagine you make $100,000 per year, but you spend $200,000 per year on your credit card. Your credit card company keeps bumping up your credit limit every time you get close to your ceiling. Nice, right? Sound familiar? The American Federal government does this, along with its partner in crime, the private Fed. But what happens when you owe so much on your credit card that your $100,000 per year in income is not enough to pay the interest each year? When does such a scheme fall apart?

Are these your elected officials? Wouldn’t it be nice to know who voted on what so we could kick out the insane ones and keep the good ones? Ah, but the Corporate Party owns the news media that tells you who is good and who isn’t. So, how do you ever know for certain, if you only ever listen to the Corporate Party news? You don’t.

And increasingly, legislative bills are introduced for voting so quickly that congressmen have no time to read them! That’s like driving blindfolded. Personally, I can’t believe America has gotten this crazy.

Frankly, I don’t see enough people snapping out of their Normalcy Bias to do enough about it soon enough.

Thriving Despite the Pyramid Scheme Bubble Burst

The best way to thrive despite the runaway train that is America is to distance yourself from paper assets. Okay, maybe you still use dollars, but convert them quickly into real assets. Try using barter as much as possible. Your friendly IRS agent won’t like this, but how are they going to put a dollar value on the barter transaction? And if one dollar changes hands, does that mean your house for their yacht is only a $1 transaction? Talk to your tax attorney about such things.

Frankly, I’m beginning to agree with a few politicians who tell us that taxation is legalized theft. One look at where the tax dollars go, and it’s easy to agree with that sentiment. Does America need military bases in nearly every country on the planet? Do we need so many in uniform overseas when 9/11 was really an inside job? (And if you still believe the Bush “official conspiracy theory,” then you really haven’t looked at the evidence.)

Boycott the corporations. I wonder if there are any truly ethical corporations left. There may be, but many of the largest conglomerates don’t care squat about America or “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Halliburton stands as one of the more egregious examples of wholesale greed at the expense of lives and honesty. Interesting how Vice President Dick Cheney still received payments from his former company especially when they were given those lucrative Iraq War contracts. Can anyone spell “conflict of interest?”

The dollar pyramid scheme is going to go bust. This pyramid scheme, like all others, is unsustainable. It’s only a matter of when.

vegetable garden -- one way to survive the dollar pyramid scheme bustCities are perhaps the last place you should think of living. Growing your own food should be high on your list. Stocking non-perishable foods and water should also be high on your list. Guns and ammunition might be a good thing to get early on, before the Second Amendment is repealed like so many parts of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, so far.

Under certain circumstances, it is now a felony to protest what the government is doing. That’s right. Free speech is no longer entirely free. You can go to jail for a decade, if a Secret Service agent doesn’t like what you yell or the words printed on your t-shirt.

The erosion of rights is so gradual that most people don’t think anything of it. Like the proverbial frog, though, when the water starts to boil, it will be too late to do anything about it. So, in order to thrive despite the coming pyramid scheme bubble burst, you need to act early.

And despite the apparently undeserved misfortune of all this tyranny, learn to forgive. You can’t be truly happy if you’re lugging a ball and chain of resentment behind you.

What ideas do you have for surviving the coming dollar pyramid scheme bust?

Posted in Confidence, Happiness, Wealth | 6 Comments

Law of Attraction and Turning the Other Cheek

Law of Attraction - look of successPerhaps it should come as no surprise that the master of miracles and spiritual ascension should give us the wisdom of the Law of Attraction nearly 2,000 years ago. You reap what you sow. You get what you dwell on.

And if you truly understand what turning the other cheek is, then the Law of Attraction becomes far easier to use.

The real trick with the Law of Attraction is to take responsibility for your feelings, because feelings are where the attraction gets energized. If you feel anxious or worried, then you will attract more things to feel anxious or worried about. If you feel happy, you’ll attract more things to feel happy about.

Turning the Other Cheek and Miracle on Wilshire Boulevard

Late one afternoon in 1977, a miracle happened. The place: Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles. At first, I was grumpy, frustrated and angry at other drivers for cutting me off. Six times within two minutes, other drivers jerked their cars, without warning, into the meager space in front of my own. Dangerous? Absolutely. Each time, my brakes squealed with hurried intent to avoid collision.

After the sixth time, with rage about to pop a gasket, I realized that I had created not only my feelings, but the events in my space toward which I could aim my frustration. Suddenly, I took 100% responsibility for their actions. All frustration, anxiety, worry and rage disappeared. It was now impossible for me to be a victim.

