Teller gave a talk to the assembled guests at the New York Symposium, entitled 'energy patterns of the future'. This is what he said:
"Ladies and gentlemen, I am to talk to you about energy in the future. I will start by telling you why I believe that the energy resources of the past must be supplemented. First of all, these energy resources will run short as we use more and more of the fossil fuels. But I would [...] like to mention another reason why we probably have to look for additional fuel supplies. And this, strangely, is the question of contaminating the atmosphere. [....] Whenever you burn conventional fuel, you create carbon dioxide. [....] The carbon dioxide is invisible, it is transparent, you can’t smell it, it is not dangerous to health, so why should one worry about it?
Carbon dioxide has a strange property. It transmits visible light but it absorbs the infrared radiation which is emitted from the earth. Its presence in the atmosphere causes a greenhouse effect [....] It has been calculated that a temperature rise corresponding to a 10 per cent increase in carbon dioxide will be sufficient to melt the icecap and submerge New York. All the coastal cities would be covered, and since a considerable percentage of the human race lives in coastal regions, I think that this chemical contamination is more serious than most people tend to believe."
And so, in a nutshell, n 1959, many of the power-elite in the United States were informed that global warming or climate change would happen, along with its catastrophic effects on humanity and our planet.
It's worth thinking logically about how the power-elite of the U.S. would have responded to this news. Being intelligent, self-serving people, they wouldn't have ignored it. There may be a climate-change-denial movement muddying the waters for us nowadays, but there's no reason to think that those oligarchs would have fallen for such half-hearted denials. Instead, it is logical and likely that they would have planned a response to deal with that impending threat.
As far as I can work out, there seems to be only four possible ways they could have dealt with the coming global climate meltdown. They could have done one or more of the following:
1) Stopped global fossil fuel use, or severely cut it back.
2) Severely reduced the global population somehow, to reduce the use of fossil fuels.
3) Built secret underground cities, safe from the atmospheric breakdown and sea-level rises, and stocked them with a chosen group.
4) Developed a space program to colonise another planet.
Choice 1 would have been a very unpopular idea, as the power-elite's wealth was heavily dependent on fossil fuel use. This choice was therefore likely to have been rapidly abandoned. Choice 2 was a very risky idea (never mind being entirely callous) as most ways of doing it (disease, armed militia) could have easily backfired and killed the oligarchs themselves. This would leave only choices 3 and 4 - underground cities and a space-colony - as their only viable choices.
If the power-elite did a study and came to that same conclusion, it's likely that they would have immediately began a major program of work to achieve those two goals. Since the elite of the U.S. are actually a small number of people, who are also closely linked through marriage and other ties, they could have agreed to put an enormous amount of influence and money into the projects. It's therefore worthwhile having a look at the period, 1959-61, in the United States for signs that these projects were actually started. Did major events and developments occur in those two years that could have helped the creation of underground cities and a space-colony-program?
In 1961, Project Gnome consisted of the detonation of a 3.1 kiloton atomic bomb underground. A few months later, researchers examined the cavern that was created and found that the space had rapidly lost its radioactivity and become habitable. The test was definite proof that engineers could make a huge hole underground without any need to physically excavate and remove that material to the surface. it was very useful news to anyone thinking of creating a secret underground base.
Between1957 and 1960, the U.S. aviation and defence media was full of stories reporting that the big aerospace defence contractors were working on anti-gravity technology. This was a development of pioneering experiments made by Townsend Brown and Nikola Tesla. But in around 1960, this entire subject disappeared from the aerospace media, as if it had suddenly become a non-subject. This bizarre switch from being the hottest trend in military aviation to being an unspoken subject is described in Dr Paul LaViolette's book, 'secrets of anti-gravity technology'. LaViolette concluded in his book that the U.S. defence bigwigs must have made significant breakthroughs and immediately made the whole topic classified. The timing is very interesting as it occurred, again, soon after that bombshell talk by Edward Teller. It goes without saying that anti-gravity propulsion would have been a very useful technology for a space-colony program.
