"Population Reduction" -- Or Change Of Paradigm?
"Many writers have spoken of intentional plans by certain Elite to thin-out the world's population; it's a recurring theme among so-called conspiracy theorists. There are frequent references to "useless eaters", which includes the bulk of mankind. Most, when hearing of plots to depopulate the planet, simply say under their breath, "Yeah, right," or more often, while shaking their head, "You're nuts." But when there is a careful examination of writings by prominent authors of this century, pieces of the puzzle certainly do fall into place - pieces which support the contention that there are certain individuals, if not entire governments, who have implemented a program of global genocide in an effort to salvage and corner "resources"."
Have extracted the above from THINNING OUT THE USELESS EATER. It is germane to the following letter (embellished as usual) which provides good fodder for thought.
Unfortunately not much can be done unless some sort of pain factor is introduced. Most are kept busy "barefoot and pregnant" as it were. Mass dissidence primarily by the intellectual community is needed. Unfortunately they are so easily bought, else we should not be in this mess, and will continue to do the bidding of the controllers totally oblivious to the fact that they are next in line in the gravy train!
Extracted from: The Machinations Of The New World Order - The Farmer
Chris Gupta
--------------------
The political avoidance of clean energy may not be the expedient option .
Andrew Michrowski
------------Date: November 5, 2006 0:43:59 EST (CA)
To: letters@thecitizen.canwest.com
Subject: "population reduction" -- or change of paradigm?
Some people have been arguing in their letters to the editor (e.g. C. Humphrey's "Fuel for thought" on November 4th) that because the high consumption of fossil fuels threatens climate stability, "therefore" we have to reduce the human population. To me, this is a "non sequitur" in logic. The second does not necessarily follow from the first; it is only made to appear so because no other options are considered by these letter-writers. And narrowing down the choice in that way opens a big can of worms, such as the methods to be employed for "reducing" the population. What's your preference? Nuclear holocaust? Forced sterlizations? Manufactured plagues to wipe out all but a few (preferably some other ethnic group, perhaps)?But if other avenues of thinking are opened up, then we should be able to see that humanity need not go down that suicidal road.
What's needed instead is the long-awaited paradigm shift away from the internal-combustion engine toward alternative approaches to clean energy. But the established business interests and cultural inertia have put the brakes on this for at least half a century. When I sent a letter to the editor a few years ago about hydrogen power, the Citizen editor at the time argued with me by telephone that he didn't know the meaning of some of these terms. I was disgusted that someone in a job which helps to shape public opinion should be so proud of his ignorance and refuse to look up the words, but I did comply with the request to add some definitions. In the end a short version of that letter did appear (Monday 21/10/2002) under the general topic area of Kyoto, though it was alongside a rant by someone in Calgary claiming that Kyoto was fraudulent and a "monstrous crime" -- the oilpatch's view of things.
For a clearly made case of technology suppression so that we are forced to keep burning oil, one that "stands up in court", go see the film "Who Killed the Electric Car?" next time it comes to the Bytowne Cinema.
As recounted in that lively and entertaining documentary, both government and big carmakers worked against all of our best interests in suppressing this clean and efficient technology. (Even a car that -- unlike a hybrid -- taps into the grid supply can do so in off-peak hours, and it's a lot easier to put scrubbers into any fuel-using generator than it is to control emissions properly from all those individual cars.) The carmaker spent huge amounts of money to try to convince people NOT to buy these vehicles. To top it off, the Bush Administration and GM used a lawsuit against California to get rid of its forward-looking legislation that would have brought about the goal of having 10% of cars to be zero-emission by now. Led by such interests, Canada and the US still subsidize oil and gas, and tolerate this kind of counter-environmentalism. And though the big American carmakers got their way, they have lost significant market share to the more efficient foreign cars. It's a case of shooting themselves in the foot.
