Month: February 2017

I am going to consciously confront something publicly that is a little painful for me.  No, I have no confessions to make. I’ve been pretty open and honest.

What I am realizing is that what comes AFTER confronting evil, is the following realization that all sorts of human feelings and emotions are underdeveloped in me. I am stunted in some ways, which I compensate for intellectually.  I think there are many like me.  I think, in fact, that most “intellectuals” are like me, just much less honest, and much less willing–and, to be sure, able–to go doubtful and painful places.

They say a neurological basis of social connection is mirror neurons.  In a healthy and satisfying attachment process, the infant learns that what it feels, others feel–that there is an “out there” which speaks back and can be conversed with, even if of course the conversation will take several more years to do in words.  And this talking back, this reaction, this connection, teaches the infant that those emotions exist, that they are valid–in the sense that some reaction is appropriate.  For example, when an infant cries, in a healthy mother/child relationship it will reliably be comforted.  If it is hungry it will be fed.  If its stomach hurts it will be burped, etc.  If it is happy, the caregiver is happy back.

This process not only creates a loop between care giver and infant, but also WITHIN the infant in that its own feelings are validated.  It does not have to learn to reject its own feelings in order to meet the emotional needs of the care-giver, which is the case is bad bonding.

And turning to that process, unnurturing mothers view crying infants not as a helpless being in need of comfort, but a nuisance to shut up.  They view small children expressing natural curiosity as brats who need to be spanked.  They view children who are always asking questions as annoying and disrespectful.  Sooner or later, such children learn to internalize the undesirability of those emotions, and by extension, spontaneous expressions of any sort.

They learn, in other words, to view with mistrust and fear their own feelings.

This, here, is where I think the heart of addiction lies.  Emotions and feelings are how we navigate the world.  They are what tell us who we are, and what we want, and what is worth pursuing.  They tell us when we feel a special connection with someone.  They tell us when we feel a special connection with a certain kind of work or activity.

Imagine if you will living in a world where every last spontaneous impulse generates an immediate feeling of fear and even revulsion.  Imagine trying to individuate in such a world, to develop a core self and sense of agency.

You can’t not feel.  What you can do is reject all your feelings–which you have no hope of differentiating, since they were not differentiated effectively by the parent, and you have not yet learned that skill–then drink to numb the social isolation and internal pain that causes.

The evil is what pushes you out of your natural world, the one where things make sense, and being who you are is not a crime.  But where it pushes you to is a confusing world where all our natural, inherent, instinctual way-markers have been conditioned out of existence, or perhaps worse yet, reversed, so that anything good is seen as bad, and all bad seen as good; or perhaps most accurately: the whole fucking thing so muddles up it is hard to tell what is what.

This is what has driven me personally to develop my analytical faculty to the extent I have.  I don’t have a clue who I am on an experiential level, and I have had to treat the entire world as an extended practical joke, at least in theory.  I would guess it is what led Descartes to his effort to create a philosophy from first principles.  Knowing nothing else about him than that he separated body/mind, and that he loved to sleep in every morning, I would guess he had considerable trauma in him he was never able to name or express.

It seems likely many famous people had terrible things in them they could not live down, could not express, and could not escape.

But we are gradually developing a vocabulary for all this, a praxis, orienting ideas based in good science.  This is all to the good.

Neurologically, circulating sensations, which is the goal of Kum Nye, would seem ideally suited to the loosening up of what amount to mental spasms, and to recontacting instinctual knowledge that was suppressed through punishment or neglect.

My own sessions this week have been quite interesting.  I can sometimes feel a sense that “I” have merged with space, and am present to a circulation of the Ten Thousand Things within me, in what in all candor feels like a colorful circus.  It has circus energy, whatever that means.

And to return to the topic, if you think about it, a connection with another human being is really a circulation, isn’t it?  Isn’t that a better metaphor?  A connection is static, but a circulation is when I send a feeling, and you respond, then I respond, and the whole circularity of it, the appropriateness of responses on both sides, is how we know we are connecting and bonding.  They may be a conversation in words, which is also a sort of circulation, but the words are determined by what happens beneath the words.

Likewise, intrapsychically, a healthy person will feel something, recognize they feel something, then respond appropriately.  Not all feelings, obviously, can be acted on, but a mature person recognizes and accepts this.  This, itself, is a reaction.

What I would submit is that absent healthy intrapsychic flow, healthy inter-psychic flow, that between people, is necessarily stunted.  The messages are not properly sent or received.  There is poor communication, and poor communication means poor flow of connection.