It's therefore seems that a lot of events occurred at the end of the 1950's that are related to possible programs of developing underground bases and a space-colony. Since that time, the odd revelation pops up on this subject, such as the statements of Philip Schneider (at least before he was found dead), along with a host of other intriguing accounts. Unfortunately, and not surprisingly, it is difficult to be sure of anything as the whole area is awash with claim, counter-claim and wild theories.
In summary, did the power-elite of the U.S. actually begin projects in 1959, developing underground cities and a space-colony, as a way to avoid the coming climate meltdown? The supposedly-spoof documentary, Alternative-3, broadcast in 1977, intimates that a global elite were already working on these options. It's hard to be certain either way but we can look at the subject logically. To put it simply, if you were the U.S. power-elite and their European friends, what would you have done once you knew that climate-meltdown was approaching? Most of us know the story of Noah and his Ark and most of us understand that Noah was the wise one to heed the warnings and sort out a lifeboat. The same could be said of Edward Teller and the U.S. oligarchs. 1958 may therefore have been the year that a new Noah's Ark, 'Project: Noah's Ark - 2000' actually began. Sadly for the vast majority of us, we'll never see it launched. All we'll see is the water.
“It’s about trust and confidence. There are people who feel that being a Freemason and a police officer is not necessarily a good idea. I find it odd that there are pockets of the organisation where a significant number of representatives are Freemasons.”
In my experience, it’s very unusual for any person in a senior role in the UK to criticise the Freemasons. Some might say that this because the Freemasons have only a minor influence in our country. Unfortunately, White’s comments indicate that a very different problem is present; that Freemasons have a very strong influence in at least one major organisation in our country. It has been common knowledge for a long time that the Freemasons are rife in Britain's police force, its judiciary, its civil service and its military. If this is correct, then Freemasons have a great deal of influence and control over the running of British society. Is this something we should be worried about? Read More...
And yet there is a lot of scientific evidence that what we eat and drink has an enormous influence on whether or not we get cancer, and how we can survive it. The excellent documentary 'Forks over Knives' puts forward a thorough case that a diet high in meat or animal protein is strongly linked to heart disease and cancer. Also, the known effectiveness (for certain cancers) of the Ketosis Diet, in which the patient switches to a diet almost entirely free of carbohydrates and sugars, shows that cancer and our diet are strongly linked.
The majority of cancers, some 90–95% of cases, are due to genetic mutations from environmental factors. The remaining 5–10% are due to inherited genetics.
"Warburg hypothesised that cancer growth is caused by tumour cells generating energy (as, e.g., adenosine triphosphate / ATP) mainly by anaerobic breakdown of glucose (known as fermentation, or anaerobic respiration). This is in contrast to healthy cells, which mainly generate energy from oxidative breakdown of pyruvate. Pyruvate is an end product of glycolysis, and is oxidised within the mitochondria. According to Warburg, hence, cancer should be interpreted as a mitochondrial dysfunction."
And to quote from the man himself:
Cancer, above all other diseases, has countless secondary causes. But, even for cancer, there is only one prime cause. Summarised in a few words, the prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar.
Nowadays, biochemists regard genetic problems as the cause of cancer, and yet if our bodies do have such a serious genetic predisposition for cancer, why has this not been weeded out through natural selection? A more likely scenario is that our bodies have been developed, over millions of years, to digest small amounts of fresh meat, along with sugars locked up in starches and fibrous plant material. In this situation, they run fine but if they are swamped with excessive amounts of refined, raw sugar and alcoholic drinks (partly and fully fermented sugars), they are in a very unnatural situation. In such a situation, sugar fermentation takes place in their cells and cancers develop. It's worth noting that the appearance of cancers in our body is actually normal. Micro-cancers appear all the time and our immune system gets rid of them on a regular basis. But it is the unstopped development of these micro-cancers into macro-cancers that is unnatural. The presence of sugar fermentation in our cells could be the key to why this happens. That creates an unnatural cellular environment which supports those unnatural cellular activities.