It's time to end that self-destructive business behaviour. And further, it's time -- long past time, actually -- to take action against the thugs and bullies who are still getting away with the crime of making death threats against independent researchers, inventors and back-yard tinkerers who are working to perfect the non-combustion energy technologies of the future. There are many documented cases of vandalism, prototype destruction, threats, and actual attacks occurring over several decades -- including some this past year.
Just enter words like "suppression + clean energy + death threat" into your search engine and see what comes up. You can find the actual reports of individuals close to a breakthrough, or actually achieving a working prototype, who backed off and destroyed their plans and took down websites when a gun was poked into their faces and their families were threatened with murder.
We might already be enjoying that cleaner future if these crimes were being thoroughly reported and justice implemented. It's even more important now to muster the political will to have these crimes of violence against scientists and against science, which are also crimes against humanity at large, properly investigated and prosecuted.
There are also ways to make fuel from waste using a new branch of science called "hadronic chemistry" which can tailor the fuel produced to have only breathable gases as its emissions. Look up "magnegas" in your search engine. Isn't it about time we had this option available in Canada? It sounds like a possible solution to the wastes from factory farming, as well as to expand the supply of clean-burning fuels for cooking and home heating.
What we need is a truly free market in which people have the right to create and manufacture devices and products with zero or safe emissions, and the public has the right to choose freely to buy them and use them without hindrance. Then our biological footprints on the ecosystem would be a lot lighter, and we wouldn't need to engage in these Malthusian musings about the need for mass murders and probably genocides in order to "save the planet".
Mary-Sue Haliburton
posted by Chris Gupta on Sunday November 5 2006
URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2006/11/05/population_reduction_or_change_of_paradigm.htm
Related ArticlesEnergy solutions - Share The Wealth
Self-Sufficiency Is The Key To Empowerment And Freedom
Share The Wealth News Blog
Site Map
See also:
Communication Agents:
Ivan Ingrilli Sepp Hasslberger Tom Atlee Emma Holister Rinaldo Lampis Steve Bosserman CA Journal
Robin Good's
Web sites:
Energy solutions
December 14, 2010Breakthrough Power:
"How quantum-leap new energy inventions can transform our world" by Jeane Manning & Joel Garbon is a non technical and easy to understand book that contains a fantastic summary of "free energy*" devices. The authors have done a superb job of making this difficult and somewhat esoteric information accessible to all. Both the experienced and those new and/or starting out in this exciting area of research will find the book eminently suitable. I have always loved Jeane's writings. She has an uncanny ability to explain complex scientific and mathematical concepts to the lay person that most scientists and mathematicians simply can't do! This combined with Joel's industry background makes this work even better.
*Free Energy does not mean that you get something for nothing it simply means that you get more energy then what you put in. This can be done for example by using very little energy to access are larger pool of existing energy source.
A distinguishing feature of clean technologies is how they harmoniously work with nature. Unlike legacy technologies which are inclined to disregard and/or override natural phenomena. Much of the confusion on free energy stems from the interpretation, or should I say misinterpretation, of second law of thermodynamics (which essentially states that you cannot get more energy out than is put into the system). The book does an excellent job of getting to the root of this misunderstanding in lay and professional terms and explains why it is possible to get more energy than one puts into a system when we harnesses the "wheel works of nature". See:
Continue reading "Breakthrough Power:"
posted by Chris Gupta on Tuesday December 14 2010
Permalink | No comments | No trackbacks
Trackback link: http://communicationagents.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.r484.cgi/2588
May 02, 2007Caution About Compact Fluorescent Lighting (CFL)
Yes further to: Sunlight, Lighting And Your Health (Dangers Of Fluorescent Lighting). With the exponentially increasing toxins in the environment adding mercury spill from fluorescent bulbs is simply unacceptable.
Chris Gupta
See also:
Communities In Bloom Goes Environmentally To The Dark Side
The message below will advise you about one problem concerning the use of compact fluorescent bulbs. You should also be aware that many of these bulbs contribute to 'dirty electricity' by putting dangerous high frequencies on the electrical system. Please also read the attached documents which relate to dirty electricity.