And practically, this can and often does cause psychic contraction.  You feel some combination of “people just don’t get me”, and “I am weird and different”.

No, what has happened is that you do lack skill, but that it is a skill like any other, that with open practice, you will get better at.

In my own case, I am an outstanding faker.  But I am not going to do that any more, as much as I can help it (and this is no doubt a tide which comes in and out).  It is a stupid game, and if I aim for one thing in my life, it is to not be stupid.

Everyone has the right to speak their mind, but nobody has the right to demand people listen.

When Trump says the media is the enemy of our country, he is, OBVIOUSLY, not saying that we should not have a free press, or that news should not be reported.

What he is saying is that most media outlets have set as an agenda the eradication of our Constitutional protections from tyranny, the cessation of independent thought, and the disruption and eventual eradication of alternative viewpoints.  They work hand in glove with the radicals–which is the core–of the Democrat Party, Quisling Republicans, and very, very wealthy people who hope to use the new order for their own benefit.

CNN will not be banned.  It will simply become progressively less relevant, at least if the American people are not as stupid as CNN thinks they are.

How long would you be willing to work hard for nothing?  How long would you be willing to work AT ALL for nothing?  How about for CLOSE to nothing?

Legally, corporations are people.  I have talked about why this is one of the smartest legal innovations in human history, because it fosters innovation and risk which otherwise would not happen.

But think about it: if the government takes their money in the form of taxes, and regulatory burdens that amount to taxes, how long will they pursue what they do with enthusiasm?

How much sense does it make to say “the institutions that employ most Americans and provide them with income are the root cause of the problems in this country, and the solution is to put the people who take money from those job creating institutions in charge of everything, and make them larger and more difficult to deal with.”?

The iPhone was invented–or at least mass produced–for profit.  So was the telephone.  So was the power grid.  So was the automobile.

Socialism and its allegedly “scientific”, more perfect offspring Communism, is based upon the idea that if we eliminate all psychologically normal motivations and replace them with coercion, everyone will be happier.

It really is that dumb.  And that lunacy, and stupidity, and evil, is on display in the wreckage of the 20th century, and the hellholes which still employ this logic, like Cuba and North Korea.

For their parts, China and India finally granted that nobody wants to work for nothing.  That is what slaves do, and they only work because if they don’t they get whipped and starved.

Whipping and starving: these are the two cornerstones of modern “Liberalism”, as it is pleased to disingenuously call itself.

If you doubt it, attack Cuba in front of somebody claiming they “increased literacy” (so their propaganda would be more effective), and see how long the pretense of moderation and concern for the common good holds up.

Imagine we and everything we know exists as a holographic projection within an infinite space.  Is that space not what is most important?

We distract ourselves with minutiae.  But only if we see God within that minutiae, as Ramanujan did in numbers, can that be called worship, which is to say life.

I’m feeling unusually mystical for some reason.  The past week has been both exhausting and illuminating.  I am not drinking, still.  What I am watching for is an inability to manage the emotions which wash over me.  So far, I am staying present, and that is good.

I am, in fact, processing MORE emotions.  That is better yet.

Do you really want to grow old doing bad science in support of a political agenda you cannot control?

You are useful tools, nothing more.  What those who control you really want, you cannot know.

It is obvious, though, that anyone willing to tell one lie now, could be telling multiple lies now; and anyone willing to lie now, will also be willing to lie in the future.

The Tao is an empty vessel; it is used, but never filled.
Oh, unfathomable source of ten thousand things!
Blunt the sharpness.
Untangle the knot.
Soften the glare.
Merge with dust.
Oh, hidden deep but ever present!
I do not know fro whence it comes.
It is the forefather of the gods.

Tao Te Ching 4.

I will add that I am realizing that the bigger I want to be, the smaller I must become.

Global Warming is a simple, scientifically formatted hypothesis: that 1) CO2 in the atmosphere causes heat retention; 2) that adding CO2 on a global basis will likely increase atmospheric CO2 levels; and 3) that this increase will cause large increases in overall global temperature, which will cause rising sea levels, destruction of reefs, and much dislocation of human population living near the ocean.

It does not, to be clear, even in the most extremist scenarios, envision anything other than a massive inconvenience, and the loss of a considerable amount of biological diversity.  And what it never mentions is the longer and more productive agricultural seasons we would see particularly in Russia and Canada if this hypothesis were true.

Be that as it may, point number 1 was of course proven long ago.  I sometimes see my arguments rebutted–so they seem to think–with reference to discoveries made in the 19th century.  OF COURSE CO2 is a Greenhouse Gas, so called.  No one disputes it.