The next moment, I pictured clearly in my mind, wide open spaces and smooth sailing all the way to my destination. The moment I let go of that thought, the center lane in front of me started a rapid evacuation. In less than 5 seconds, 2 miles of Wilshire Boulevard lay empty in front of me, with the lanes left and right impossibly, doubly thick with bumper-to-bumper traffic.

For the next 4 minutes, I moved ahead without one person moving their vehicle into the empty space ahead of me. After that, traffic was sparse and I was at my destination.

From Self-Perception to Sculpting Your Own Feelings

The more you refine your perception of what you’re creating—especially in your feelings—the more control you will be able to exercise over what you create.

Undoubtedly, confidence is an attractive trait. In a group, who gets the most admiration—the wimp or the confident, but humble member? The confident one, of course.

If someone has a natural confidence that comes from within, they’re far more likely to stay confident when trouble strikes, than one who depends on external factors.

If someone depends on feedback from others to feel good about themselves, they’ll thrive when everything is going well, but flounder when things go sour. You need to develop within yourself a confidence that no one or no thing can touch.

Law of Attraction and Ego vs. the True Self

What does “turning the other cheek” have to do with the “Law of Attraction?” It has to do with viewpoint.

Did you know there are two of you? Besides the obvious physical component—your body—there are two selves dwelling within your personal identity. One of them remains asleep in most people. This is the “true self”—the immortal child of God, soul or Holy Ghost.

The other “self” goes by the name of “ego.” This is the part that is vulnerable. This is the part that dwells on scarcity and harbors resentment for apparent wrongs done against it.

Tony Robbins once said, “Those who always look for what they can get out of something are living in scarcity.” This is the ego viewpoint. This is the sense of entitlement and the source of selfishness.

When someone else does something to you that injures you in some way, ego flares up and resents that apparent attack, whether or not it was intended as an attack.

Turning the other cheek subdues ego. It puts you in the position of being more powerful than the perceived hurt. It swaps viewpoint from ego to the spiritual self. Of course, if you deny that you have a spiritual self, then you automatically cripple yourself.

And turning the other cheek thrusts you into the viewpoint of abundance. By turning the other cheek you are taking 100% responsibility and that makes being a victim impossible.

Everyone Wins

When you turn the other cheek, everyone wins—yes, even the perpetrator. They may not know it yet, but you’ve given them powerful wisdom. What they do with that valuable seed is up to them. If they squander the gift, then that’s their loss.

When have you turned the tables on your own ego? What was the result?

Posted in Confidence, Happiness, Spirituality | Leave a comment

Science is Biased and Likely You Are Too

Science is biased? This is not what a scientist wants to hear. In fact, most scientists probably would be quite skeptical of this idea. But by the very act of skepticism, they are being biased. As I eventually found, it’s very difficult to avoid bias altogether.

A Lifetime Love of Science, Logic and Mathematics

Science is biased, but still able to put Sputnik in orbitI started out this life going to movies that stretched my mind. Even as an infant, my parents would take me to the drive-in to watch all manner of movies, including tales of alien invasion. By the time I started school, I was well-versed in the idea of alien worlds and space travel, despite the fact that Sputnik was still a dream in some Russian scientist’s mind. The family encyclopedia found me pouring over its pages, especially in the astronomy section.

In fact, I lived in a family of geniuses and, at times, it was hard to keep up. My own IQ has tested at various times at 138–140—borderline genius by some standards or merely far above average by others. But in my family, I was the underachiever on IQ. Both of my parents were smart and it affected how my three brothers and I grew up. If I remember correctly,

  • Terry had a 169,
  • Larry a 149 and
  • Ken was off the charts.

The tester had written on Ken’s IQ test, “immeasurable, far above 200.” And what Larry lacked in IQ, he made up with high EQ (emotional quotient)—very sociable, outgoing and empathetic—a very open and genuine person. I love all three of my brothers and they do a good job of making me feel smart. They’re even tolerant when I don’t immediately get it.

Throughout school, getting high grades was pretty normal—usually “A’s” and “B’s.” Mathematics was particularly easy. But in high school, I started to get bored with it all. In advanced algebra and trigonometry class, I wanted to know from the teacher what use the quadratic equation was in real life—what application did it have? He looked immediately stunned and then said, “You’ll learn that in college.” I suspect he didn’t learn that in college, otherwise he could’ve answered my earnest question. I certainly did not learn that in college, despite his promise to the contrary, but the teacher knew how to deflect a question he couldn’t answer, and thus prevent seeming too ignorant. Perhaps it would’ve been more honest to say, “I don’t know.”