Martin
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert RiedlingerSubject: Fw: Danger of Compact Flourescent (CFL) bulbs
From Fox News:
Light Bulb Lunacy (Original is here.)
Thursday , April 26, 2007By Steven Milloy
How much money does it take to screw in a compact fluorescent lightbulb? About $4.28 for the bulb and labor - unless you break the bulb. Then you, like Brandy Bridges of Ellsworth, Maine, could be looking at a cost of about $2,004.28, which doesn't include the costs of frayed nerves and risks to health.
Sound crazy? Perhaps no more than the stampede to ban the incandescent light bulb in favor of compact fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs) - a move already either adopted or being considered in California, Canada, the European Union and Australia.
According to an April 12 article in The Ellsworth American, Bridges had the misfortune of breaking a CFL during installation in her daughter's bedroom: It dropped and shattered on the carpeted floor.
Aware that CFLs contain potentially hazardous substances, Bridges called her local Home Depot for advice. The store told her that the CFL contained mercury and that she should call the Poison Control hotline, which in turn directed her to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection.
Continue reading "Caution About Compact Fluorescent Lighting (CFL)"
posted by Chris Gupta on Wednesday May 2 2007
Permalink | Comments (3) | No trackbacks
Trackback link: http://communicationagents.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.r484.cgi/2304
November 05, 2006"Population Reduction" -- Or Change Of Paradigm?
"Many writers have spoken of intentional plans by certain Elite to thin-out the world's population; it's a recurring theme among so-called conspiracy theorists. There are frequent references to "useless eaters", which includes the bulk of mankind. Most, when hearing of plots to depopulate the planet, simply say under their breath, "Yeah, right," or more often, while shaking their head, "You're nuts." But when there is a careful examination of writings by prominent authors of this century, pieces of the puzzle certainly do fall into place - pieces which support the contention that there are certain individuals, if not entire governments, who have implemented a program of global genocide in an effort to salvage and corner "resources"."
Have extracted the above from THINNING OUT THE USELESS EATER. It is germane to the following letter (embellished as usual) which provides good fodder for thought.
Unfortunately not much can be done unless some sort of pain factor is introduced. Most are kept busy "barefoot and pregnant" as it were. Mass dissidence primarily by the intellectual community is needed. Unfortunately they are so easily bought, else we should not be in this mess, and will continue to do the bidding of the controllers totally oblivious to the fact that they are next in line in the gravy train!
Extracted from: The Machinations Of The New World Order - The Farmer
Chris Gupta
--------------------
The political avoidance of clean energy may not be the expedient option .
Andrew Michrowski
------------Date: November 5, 2006 0:43:59 EST (CA)
To: letters@thecitizen.canwest.com
Subject: "population reduction" -- or change of paradigm?
Some people have been arguing in their letters to the editor (e.g. C. Humphrey's "Fuel for thought" on November 4th) that because the high consumption of fossil fuels threatens climate stability, "therefore" we have to reduce the human population. To me, this is a "non sequitur" in logic. The second does not necessarily follow from the first; it is only made to appear so because no other options are considered by these letter-writers. And narrowing down the choice in that way opens a big can of worms, such as the methods to be employed for "reducing" the population. What's your preference? Nuclear holocaust? Forced sterlizations? Manufactured plagues to wipe out all but a few (preferably some other ethnic group, perhaps)?But if other avenues of thinking are opened up, then we should be able to see that humanity need not go down that suicidal road.
What's needed instead is the long-awaited paradigm shift away from the internal-combustion engine toward alternative approaches to clean energy. But the established business interests and cultural inertia have put the brakes on this for at least half a century. When I sent a letter to the editor a few years ago about hydrogen power, the Citizen editor at the time argued with me by telephone that he didn't know the meaning of some of these terms. I was disgusted that someone in a job which helps to shape public opinion should be so proud of his ignorance and refuse to look up the words, but I did comply with the request to add some definitions. In the end a short version of that letter did appear (Monday 21/10/2002) under the general topic area of Kyoto, though it was alongside a rant by someone in Calgary claiming that Kyoto was fraudulent and a "monstrous crime" -- the oilpatch's view of things.