After many years of drinking socially (and getting drunk), I cut back because I realised that alcohol is a 'sweet death'. It is a way to lose yourself in a warm but poisonous fog. It would seem, if Warburg is right, that sugar and alcohol may be the 'sweet death' for our bodies too.
If the above relationship between charge and gravity is correct, then it would it explain why stars orbit the centre of galaxies faster than they should (they are highly charged objects) and there would be no need for the dark matter that civilian scientists believe exists but cannot find. It would also mean that we could construct craft that could easily take us to other planets and other stars. Our era of using ludicrously primitive chemical rockets would be over. It would also mean, theoretically, that other races from all those planets around all those stars could easily visit us, once they'd developed this technology.
Many people might think that if gravity is all about positive and negative charge, we'd all have anti-gravity saucer craft by now. There are good reasons why our civilians scientists would not be getting the chance to give us craft that make petrol-guzzling machines obsolete. I'll leave the details of that for now. Nevertheless, if gravity and charge are linked, then a lot of aliens should be visiting our planet. This is a powerful piece of information and since 'knowledge itself is power', to quote the brilliant scientist and diplomat Sir Francis Bacon, it's hardly surprising us ordinary folks are being kept away from it.
When it comes to reports of aliens visiting us, a lot of us will immediately think about stories such as 'the glowing light got me and then I woke up on a laboratory table and these evil looking greys were experimenting on me and they shoved something in my brain and in my eye and left me by the side of the road!' This sort of event may certainly happen; it's certainly the idea promoted in entertainment like the 'X' files, but it can't be the only way humans could interact with aliens. If aliens are visiting our planet, some of them would logically be nice individuals. Any other view smacks of hysterical paranoia.
So, logically, if all the above elements are correct, then there should be accounts of nice alien visits. Fortunately, there are and here's one to watch. Steve Boucher comes across as a genuine, peaceful, honest guy. He might be lying all the way through the interview but his non-verbal behaviour, his speech patterns and his demeanour all point to him being entirely sincere (as far as I can tell). His account is believable, fascinating and at times, very funny. Definitely recommended.
Here's the follow up interview with Q&A:
For example, our zodiac includes two key figures, the Scorpion and the Centaur Archer. The Scorpion’s sting-tail and the end of the Centaur Archer’s arrow stand over the centre of our galaxy. This is a very surprising coincidence considering the centre of our galaxy is invisible to us because of intervening dust clouds. LaViolette uses these facts, along with the geological record, ice core studies and the stories of indigenous peoples, to put forward the idea that, in around 12,000 BC, our planet was hit by such a wave from the centre of our galaxy. This wave of high energy particles pushed a vast amount of interstellar dust into our inner solar system, against the solar-wind which usually keeps out such dust. This vast amount of dust caused chaos on Earth and triggered the catastrophic end of our ice age.
It’s interesting to note that Dr LaViolette uses an idea in his book that I also put forward, years ago. The idea, to put it simply, is that the Book of Revelations is not about our future, as it says in its introduction, but is instead an account of a cataclysm in our ancient past. LaViolette points out that the events described in Revelations match exactly what would occur when a vast incursion of dust and disturbed comets entered our inner solar system and hit Earth.
I definitely recommend ‘Earth on Fire’. It is a bit over-wordy in places and I did skim a few pages here and there but overall, it’s a fascinating, well-researched and compelling theory.
First line from this year's winner (Tor Freeman):
It's interesting to see what the competition organisers are looking for nowadays. Last year's winner was a milkman's desire to win his local Tall Milkman competition. This seems, I think, to show that Cape are currently after low-key, heartwarming stories about everyday life. Both stories are also illustrated in a style that's akin to a children's book illustration, making them accessible to a larger age group.
Sample line from last year's winner (Matthew Dooley):