The points relevant to the discussion, though, are 1) it is only relevant at higher altitudes; and 2) its relative influence is cut in half with each doubling.  It makes a huge difference initially, then makes less and less of a difference of the more of it there is.  It is strongly implied in Warmist language that there is a linear relationship between CO2 accumulation and temperature, but nothing in the literature supports this.  The fact is the more there is, the less it matters.

To my point, though: the key, absolutely unavoidable, absolutely clear postulate of this hypothesis is that massive warming will happen in the Upper Troposphere.  This is where the warming MUST begin, for the hypothesis to be true.  There is no Option B.  There is no possibility of switching from Warming to Change.  This is the SINGLE data point upon which the entire edifice hinges.  It is the core data point from which the entire usefulness and importance of the many billion business of Global Warming “research” emanates.

We have real time, highly accurate, and long term (4 decades or so) data.  And what does it show?  Nothing.  It shows some warming, but nothing faster than the overall atmosphere itself, when basic physics would require 3 or more times the warming we see for the hypothesis to be true.

I have made this point before.  The data is clear that this whole thing is “fake news”, although the consequences of this fake news are much bigger than is normally the case.

The point I wanted to make here is that very intelligent, highly funded, very capable people continue to attempt to use very difficult, highly suspect, and ultimately unreliable measurements, as sculpted through statistical models created through both guesswork (and in my view subterfuge) to estimate overall land temperature, and even computer models to guess OCEAN temperature, at the bottoms of the oceans.

Why do they do this?  Why do they want to use as arguments bad–or at least suspect and highly unreliable–data to continue to argue for public policy oriented around reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions, and specifically CO2 emissions?

THIS IS THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN KEEP THIS MONSTER ALIVE.

Speculate, then, from there.  But speculate KNOWING that science is not at the core of this thing.  It is not the core aim, and this is CLEARLY the case. If the more generous want to ascribe idealistic motives to these massive lies, so be it.  But lies they are.  Demonstrably, and irrefutably.

People trying to provide real solutions to real problems look for the best, most relevant data.  They do not fight for the inclusion of and reliance on the worst data.

I see some attacks on Alex Jones in the complicit media lately, and I wonder: “what could they hope to accomplish?”

Here is the thing: nobody who was capable of watching alternative media has failed to grasp that our system is corrupt to the core, ideologically driven, and that the ideology in question is a cultural corrosive which has as its aim the final vitiation of all Constitutional restraints, and the institution in permanent power of an elite who aim to demonize and likely commit acts of mass violence against all dissent.

Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.  Simple enough.  And self evidently, all for our own good.  They are PROTECTING us, not oppressing us.  Because, you know, global warming and open bathroom rights for all.

So all ANY complicit media member has to do is say or even imply that somebody is NOT ONE OF US, and all the following evils have already been “tagged” onto that person.  They are, by dint of being accused of non-conformity, all of the following, plus whatever might seem to need to be tagged on: stupid, crazy, racist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, for polluting air and water, in the thrall of evil corporations, etc.  They have no real means of differentiating Bill O’Reilly from Alex Jones, and there is little point in doing so.  It might appear to enhance their attacks on Trump temporarily, but to what point?  Most of America isn’t listening.  We showed that on Election Day, and they still have not processed it.  How much more hate does one need to gin up when people are already frothing at the mouths in the streets?

The people who respond to the Pavlovian call of “wolf” are already responding.  This number is unlikely to get any bigger, and seems on the contrary to be shrinking.  How long can you say the same stupid fucking things about everyone and everybody who disagrees with you before the spell starts wearing off?  That was the whole point of the fairy tale.

But what I myself would say about Jones is that for a very long time he was on the fringe even for me.  I would visit Drudge and Lucianne, mainly, sometimes Front Page Mag, and Arts and Literature Daily when I thought about it.  Yahoo on occasion, and of course Facebook.  That was about it.

But in the lead up to the election he was one of the only people talking about the polls being skewed.  He was one of the only ones talking about voter fraud.  He WAS the only one who seemed to share my growing sense that our system was being manipulated by a power elite.  That there is a “Superclass” seems to be beyond question.  Here is one book on the topic: https://www.amazon.com/Superclass-Global-Power-Elite-Making/dp/0374272107 .