Continue reading ""Population Reduction" -- Or Change Of Paradigm?"
posted by Chris Gupta on Sunday November 5 2006
Permalink | No comments | No trackbacks
Trackback link: http://communicationagents.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.r484.cgi/2214
February 21, 2006Solar Power Using An Alloy Film Better Than Silicon
Further to: "Off-The-Grid" Right Now here is some great news. Starting with following two articles - a very interesting technology to follow up on.
..."solar photovoltaic technology can be produced in any desired amount, from a few milliwatts to many megawatts, if so desired. It is not necessary to erect large power stations to serve a community with energy from this technology.
A typical middle-class suburban family needs only about 30 square metres (about the size of a living room) of solar panels to supply all of its electricity needs."..
This highly efficient Copper-Indium-Gallium-Diselenide (CIGS) alloy eclipses Silicon and should finally make solar energy possible.
Here is a collection of scientific literature from NREL on Copper Indium Diselenide (CIS):
Chris Gupta
----------------------------SA solar research eclipses rest of the world
By Willem Steenkamp
In a scientific breakthrough that has stunned the world, a team of South African scientists has developed a revolutionary new, highly efficient solar power technology that will enable homes to obtain all their electricity from the sun.
This means high electricity bills and frequent power failures could soon be a thing of the past.
The unique South African-developed solar panels will make it possible for houses to become completely self-sufficient for energy supplies.
The panels are able to generate enough energy to run stoves, geysers, lights, TVs, fridges, computers - in short all the mod-cons of the modern house.
Nothing else comes close to the effectiveness of the SA invention
The new technology should be available in South Africa within a year and through a special converter, energy can be fed directly into the wiring of existing houses. New powerful storage units will allow energy storage to meet demands even in winter. The panels are so efficient they can operate through a Cape Town winter. while direct sunlight is ideal for high-energy generation, other daytime light also generates energy via the panels.
A team of scientists led by University of Johannesburg (formerly Rand Afrikaans University) scientist Professor Vivian Alberts achieved the breakthrough after 10 years of research. The South African technology has now been patented across the world.
Continue reading "Solar Power Using An Alloy Film Better Than Silicon"
posted by Chris Gupta on Tuesday February 21 2006
Permalink | Comments (47) | No trackbacks
Trackback link: http://communicationagents.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.r484.cgi/1999
Breakthrough Power:
December 14, 2010Caution About Compact Fluorescent Lighting (CFL)
May 02, 2007"Population Reduction" -- Or Change Of Paradigm?
November 05, 2006Solar Power Using An Alloy Film Better Than Silicon
February 21, 2006"Off-The-Grid" Right Now
January 24, 2006Communities In Bloom Goes Environmentally To The Dark Side
December 07, 2005Sunlight, Lighting And Your Health (Dangers Of Fluorescent Lighting)
December 06, 2005Battery Recharges in Only One Minute
April 01, 2005Cool: Fridge Without Using Electricity!
April 14, 2004Roots of Medical & Other Monopolies
April 01, 2004Ramifications of Free Energy-Tesla and Others
June 06, 2003
A Person Is Only As Valuable As She Can Be Of Help To Others
Home | Site map | About | Contact
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.These articles are brought to you strictly for educational and informational purposes.
Be sure to consult your health practitioner of choice prior to any specific use of any of the non drug device or food based medicinal products referenced herein.The Ads are not a an endorsement of the webmasters or writers on this site and are simply a means to facilitate our ability bring you more information not generally available via mainstream media. You are encouraged to take matters in your own hands with the tools and ideas provided on this site and elsewhere.