Trouble in Academia

Sylvanus P. Thompson knew science is biased.

Sylvanus P. Thompson, author of the ever popular, “Calculus Made Easy” (1910).

How could it be that science is biased? One of the first clues came several years after high school, and before I decided to go to college for my degree, I was working in Hollywood as an artist. I was also hungry to write science fiction. For one story, I wanted to get my atmospheric science correct, so I started to research. Quickly, I found I needed to know calculus.

I bought two used textbooks at the local college bookstore and started studying. That was painful. I would read in one textbook until I couldn’t go any further, then I’d switch to the other one, attempting to read the same subject matter from their slightly different viewpoint. Then I would have an epiphany! “Oh, that’s what they’re talking about. That’s simple. Why do they have to make it sound so difficult?”

Yes, it seems the mathematicians who wrote those textbooks were great at math, but lousy at writing. And lousy at teaching!

I searched the bookstores for something better. Finally, at Pickwick Bookstore on Hollywood Boulevard, I spotted “Calculus Made Easy,” by Sylvanus P. Thompson. I was immediately in love with calculus. I had thought that the book was merely another in a series of “Made Easy” books that were popping up all over in the late 70′s.

I was surprised to discover that this book had been through dozens of reprintings starting in 1910! Why couldn’t more textbook writers be like him? Why were publishers purposefully obfuscating the subject? Calculus is not complicated! Many calculus textbook writers, it seemed, were merely incompetent.

Discovering a New Talent

Stars in the NeighborHood software, despite that science is biasedWhile still an artist, I took a correspondence course in electronic engineering. That was fun. Here, mathematics was being applied to real-world examples. In one of my lessons, I learned how tuning circuits worked for radio broadcast and reception. The heart of the circuit was something called the “tank”—a coil and capacitor in parallel. As I was reading about this wonderful invention, I started to get goosebumps.

Suddenly, I realized that I was surrounded by tank circuits—trillions of them! Every atom is a coil (electron orbiting its nucleus) and a capacitor (negative electron separated from a positive nucleus). Suddenly, what I had learned about absorption and emission spectra in astronomy all made sense. Atoms were “broadcasting” certain frequencies and “receiving” those same frequencies. I wonder how many of my fellow students ever had this realization. I was becoming aware of my own talent for recognizing patterns.

After I had started college, I wrote a 3D astronomy program, “Stars in the NeighborHood.” Computers had become powerful enough and monitors and graphics cards had become advanced enough to display all the colors I had long wanted as an artist.

Cracks in the Ivory Tower of Science

Plato knew science was biasedI had also long been interested in human prehistory, myth and legend. I was particularly interested in Plato’s lost Atlantis. In the early 2000′s, I found a burning urge to write a novel. I had already accumulated over a thousand pages of notes that were ripe as background for such a project.

I was lucky enough to have a year to dedicate to the project. I researched and wrote full time. I had been aware of science’s disdain for Atlantis, but my research turned up much more of this ugly prejudice. Emotionally charged words laced the literature—”fringe,” “crackpot,” “pseudoscience” and the like. I started to suspect the nature of science itself—that science is biased. Why were scientists being so subjective and illogical about Atlantis?

In the October, 2004 issue of Scientific American, for instance, Michael Shermer (Mr. Skepticism), offered a short piece on the significance of Atlantis. He wrote, “What if Plato made up the story for mythic purposes? He did.” There are several problems with his statement. Not only does Mr. Shermer jump to a conclusion without discussion, he offers no proof for his conclusion. He dismisses all ideas that Atlantis was anything but a contrived story used as a parable. But how does Mr. Shermer “know” this? Is he omniscient? Did he interview the long-dead Greek philosopher?

A few years after this, Dr. Greg Little, psychologist, discovered some ruins off the coast of Bimini Island, in the Bahamas. He asked a friend, a professor of archaeology, to investigate, but his friend politely refused. Why? It would jeopardize his career. Bimini was associated with the Atlantis myth, and any scientist who gave any credence to the Atlantis story would immediately be shunned by his peers. Yes, science is biased. Science by intimidation.

Then, in my research, I learned of the “Clovis first” dogma. Any scientist who attempted to dig below the Clovis horizon (the historical strata of the first Clovis settlement) was immediately ridiculed. Science by ridicule.

Do scientists ridicule others?

They most assuredly do. How primitive!

Science is Biased: A Pattern of Misbehavior

The more I read, the more I realized that science, though pretty cool, did not have the best of stewards overlooking its progress. I found multiple examples of fraud, countless examples of self-indulgent ridicule and innumerable examples of distortion and self-congratulatory ignorance.

