Adrian's Writing Blog

news, articles and reviews

Edward Teller, climate change and 1959

There's a very interesting article in today's Guardian newspaper by Benjamin Franta. It concerns a symposium entitled 'Energy and Man' that took place in New York City in 1959, organised by the American Petroleum Industry as part of a celebration of 100 years of the American Petroleum industry. To quote from the article, 'Over 300 government officials, economists, historians, scientists, and industry executives were present'. Its guest of honour was Robert Dunlop but there was another famous face taking part, the brilliant physicist Edward Teller.

Edward Teller was a very right-wing man, almost as right-wing as his fellow ex-Hungarian, the genius scientist John Von Neumann, who supposedly became the inspiration for the character of 'Dr Strangelove' in Stanley Kubrick's famous movie. Both were firm advocates of a massive increase in arms spending and a deep-seated fear and hostility towards the Soviet Union. Von Neumann famously admitted to a congressional committee that he would carpet-bomb the entire Soviet nation at the first opportunity.

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?

Iinterestingly, several key events relating to underground cities and space-colonies did occur in the U.S. in 1959 and 1960. For example, in 1960, JFK ran for President (and eventually won), promising to create a much larger missile defence program and begin a mission to the moon. Both programs were hugely expensive and, by interesting coincidence, both would have been highly beneficial for 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.

Keep them ill, keep them scared

The United States of America, along with the United Kingdom and France, are very keen on Ancient Greek and Roman architecture. Their capitals are filled with columned temples, obelisks, triumphal arches and other visual motifs from those ancient, Mediterranean civilisations. These countries' also like to talk about how they've inherited a key process in collective decision-making, known as democracy.

Democracy was developed by the Athenian city-state, and others, as a way to collectively decide what to do. Athenians would discuss openly their views on key subjects and then take a vote. This process is now used worldwide to decide national matters. This all sounds great but in truth, how much is modern, Western democracy really like Classical, Athenian democracy? Read More...

Secret Societies, Parasites and Climate Change

A very unusual event happened this week in Britain. The current chair of the Police Federation, Steve White, is stepping down from his role, but before leaving, he has openly stated his concerns about the continued influence of Freemasons in the British Police. He felt that they were an obstacle to reform and modernisation of the police service. To quote from the Guardian article, White said:

“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...

Otto Warburg, cancer and the fermentation of sugar

According to science and the media, cancer is caused by a wide range of factors. It's effectively a matter of pot-luck whether a person gets it or not. Genetic history and the environment play a major role and it's all very much outside the control of the individual. To put it bluntly, we can't do anything about it; it's just a roll of the genetic and environmental dice. To quote from the Wikipedia page on cancer:

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.

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.

This relationship between sugar and cancer has actually been known for a long time. It was pointed out and defined as a theory by a Nobel Prize-Winner, the brilliant physiologist Otto Warburg. He won the Nobel Prize for Physiology and Medicine in 1931. During his life, Warburg had a very straightforward view of the cause of cancers. To quote from his Wikipedia entry:

"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.

Steve Boucher Alien Encounter

Are aliens visiting us? Recent scientific discoveries have shown that there are many, many, many planets out there, orbiting nearby stars in our galaxy, so there probably are lots of alien races out there. As for them getting here, work done by scientists and engineers such as Dr Paul LaViolette, Townsend Brown, Nikola Tesla and others show that our understanding of the relationship between electromagnetism and gravity may actually be wrong. Einstein thought that there was no relationship between charge and gravity, only a relationship between matter and gravity. He may have been mistaken. Instead, it may be that positive charge creates a gravity well and negative charge creates a gravity hill. Since there is evidence that the positive charge of the proton is very slightly larger than the negative charge of the electron, electrically neutral matter would have a tiny gravity well, which neatly explains the gravity effect we witness every day. This tiny discrepancy is what causes us to be attracted to the Earth with a force far smaller, pound for pound, than a magnetic attraction.

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:

New article - Predictions of our future and June 2019

Just a quick note to say that I've added a new article to the anomalies section. This one's entitled; 'Predictions of our future and June 2019'. It investigates what certain groups have told us about our near future on Earth, how closely they link up to each other and how that connects to the scientific evidence. The specific date of June 2019 refers to a recurring dream I've had over the last couple of years. I do try and pay attention to my dreams, whether they're about violence, entering the light or really anything of significance and this recurring dream is no different. I'm very interested to see whether its prediction actually comes about. Then again, if it does, a discussion about dreams will probably be the last thing on everyone's minds! :-)

'Earth under fire' by Dr Paul LaViolette - book review

A month ago, I read a very good book by Dr Paul LaViolette recently called ‘Secrets of Anti-Gravity Propulsion’; it was an excellent mix of solid theoretical and engineering studies and fascinating new ideas and theories about our reality and the technological development of our species in the last century or more.

As a follow-on to that book, I’ve been reading another book by Dr LaViolette, Earth under fire. In this book, Dr LaViolette explores a very different topic to anti-gravity research, modifications to Einstein’s Relativity et al. Instead, LaViolette puts forward a dramatic idea, that the centre of our galaxy is not a nest of black holes, which is the dominant view in the science establishment at the moment, but that it is a centre of extreme matter creation. What’s more, periodically, this very active centre of our galaxy spews out a vast amount of new material in a wave of high energy particles and radiation. LaViolette explains in his book that there is a lot of historical evidence that our planet has been hit periodically by these waves of new, high-energy material and that our forebears have inscribed that fact in their writings and theories.

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.

Jonathan Cape Graphic Short story 2017

This year's winner of the Jonathan Cape Graphic Short Story competition is in the Guardian today (or the Observer on Sunday, to be exact) and it's a heartwarming tale about compatibility and romance. Congratulations to this year's winner! I'll chat about the recent winners and then I'll show my graphic short story entry…

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):

Screen Shot 2017-11-05 at 09.58.23