The only questions are how homogeneous they are in their aims, and what those aims are.  Global Warming clearly seems to be one tool they use.  Unregulated mass immigration seems to have been another recent one used to radically alter the face of Europe.  The eradication of national borders seems to be another goal, one seemingly articulated by Hillary to an approving group of bankers who presumably where in this class.

So my standard line for some time has been that Jones is half crazy, but he still needs to be paid attention to.  He says things nobody else is saying, that are often–not always, but often–worth listening to.

It really is odd that we seem to live in a time when people demand “purity” from their news, that they never say anything speculative, even when in fact, of course, virtually everything most “news” sources says is either speculative or, worse and more commonly, intentionally misleading and manipulative.

Jones–and he is like Donald Trump in this regard, even though I think Trump is much smarter–speaks his mind. He says what he is thinking.  He is not trying to footnote his every comment.

And obviously he brings emotion to the whole thing.  He loses it on camera sometimes.  He explodes because he is ANGRY at the abuses he feels are happening.

Intelligent people who actually took advantage of their education to improve their ability to process information never need fear contrary viewpoints.  If they are farcical–as is the case, when you get to its root, with Global warming–they can be ignored.  If they seem clearly to be true, then they should be listened to.

But there is this wide, large category of “maybe true”.  This is where alleged ‘professionals” get cold sweats.  This is where information which contradicts long held views, or viewpoints which they have worked long and hard to reach, becomes dangerous.

But simply because it is emotionally dangerous to the people we are indoctrinated to blindly trust as “experts”, who have failed us again and again, does not mean that we should stop listening, or refuse to form our own viewpoints.

The whole merit of that ideational plurality which is protected by free speech and the freedom of religion, is that when you have many competing ideas, the best ones rise to the top.  ONLY when you suppress viewpoints can they fail to win the attention and respect they deserve.

And modern science too–if I might shift gears slightly, since this points is patently obvious with regard to political commentary masking as journalism–regrettably, shows again and again and again that even though they have the freedom of speech in theory, our systems have gate-keepers who would be perfectly in place in any totalitarian regime, and who ironically enough are WORSE than those in many totalitarian regimes.  Much of the most interesting work in fields like psi, and what might be called “alternative biology” has necessarily been done in Communist nations like the USSR and China, because the American censors are WORSE than theirs.

The Communists only cared about political purity.  They had and have no scientific ideas they have to protect.  That is not the case in America, and most of Europe generally.

My vote is that the crazies, so called, always get to speak their voice, and get an honest hearing, at least if they meet very, very minimal standards.

As I think about it, in the scientific community, in this country especially, and especially in anything that touches the American Medical Association, we have SHOW TRIALS, do we not?

I think of Cleve Backster, where the only attempted replication of his work was not done following his clearly stated experimental protocol, which then ironically enough said that his protocol was not “scientific”, even though he regularly demonstrated his results to any visitors who came by his lab for DECADES.  This was BIG NEWS in certain circles.  He was crucified in public, after a mockery of an effort at replication.  Their interaction with his work was exactly homologous to the efforts of the Soviets and their satellites to conduct honest criminal trials of dissidents who had already been convicted.

If you read his book, Primary Perception, you see the ridiculousness of the “scientific community” claiming to have tested and falsified his very long term experimental work.  He does through it in some detail, since he was an honest person.

Hell, even MythBusters accidentally validated his work, then made sure the next experiment failed.


As Sir Winston put it: 

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.

I could go on–there are many examples I could cite off the top of my head–but I have things to do.


The POINT is that if you are not regularly assuming that much of what you were taught COULD be wrong–not, note, that it IS wrong, but that you could be much stupider and more ignorant than you presently realize–then are missing half of the data which is zipping by your head.  Some of it you can throw away immediately.  But much of it, I would suggest, intelligent people will file away for possible future use.


If you are building anything–and building better ideas clearly applies–you are only as good as the tools and materials you have available for your use.  Ponder that.

How the fuck is anyone who made it through grade school unable to distinguish between LEGAL and ILLEGAL immigration?

I get the feeling with the Left at the moment that they just can’t get over the idea that their parents said no to the fourth glass of Grape Kool-Aid.  But they really WANT it.  They had some before and they want more NOW.  NOW.  NOW.

You want to be gay.  Fine.

You want to get married.  Fine.

You want to dress up like a girl and pretend you are a girl. Weird, but fine.

You want to tell ME what gender you are?  And change it whenever you want to?  Full stop.  You know what, let’s just call it quits with the demands for a while.

And if you want to throw a fit, fine.  The cop videos continue to get better.  And if the cops won’t do their jobs, at some point the silent majority will not be silent any more.