What if someone shown a light on such behavior and made scientists aware of these drawbacks? Could we overcome the fact that science is biased? Would science experience a new Renaissance? Don’t I wish. But ego gets in the way.

The more I dug, the more I realized that ego is an equal-opportunity crippler. It attacks all aspects of humanity, not just science. You can find ego in government, religion, families, clubs, schools and more. Ego is divisive. It stands for entitlement and self-superiority.

I couldn’t understand how a group which proclaims to hold such high ideals could be running rampant with such illogical behavior.

Scientific Fraud

Helping to prove that science is biased, George Bush and 9/11.

Could George W. Bush have been amongst those behind 9/11? It’s a scandalous question, but should it be asked? Photo 9/11: National Park Service, PD, via Wikipedia. Photo Bush: Agência Brasil, CC BY 3.0, via Wikipedia.

Ten years after the tragedy of 9/11, a friend coaxed me to look deeper into the event. I had my misgivings about the official theories, but had not given it much thought. What I found at first dismayed and distressed me. I felt gut-kicked. Suddenly, the official story was obviously a lie. And blatant crimes were committed in broad daylight, like Mayor Giuliani destroying crime scene evidence before the scene could be properly investigated. Within 3 or 4 months, “ground zero” had been scrubbed, the steel beams sold and shipped to China, and all this a full year before the “official” 9/11 investigation began.  As one scientist so poignantly put, you can’t do science if the evidence is missing. Top military officers responsible for the security failures on 9/11 were each given promotions instead of courts martial.

Had there been other lies? The missing WMDs of Iraq came to mind. Oops! But with 9/11, government scientists were lying about science!

A third building goes into free-fall collapse on 9/11 and NIST (National Institute of Science and Technology) scientists treat it as the obvious result of office fires and lopsided damage from the collapse of the twin towers, earlier that day. But only because science is biased does asymmetrical damage ever lead to symmetrical collapse.

The truly obvious implications of free-fall immediately debunk the NIST findings. How? Buildings never go into free-fall unless all of the supports are cut. Not crushed, as NIST suggests. Crushing takes work. Crushing slows down the collapse. Free-fall means no slowing down. NIST lied!

How Does Such Dishonesty Exist in Science?

One could just as easily ask, how does dishonesty exist in any human endeavor?

Then I reread the definition of “scientific method.” In that definition, it warned against bias. Suddenly, I realized that science had been working with the wrong paradigm all this time. Skepticism, even in its most benign form, contains the potent bias of doubt. My God! Science is biased!

Scientists have become addicted to skepticism. They are veritable “doubt” junkies.

For most scientific efforts, the more benign form of skepticism still works pretty well, because the restraint and humility built into skepticism allows the scientist to discover the next relative “truth.” Obviously, no one can discover anything if they think they know it all in advance. Suddenly, I realized that all of the problems in science could be drawn back to this problem—ego and the self-indulgent attitude that one knows it all, or at least knows all there is about a specific patch of human knowledge.

But skepticism has a dark side. When scientists ridicule other scientists as they did when two men discovered “cold fusion,” all of humanity suffers. That’s ego. When a scientist or skeptic uses unsupported dismissiveness, as did Michael Shermer in his 2004 article, we all lose. And ego wins.

When discussing this in forums, you encounter all manner of opinion. Most of it is defensive of science, as if skepticism and science were joined at the hip for eternity. They think science is not biased, but that I am. Of course I am, but I knew that already.

But if not skepticism, what should the paradigm of science be? Why not “restraint” and “humility?” Both of these together accomplish the purpose of skepticism, but without the bias of “doubt.” And restraint and humility prevent the darker forms of skepticism from manifesting.

We can all move away from bias by being self-aware, but a better approach is in eliminating ego—putting love of others ahead of self.

Imagine that. Science without ridicule. No more “science is biased.” I like it.

Now, tell me: What forms of bias have you found in science?

Posted in Education, Spirituality | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Certainty — The Crutch of ‘Knowing it Can Be Done’

Certainty: FA-18 Hornet, breaking sound barrier.

FA-18 Hornet, breaking sound barrier. Photo: Ensign John Gay, U.S. Navy, PD, via Wikipedia.org

Is certainty a crutch? Sometimes it can be. It depends on how that certainty is formed.

When Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier in 1947, many of his fellow pilots were decidedly uncertain it could be done. Some suggested that he should be fully insured. A few of his peers had already died trying. There was little certainty that such a physical barrier could be pierced. Yeager is said to have been very certain that it could be broken. “What barrier?”

A more arbitrary barrier—the four-minute mile—was broken by Roger Bannister in 1954. What makes this more subjective is the nature of both the mile and the minute. Both are arbitrary units of measure that have no direct relation to one’s ability to run.

Certainty of Chuck Yeager in his Bell X-1.

Chuck Yeager, the man credited with breaking the sound barrier, standing in front of the Bell X-1. Photo: US Military, PD-USGOV-MILITARY, via Wikipedia.org

Yeager’s “sound barrier,” on the other hand, was a very real and physical obstacle; it involved a tangible change of state between subsonic and supersonic travel. That boundary is marked by the rather noisy “sonic boom.” In fact, the crack of a whip is just such a “sonic boom.”

And yet Bannister’s breakthrough on the track suddenly unleashed a flurry of copycats, just as did Yeager’s performance in the air. Suddenly, everyone was certain it could be done, because someone else had already done it.

Something about the fact that it had already been done gave others the crutch of certainty they needed to duplicate the feat. You might want to re-read that last sentence again. There is a world of wisdom and inspiration in it.

This distinction gives us an advantage. How? Breakthroughs are all around us waiting to happen for the first time. All it takes is someone with the right accident or the right, brazen certainty to find them.

Now, if you want to go through life accidentally, as so many on this planet seemed destined to do, have at it. On the other hand, if you want to accomplish something no one else has done, simply write it down in detail and imagine yourself already there. Don’t just think it—feel it.

Certainty of the Children of Atlantis and the Start of Civilization

Certainty despite inferior numbers, Pizzaro takes the Inca

Pizzaro attacking the Inca leader, Atahualpa, in Peru, with inferior numbers. Painting: Sir John Everett Millais, PD, via Wikipedia.org

Jared Diamond, in his best-selling book, Guns, Germs and Steel, proposed the idea that passive elements of geography increased the likelihood of civilization getting a start. He developed some compelling arguments to support that thesis. In Eurasia, humans had the latitude to expand and mix ideas—from one longitude to another. Humans resist changes in latitude, because of the changes in climate, temperature, and available food. Crops that grow at mid-latitudes likely won’t do well at low or high latitudes.

Starting civilization is not something that is preordained. Most people would likely view such an undertaking as impossible, if they were starting out as simple hunter-gatherers.

But what if someone knew that civilization was already possible? What if the children of Atlantis—descendants of the refugees of that lost island empire—showed the primitives of Eurasia how to plant wheat or rice, how to hew stone and how to bury their dead?

Certainty at Göbekli Tepe, carving stone structure

The certainty that civilization could be created may have helped the people of Göbekli Tepe to create these structures, some 11,500 years ago. Photo: PD, via Wikipedia.org

Don’t believe in Atlantis? That’s okay. Atlantis doesn’t believe in you, either. For decades, skeptics of Atlantis said that there is no evidence of civilization existing that far back. Little did they realize that their skepticism is based on an “argument-to-ignorance” type logical fallacy. All it takes is one piece of evidence to shatter their argument. And, in 1995, scientists began digging at Göbekli Tepe, Turkey, unearthing large stone structures decorated with intricate carvings. The estimated date: 9500 BC—merely a hundred years after Plato’s date for the end of Atlantis. And you have to ask, what other evidence is out there yet to be dug up?

Scientists characterize the site as the oldest known religious structure in the world. They speculate that the builders were hunter-gatherers who may have lived at least part of the year in nearby villages. What if the builders were hunter-gatherers by necessity, rather than by choice?

The site contains 20 round structures. Only 4 of them have been excavated. Wikipedia tells us, “Recent DNA analysis of modern domesticated wheat compared with wild wheat has shown that its DNA is closest in sequence to wild wheat found on Mount Karaca Dağ 20 miles (32 km) away from the site, suggesting that this is where modern wheat was first domesticated.”

For more information on evidence that supports the past possible reality of Atlantis, check out Mission: Atlantis.

Certainty for Building Your Own Future

Certainty doesn’t have to wait for someone else. As with any emotion, you create your own confidence. Sure, you can use conditions in your environment or experience to justify your emotions and confidence, or you can decide to create confidence despite what goes on in your environment.

Realize this: civilization was not built by reasonable people. Reason has its place, but it acts as a double-edged sword. You can be just as confident that something won’t work as you can be that it will work. Either way, you frequently prove yourself right.

Posted in Confidence, Happiness | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment