All posts by Daring to look...

The Cosmology Documentary is finished!

It’s been a really big push the last couple weeks, but it’s finally done, and overall I will say I’m satisfied with how it turned out, even though of course things could always have been done better. This was the largest project I’ve ever committed myself to, but it was worth it in the end. Hopefully this will help many more people out there start to see how Cosmology and FE “fits” into the rest of the Biblical/Prophecy/Conspiracy narrative, from beginning to end. That is my hope anyway. Thanks to everyone who has been an encouragement and support over the past couple of years, since I first started tumbling down this crazy, crazy rabbit hole… – Will

Chapters:
1. The Ancient Conflict 4:36
2. A New Nation 11:00
3. The Cosmic Rewrite 17:30
4. The Quantum Deception 25:49
5. Sorcery Reborn 35:09
6. The Power of the Air 51:27
7. New Age “Zience” 1:12:33
8. Oracles of the Technium 1:28:27
9. The Templum Defiled 1:42:10
10. The Choice 1:47:53

Links:
Carolyn Hamlett and Daniel Duval: Higher Dimensions and Parallel Worlds (interview with Zen Garcia, V of VI): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IdTl…

“What is Reality?” [Quantum Gravity Research] https://youtu.be/w0ztlIAYTCU

“Flat Earth… Let there be Light” [Dan Dimension] https://youtu.be/3GZhj9BbIXc

Advertisements

Death by Mathematics…

Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments,
and they wander off through equation after equation and
eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.”— Nikola Tesla

First published July 22, 2007 (http://milesmathis.com/death.html)

In the 20th century, physics underwent a transformation. No one would deny that. But normally the transformation is credited to Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. And normally the transformation is seen as a great advance. In this paper I will argue the opposite. The transformation was due more to a transformation in mathematics, and that transformation has been almost wholly deleterious.

This transformation due to mathematics began in the 19th century, but it did not engulf physics until the 20th century. In the 19th century the stage was set: we had several abstract mathematical fields that reached “fruition”, including a math based on action variables and principles, a math based on curved space, a math based on matrices, a math based on tensors, a math based on i, and a math based on infinities.

As I have shown, 19th century mathematics inherited many unsolved problems from the past, including problems from Euclid and Newton. It made no progress in solving these problems because it did not recognize them as problems. It had already given up on foundational questions as “metaphysics”, and it preferred instead to create more and more abstract systems. The more abstract the mathematical system became, the more successful it could be in avoiding foundational questions.

The clearest example of this is the field of applied mathematics based on action variables. For the last hundred years we have heard an ever-increasing level of praise of action variables, culminating in the propaganda of Feynman. But action variables are just an abstraction of Newtonian variables. By abstraction, I mean that they do not add clarity, they cloak disclarity. Newtonian variables were never very rigorously defined, but action variables are very good at hiding Newtonian variables. Action variables do not replace Newtonian variables, as some appear to think. Action variables contain Newtonian variables. Action variables restate Newtonian variables in what is considered to be a more efficient form. But action variables are utterly dependent on Newtonian variables. If it were discovered that Newtonian variables were false, action variables would be, too, by definition. The action concept developed directly out of Newtonian mechanics, and action assumes the absolute validity of Newtonian mechanics. Action does not transcend Newton in any conceivable way, it only compresses his method. Just as velocity is a compression of distance and time, the Lagrangian is a compression of kinetic and potential energy. Each compression is a mathematical abstraction, because the individual variables are no longer expressed singly. They often do not appear in the equations at all. They are included only a parts of greater variables.

From an engineering standpoint, this is a real advance. As long as the greater variables express the changes of the individual variables in the right way, abstract systems like this can save a lot of time. But from a theoretical standpoint, abstract mathematics can be a great danger. Since the individual variables are no longer in the equations, it becomes much more difficult to see when they are being misused. Abstract mathematics must assume that all its original assumptions are applying with each new application, and with many new applications this may not be so. If time and distance are not behaving in normal ways, then the equations have no way of correcting for that, since they don’t have any way to express it. The equations rely on original definitions and assignments, and modern mathematicians and physicists do not usually bother to check to be sure that all these definitions and assignments hold for each new application. They don’t do this for two reasons. One, they often don’t know what the original definitions and assignments were. The mathematical systems are taught as abstract systems, where foundations are considered to be moveable. In the case of the Lagrangian, for instance, we are taught that the variables are general coordinates that we can apply to almost anything. Well, this is true to only a limited degree, and the limits have been ignored. Two, definitions and variable assignments are considered to be metaphysical, and therefore beneath the notice of mathematicians and scientists. Modern scientists cannot be bothered to look at foundational questions, since math is only the equations themselves. If you have mastered the manipulations, you have mastered the math, they think.

To be very clear, it is not action variables I object to. What I object to is their misuse. They are misused when they are applied to systems that do not match the time and distance assignments they were created for. I also object to the implied superiority of action variables. They are very efficient in some uses. But because they are abstract, they are prone to misuse. In this way they are actually inferior. They are inferior because they are less transparent than Newtonian variables. Newtonian variables are not always transparent either, but action variables are always less transparent. Action variables are the first cloaking of physics. And in some cases this cloaking is not an accident. Action variables and the math surrounding action is not always used to generate efficient solutions in familiar situations. It is now often used to blanket over holes in theory or math. Like many other mathematical systems, it is now used to mask purposeful fudges.

[Added February 2011: I have finally unwound the whole idea of action, via the Lagrangian, showing why it fails as mechanics. Go here to read how Lagrange pushed his math to match celestial mechanics, but failed to include the charge field.]

The next mathematical system that invaded physics is that of Gauss and Riemann, invading through the door of General Relativity. This was really the first major invasion, and the most important. Up until then, physicists had been wary of allowing mathematicians to define their fields, especially with the new abstract systems. The action principle had not yet invaded physics on a full scale, and would not until the arrival of quantum mechanics. Einstein himself was very wary of abstract math, purposely avoiding it until 1912. Put simply, he “did not trust it.” But in that year he discovered Gauss, and called on his friend Grossman to help him with the math. A couple of years later Einstein was hired in Berlin, and there he got even better help, from Hilbert and Klein, no less. Einstein had asked the wolf in at the front door.

I don’t think it is an accident or coincidence that the first thing the wolf tried to do is take over the house. Hilbert, after schooling Einstein on all the latest techniques, tried to beat Einstein to the punch by publishing the theory of General Relativity two weeks before him. He didn’t succeed in this dastardly trick, but amazingly history has not held it against him. Einstein quickly forgave him, and now Hilbert is treated as the greatest mathematician of the 20th century. But to me, this incident perfectly presaged the way the 20th century would go. The mathematics department, invited to consult, would see its opportunity to steal the show, and it has since stolen the show. Someone like Feynman could throw barbs at the math department, but this was only misdirection. The top mathematicians could look back over their shoulder in feigned opposition, only because they had already taken over the physics department. Feynman was not smirking at mathematics, he was smirking at mathematicians who were too narrow to crossover and become famous, like he had. It was as if to say, “We now own physics, the queen of the sciences and the modern kingmaker, and you guys prefer to argue over trivialities like Fermat. That will never win you a Nobel Prize or a trip to the White House.”

Einstein’s success with the tensor calculus called all the present demons out of the closet, invited them all into the kitchen, and gave them control of the fire. He showed the road to fame, and the first stop on that road was enlisting a new abstract mathematics. That has been the road ever since, and it defines the current low road of string theory, which had planned to awe all opposition with a math so great and so abstract there was no beginning or end to it (its plan is not moving as planned). Quantum Mechanics was the first to learn this lesson, though, and Heisenberg was the greatest student. Heisenberg understood first and best how to use mathematics to impress and cow the audience. He also understood first and best how to use mathematics as a tool of propaganda. A math of proper abstraction and complexity could be used to hide all error, to divert all effort, to deflect all criticism. It could be used like a very heavy, very highly decorated quilt, covering the bedbugs beneath. This new abstract math would come not with a foundation, but with a manifesto. It did not have axioms, it had public relations. It was not sold with an explanation, but with an “interpretation”, and this interpretation was to be accepted on authority.

The takeover in the 20th century was very quick once it began. The mathematician Minkowski reworked Special Relativity before the presses had even cooled on Einstein’s paper, expressing the field in complex and abstract terms. This reworking was completely unnecessary, but it was accepted just as fast as it was offered. The novelty of it was enough to complete the sale, although the price was steep indeed. The problem with Minkowski’s math is the same as the math of action: the danger is all in the loss of transparent variables. Again, I have nothing against complex math as long as it is used with discretion and complete honesty. But Minkowski fails miserably on both counts, as I have shown. The symmetry is a manufactured symmetry, and the loss of the time variable has been disastrous. The subtle errors in Einstein’s math were immediately cloaked under an abstract math, and that abstract math was in no way more elegant than the simple algebra of Einstein’s original paper. Einstein’s paper was dense, but that was Einstein’s fault, not the algebra. Minkowski’s unstated axioms were not only unstated and unnecessary, they were false. The time dimension does not travel orthogonally to the other three, and this is not a metaphysical subtlety. It is a physical and mathematical fact, easily proved. Even Einstein called Minkowski’s math “superfluous erudition.” He was only half right. Minkowski’s math was certainly superfluous, but it was false pedantry, not erudition. It was sciolism.

Even this unnecessary abstraction and obstruction was not enough to satisfy. Another level was soon added by the tensor calculus, a blanket ten times as heavy as the blanket of Minkowski. Although I have shown that General Relativity can be expressed with Newtonian variables, a Euclidean field, and high-school algebra, the worthies of the time preferred to express it with an undefined curved field and a hatful of unwieldy tensors. In his previous mood, Einstein had said, “You know, once you start calculating (with abstract mathematics) you shit yourself up before you know it.” But suddenly, in 1912, he developed a fondness for this mess. Perhaps he saw darkly what Heisenberg would see very clearly: the 20th century would have a love affair with shit. The century proved this in every field, from art to math to science to war to politics to entertainment to sex. The century loved nothing so much as watching someone foul himself in public, as long as that someone could sell the spectacle as a transcendent event.

Once again, a Gaussian field and tensors and all that has followed can be made to work. In some situations it is actually useful. I am not arguing that these fields or manipulations are necessarily false. What I am arguing is that physics doesn’t need them. The physical field is not that complex. We have invented maths that are much more complex than we need, and we have gotten lost in their mazes. The problem with the math of General Relativity is that it cloaks the mechanics involved. It is too abstract by several degrees. This means that although Einstein sometimes found a way to get the right answer with all this math, he just as often got the wrong answer. The math is so difficult that almost no one can sort through it and tell when the answer is right and when it is wrong. Even worse is the fact that the opacity of the math makes it impossible to unify it with any other math. The primary events are buried so deep and are so poorly defined that there is no hope of expressing them with the mathematical tools available, or isolating them so that they can be located in other fields. The mathematical manipulations become the primary events, and the mathematical field becomes reality. The math ends up usurping the mechanics. [See my paper on Non-Euclidean fields for more on this.]

This opacity causes another problem. Because the primary variables are buried under so many abstract layers, they cannot be studied when problems arise. Later repairs cannot be done at ground level, they have to be done in end-math that adds complexity. In QED this end-math is called renormalization. In GR it is called other things, but in either case it leads to an endless scholasticism and an endless and unsightly tinkering. It ends up providing physics with equations that are post-dictive instead of pre-dictive. Every new experiment requires a new fix, and each new fix is pasted over all the others. You then end up with what we have: a physical math that is burdened with so many fields and operators and manipulations and names that it makes Medieval biblical exegesis look like a cakewalk. And it leads to the absurd situation of having physicists who invoke Occam’s razor and the beauty of simplicity offer us a proliferation of fields and manipulations that is truly mind-numbing. When I see a string theorist invoke Occam’s razor, I can’t help feeling queasy. It is like Fox News invoking honesty in reportage.

Next came Quantum Mechanics. Heisenberg saw Einstein’s success with the matrices and voila, the matrix moved to QM, making it even more famous than GR. But this time we got a confluence of new abstract maths: the turn of the screw. It was feared the matrix would not be enough to wow the world, and so the matrix was joined by the Hamiltonian and Hilbert Space and Hermitian operators and eigenvalues and so on. It was never explained why quanta could not travel in Euclidean spaces under transparent variables, just as it was never explained why gravity required tensors. It was never explained because no one needed an explanation. All were quite satisfied to have new things to do. The new math was the main draw. It gave the theory a required ballast and made everyone look smart. What was there not to like?

Well, there was the fact that everything was based on probabilities, that the mechanics was contradictory and unfathomable, that many insoluble paradoxes were created, and that the math required an infinite renormalization that was basically “hocus pocus.” But I mean, other than that, what was not to like? If we could just learn to accept that Nature no longer made sense, we would be just fine. After all, the math was big enough to make up for everything. What was Nature next to a math that could fill blackboards? [For a full critique of the math of QED, gauge theory, see my paper on the Weak Interaction.]

As David Politzer, Nobel laureate and inventor of asymptotic freedom put it,

English is just what we use to fill in between the equations.*

Which may explain why the equations have gotten ever longer and the English evermore tenuous and fleeting. Theory must be stated in English—we have no theory—therefore we need no English. Equations will do.

And now that QED is “perfect”, we graduate to the even bigger blackboard that is string theory. Since a huge unfathomable math was so successful in QED, string theory naturally developed an even huger and more unfathomable math, one with exponentially more paradoxes and contradictions and ad hoc fixes. If QED requires an infinite renormalization, string theory requires a trans-infinite renormalization. Since QED so successfully ignored mechanics, string theory ignores it even more thoroughly. QED had to state out loud that it was going to ignore mechanics, as a matter of some sort of principle (we are not sure what principle). But string theory goes to the next level of ignorance, which is ignoring that mechanics exists or ever did exist. Like Mephistopheles, the string theorist can call up any entity he likes, just by a simple conjuring. He doesn’t need an axiom or a proof or even a definition. All he needs is a need. Science is now defined by desire more than anything else. “I desire a ten-dimensional donut with spikes like a pufferfish, and a gauge theory in the shape of a wombat sitting in the corner smoking a cigar, therefore the universe and this computer model must supply me with one. Oh, and all this exists beneath the Planck limit. Except for the cigar, which disappears in the presence of a scanning microscope.”

Yes, modern physics has become a neo-scholasticism. It is the avoidance of real questions in the pursuit of trivial methodology. It is the memorization of an endless list of names and manipulations in lieu of understanding mechanics. It is the setting up in some black data hole and extemporizing on an endless string of evermore ridiculous hypotheses instead of looking at known physical problems closer at hand. It is the knee-jerk invocation of authority and the explicit squelching of dissent. It is the hiding behind tall gates and a million gatekeepers, and euphemizing it as “peer review.” It is the institutionalized acceptance of censorship and the creation of dogma. Grand Masters like Feynman say “shut up and calculate!” and everyone finds this amusing. No one finds it a clear instance of fascism and oppression. An internet search on “against Feynman” or “Feynman was wrong” or “disagree with Feynman” turns up nothing. The field is monolithic. It is completely controlled and one-dimensional. All discussion has been purged from the standard model, and all debate has been marginalized. Any non-standard opinion must be from a “crank” and blacklisting is widespread. Publishing is also controlled, both in academia and in the mainstream. Einstein already found science publishing too controlled for his taste in the 30’s, refusing to work with Physical Review. What would he think now? Can anyone imagine his early papers getting published in the current atmosphere?

If you are an insider at a major university, you can publish anything, the more absurd the better. You can say anything without fear of contradiction or analysis, since science most wants right now to be creative, and it thinks (like modern art) that absurdity is the most creative thing possible. The paradox is the highest distinction, the contradiction the surest sign of elevation. The contemporary physics paper has become like Dubuffet’s La Lunette Farcie, a purposeful mockery of all convention, a nothing packaged as a something. Soon the physicist may be expected to follow Duchamp, publishing a toilet seat as a TOE.

Contrary to what we are told, contemporary physics is not booming. It is not very near to omniscience, it is not the crown jewel of anything. In fact, it is near death. It has been damaged by any number of things, only a few of which I have mentioned by name here. But the prime murderer has been abstract mathematics. Physics has succumbed to a suffocation. It is the victim of a strangulation. It is in a not-so-shallow grave, and piled on top of it like dirt are a thousand fields and operators and variables and names and spaces and terms and eigenvalues and dimensions and criteria and functions and coordinates and conjugates and bases and bijective maps and automorphism groups and abelian gauge fields and Dirac spinors and Feynman diagrams and so on ad nauseum. The only way the grave could be any deeper and darker, in fact, is if we allowed Deconstruction to dump its transfinite dictionary of onanic terms on top of this one.

The only road out of this grave is to start digging in the upwards direction, clearing away all this schist. The sort of math that physics requires is a math of rigorous definitions and transparent variables, with as little abstraction as possible. We don’t need spaces of infinite dimensions, since we don’t have infinite physical dimensions. We don’t need abstract operators, we need direct representation of motions and entities. Taking the advice of Thoreau, we must “simplify, simplify, simplify.” That is our only hope of a Unified Field and a mechanical explanation of the universe.

*http://pr.caltech.edu/periodicals/CaltechNews/articles/v38/asymptotic.html

Hitting Buttons… Making Words…

This week I’ve been busily typing away, trying to actually sit down and really focus on writing the outline for the documentary.  I actually started over from what I put together before.  Had gotten about three “chapters” in, then decided on a whole new approach.  C’est la vie.  It’s a totally different exercise overall though.  I had become quite accustomed to getting some kind of idea fixed in my head, some topic to explore  or thing to ramble about, then sitting down and writing it, recording it, turning it into a video usually between 10-15 minutes long.  It had finally gotten to the point of being almost instinctual.  I had a process more or less down.  But this?  This is just quite different.  I think I thought it would be slightly easier.  Simply what I’ve already been doing, only putting many of those 10-15 sections together into one piece.  Right?

Well, not really.  Not if I want to really make sense.  Make sense in the way that it all seems to make sense in my head.  (which, who knows, maybe isn’t all that sensible after all…) But overall I do feel a growing sense of “urgency” to get it put together.  I do believe the information and the project is worthwhile, and needed, and will perhaps only continue to become so even more, as this topic continues to expand in the public consciousness.

Perhaps I just needed a little “cathartic release typing”, as opposed to the much more intentional and scrutinized writing I’ve been doing this week.  That’s what this blog used to be about for me anyhow, but, it’s definitely taken a back seat.

But then, that’s what’s also kinda interesting.  Because, when I was “blogging regularly”, mainly focusing on the more “mundane” topics of things like the New World Order, Bible Prophecy, Transhumanism, the Occult, etc., and honestly, I wasn’t getting a ton of readers. Not that my material was so fascinating in the first place, but, in the past year or so, since getting into Flat Earth, and barely touching the blog, people continue to trickle in.  Not because of any of the things I used to write about.  But because of this topic.  It continues to grow, continues to spread, and this amazed me almost more than anything (even though I suppose it shouldn’t, considering how I believe it to be the Truth, but…)

A few days ago, Shaquille Oneill came out publicly and said the Earth is Flat.

I honestly still don’t even know quite know how I feel about that, since on the one hand I realize that things like that will inevitably cause more people to look into it, research it online, get blown away by what they actually find, etc., but….  at the same time, his “Flat Earth profession” was just, weak.  Very much sounded like he didn’t really investigate it himself (unlike NBA star Kyrie Irving, who does sound very knowledgeable as to why he believes the Earth is Flat.)

Edddie Bravo goes on Infowars talking about FE.  People are planning a “Flat Earth Conference” in November.  It’s being ridiculed on tv shows like “Tosh.0” and “The Jimmy Kimmel Show”.

It’s actually starting to “penetrate the mainstream”, in a way that 9/11 Truth or so many other conspiracy topics never have.  And in one sense you know that this will only make the anti-FE Truthers more skeptical that it’s a “psyop”, intended to make the Truth Community “look stupid”.  Christians are convinced it’s designed to make the Bible and Creationism “look stupid.  Many Flat Earthers believe that other Flat Earthers are “shills” designed to make Flat Earth look stupid.  So, (*sigh*), yes, the circus continues….

And I do tire of it.  I tire of the “buzz”, the increasing fixation so many FE people have with every time a celebrity or the mainstream media mentions FE, in any capacity.  I just don’t really care.  I don’t believe that celebrity hype or trying to get a topic to be “trending” on FB, or whatever else, are ultimately anything to give a rip about.  If the Earth really, truly, has no curve?  Is not a ball?  Is not floating in space…?  Well then, hey, it’s coming out, sooner or later.   And if the Bible really does describe such a thing as well?  Then the Spirit will guide us, those of us willing to search the Scriptures with an open heart, completely unrattled by how foolish the Evolution-preaching world thinks we are…

In the meantime, I am going to go bang on some more keys.  Make some more words.  Hopefully a few that even go together.  Thanks for letting me vent a little today.

“Solomon’s House”: The Hermetic Foundations of Science/Scientism…

Most people today are familiar with the quote from Arthur C. Clarke, his third self-described “law” which says: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”

But what I find increasingly strange, is that while so many people seem to resonate with the truth of this addage, we do not at the same time seem to take it backwards to it’s inevitable conclusion, back to the implications this would seem to have about the origins of science and technology themselves.

Would most people react as favorably to a type of inverted version of this quote? Would they also agree with a preposition such as “Any primatively developed magic is indistinguishable from science…?”

Anyhow, I’m waffling a bit here, but the point is that the more we continue digging into the development of modern science or rather Scientism, with it’s rather glaringly false foundational philosophical assumptions such as Evolution & Copernicanism, and perhaps now Atomism as well, the more it really begs the broader historical question as to how in the heck we ever got to this point.

In the Western World, many of grew up in a culture and an educational system which for the most part, has regarded the development of scientific knowledge as largely the product of some vague concept of the Judeo/Christian belief system, this generic idea that it was the Christianized nations of Europe and their colonial offshoots which, because they had the Theistic foundation which taught that a rationale Creator made the world in an orderly way, that could be studied and understood, enjoyed the intellectual climate most preferable for scientific study and development, producing such great scientific minds such as Isaac Newton, Galileo, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Edison, Albert Einstien, etc. All those genius folks we learn about in school…

However this worldview does not hold up well at all to any decent scrutiny of the history of scientific thinking.

Not surprisingly it seems to be the Christian culture today that is the most blind in this matter, preferring to cling to this mythology about the Christian roots of Science, because it plays such a large role in the current approach to Christian apologetics, in familiar subjects such as Creationism, where so many sciences such as geology or astronomy are turned to in hopes of vindicating the Genesis account in favor of the Darwinian paradigm.

But when we listen to secular historians expound upon things that pertain to this development, the fuller picture is really not that difficult to begin to realize, especially if you’re willing to lay down a lot of those rosy-colored, Christian-slanted views of scientific history in Europe, America and the West…

In previous pieces I have delved a fair amount into the roles of both Alchemy and the Kabbala in the development of things like chemistry and atomic theory as well as the development of Copernican astronomy and cosmology, in tracing the Occult, Mystery School roots of what today we may refer to generically as the religion of Scientism, but there is another strand of Occultism which played a hugely signficant role in the progression of Scientism, and that strand was the introduction of Hermetic philosophy into Europe towards the beginning of what we now refer to as, the Renaissance…

The figure of Hermes himself, as well as the documents which bore his name, sheds an incredible amount of light as to how ancient esoteric teachings penetrated Europe and gave rise to the periods known as the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and finally the Scientific and Industrial revolutions.

It is rather astounding to learn just how highly regarded the figure of Hermes Trismegistus to the European Renaissance mind was. He was considered by scholars from Augustine to Thomas Aquinas, to be not just a literal figure of history, but a pagan Egyptian priest, who, somehow, apparently because he was believed to be more or less a contemporary of Moses, was viewed as sort of this quasi-patriarchal figure. They really elevated him essentially to the same level as Moses or Abraham, but as this kind of extra-biblical prophet, who they argued gave credence to Christian doctrines such as the Trinity, though coming from a clearly non-Hebrew origin.

250px-hermestrismegistuscauc

So, here we have the figure of Hermes, the quintessential magus, this pagan magician from antiquity, who somehow comes to receive this incredibly favorable treatment by European Christian theologians and scholars, alongside Europeans who are of course much more deeply attracted to the Occult elements of this tradition. And so in the 15th century, we have the Italian scholar, a Catholic Priest, Marsilio Ficino, who had been commisioned by the wealthy Medeci family to translate the works of Plato, and yet when the Medeci’s suddenly came into the possession of a greek manuscript said to be the writings of the magnificent Hermes, Ficino was ordered to halt all work on Plato and translate the Hermetic text with the utmost priority.

What resulted was the work known thereafter as the Corpus Hermeticum, and this volume, along with other works such as the Asclepius, began to be spread around Europe among scholars and Renaissance thinkers, being regarded as quite harmonious with the increasingly popular Kabbalistic writings, (and rightfully so, since they are derived from the same Occult origins) and all of which quite plainly was fairly inseperable from the spread of Copernicanism in Europe.

While the Corpus Hermeticum contained a fair amount of more philosophical/ideological content, it also contained descriptions of outright occult rituals, such as how to summon astral energies down from above into stone idols and animate them, and so is quite deserving of the categorization as witchcraft.

One prominant figure within the rise of Copernicanism whose Hermetic influences have been thoroughly documented is the well-traveled figure of Giordana Bruno, who first proposed that stars are distant suns, and was killed by being burned at the stake. Frances Yates, a 20th century historian who specialized in Renaissance history, wrote an entire book on this titled “GIordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition”, which you can now read online for free, see the link below.

Copernicas himself referred to Hermes in this quote abou the sun:

“In the middle of all sits the Sun enthroned. In this most beautiful temple could we place this luminary in any better position from which he can illuminate the whole at once? He is rightly called the Lamp, the Mind, the Ruler of the Universe; Hermes Trismegistus names him the Visible God, Sophocles’ Electra calls him the All-seeing. So the Sun sits as upon a royal throne ruling his children the planets which circle around him.”

Isaac Newton is well known to have been an alchemist and student of Kabbalah, supposedly having endeavored to translate the Emerald Tablets of alchemy, but he too was a student of the Corpus Hermeticum. So, we have Nicolaus Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, Robert Boyle, Isaac Newton, all heavily influenced by Hermeticism, and of course, Francis Bacon as well, whose writings would seem to eventually inspire the creation of the first official institution of scientific study, the Royal Society.

There has intrestingly enough been a fair amount of research done by numerous people examining the founding members of the Royal Society and their connections to both Freemasonry and Rocicrucianism. Francis Bacon, the famous occultist who is credited with basically being the father of the scientific method, wrote the well-known utopian novel “New Atlantis”, which described the creation of an ideal college, dedicated to human discovery and knowledge, called “Solomon’s House”…

The Royal Society was in many ways the blueprint for the Science departments for universities in the centuries that followed, and I believe, this is the phase in the historical progression where the Occult roots and influences were successfully white-washed from the enterprise of Science, as it morphed into the more contemporary concepts of Natural philosophy and scientific materialism we are familiar with today.

But, Yates argued, (rather convincingly in my opinion) that without the influx of Hermetic philosophy in the 15th to 17th centuries, there would quite simply have been no Scientific Revolution. Without the magical traditions of Hermeticism, which focuses on the influences of things on each other, on their interconnectedness in nature, and on the practices of observation of these influences, and the classification of phenomena and elements of nature, there’s no such thing as science as we know it today…

One thing that has really startled me, as a Christian myself, is to get to this point where I’ve had to actually stop, and recognize that if these influences of Alchemy, Kabbalism, Hermeticism, (and also Neo-Platonism) hadn’t entered in, then we’re left with a somewhat uncomforable question, as to whether or not the Bible on it’s own would have ever inspired people to the level of scientific study and technological advancement that so rapidly occurred, between the rediscovery of all these ancient Occult teachings (i.e. the “Renaissance” or revival of said Occultism) and the modern day.

Many people have equated Bacon’s “New Atlantis” to the founding of the United States of America, with it’s pervasive Freemasonic origins and all the esoteric symbolism of the streets of Washington DC, and so much more, and, I’d have to say that this theory probably has a lot of truth to it, but at the same time, is probably one a piece of the whole…

If the building of “Solomon’s House” was fundamental to the creation of that Luciferian utopia of the “New Atlantis”, then, I now have to think that in all probability, this massive thing that we call “Scientism” is really almost another term for that same over-arching thing. The re-introduction and re-establishment, of those ancient “sacred sciences”, or “seven liberal arts” of antiquity. In the days of the Early Christian church it was combatted as “Gnosticism”, the heresy of the Mystery School teachings which was constantly trying to embed itself within the orthodox Christian gospel, whereby the aquisition of knowledge, or “Gnosis” was central to humanity learning to save itself.

How is the current understanding of “Science” really any different?

(links/further resources):

Hermeticism: the nexus between science, philosophy and spirit
http://www.josephwaligore.com/rise-of-science/
http://www.academia.edu/26602034/Freemasonry_Rosicrucianism_and_the_Royal_Society

http://tarothermeneutics.com/classes/waite-trinick/books/Francis-a-Yates-Giordano-Bruno-and-the-Hermetic-Tradition.pdf

A Documentary Series on Biblical Cosmology..??

Hi there, remember me? I have no idea if anyone will still happen along this ol’ blog of mine here, since I have officially treated it like a forgotten sock, lost behind the dryer, but, I do get people asking about it now and again, and I also just finally got around to fixing what was apparently a broken link to here from my YT page, so, looks like I am still the reigning world champion of procrastination. (undefeated!)

But speaking of procrastination… Since I’m here, I might as well take advantage of my dusty little corner of the blogosphere and stop to brain-puke about the current status and development of a project that I’ve been feeling more and more convinced I need to tackle as time has gone on.

It’s been a crazy last year and a half or so, since I first started tumbling down this “cosmology rabbit hole” as it were. The reason my blog wound up so woefully neglected is because it found itself playing third wheel to the youtube channel, which has indeed been a steadily-growing hub for my investigations into all sorts of aspects relating to “Biblical enclosed cosmology” or “original Hebrew cosmology” etc., as I’ve found myself increasingly referring to it as. The deeper we go, the more questions that arise, and the more things really do seem to continue fitting together in a manner which I can still scarcely believe.

Yet now, after putting up around 120 videos, the vast majority of which delve into the issue of the Flat, Enclosed Earth in some way or another, I am feeling ever-more convicted that despite all of the copious and increasing amount of FE material on YT and elsewhere that exists currently, I still don’t see anything out there which dares to try and take all of these revelations from true Biblical Cosmology, and then present it all in the context of the “whole story”, the grandiose cosmic Genesis-to-Revelation narrative, of which we are now presently somewhere in the middle of that last chapter.

My personal desire at this stage, is to see the Cosmology material put together in a way that starts from Creation, weaves through the ante-deluvian age with the Watchers/Nephilim and “Genesis 6 paradigm”, moves onto the post-flood era, with Nimrod and Babel and the “divine council” topic, and then so on and so forth, tracing the progression of this battle between the kingdoms of Light/Darkness, all the way up to our present day, in light of how the Enemy has been very intently working over the centuries to procure increasing control over various heavenly/earthly “principalities”, dominions, etc., and accomplishing this to a large degree by way of DECEIVING humanity about so many of the truths about heaven and earth, about cosmology, about Creation…

Satan has been fighting a war for heaven and earth, by doing what he does best, lying about the realities of heaven and earth, and the more we learn about just how pervasive and vast this complex of lies is, this spiritual stronghold of “Scientism” that we live entrenched in today, the more pressing it becomes (in my view) to put together all this information in a way that works as a cohesive whole, a holistic rebuttal of this monolithic, pseudo-scientific, Lie.

So, simple right? (!!!) The scope and scale of such a project to me is compelling, yet at the same time utterly terrifying. I keep going back and forth as to what the best overall approach to conceiving an outline would even be. Should it be chronological? Topical? Sort of a mix of both? My head hurts just thinking about it. I really must be getting super delusional to be seriously considering a project like this. But then again, the thing is, when I step back now and look over all the videos I’ve put in the last year and a half, if you add it all up, you’re looking at like dozens of hours worth of material now. And it’s for the most part, material which I sat down, researched, wrote out a “manuscript” for, recorded, mixed the audio, collected visual material, and then edited it all together. I’ll admit that overall it’s been kind of a good way to learn and hone that whole process, and it’s probably prepared me (since before I had ZERO video editing experience), but still… This project idea is simultaneously thrilling, yet totally daunting.

Maybe I’m just writing this out, and posting this little “Title screen” I threw together, so as to motivate my procrastinating butt to finally sit down, and just start writing. I know that’s the first step, and it’s probably going to be a fairly long and involved one, but in the end, I know I truly believe in the importance of this topic, and I believe in the need to see it all formulated in a way that perhaps will finally make BFE Cosmology finally “click” for some of those people out there who already understand all the other pieces, but still, somehow, just don’t see how amazingly and perfectly it all fits together within the context of true, original Hebrew cosmology. I think of it like, seeing a story portrayed in it’s final theatrical presentation, with all the background scenery and locations and historical settings, etc., instead of just reading random excerpts of the screenplay.

Anyhow, here’s the little Title Screen I’ve managed to throw together so far:

Flat Earth: “The Way Out”…

Escape…

It is one of the most powerful themes which resonates throughout the tapestry of human experience, it permeates the spectrum of recorded literature, religious attention, political ideology, spiritual reflection…

From ancient mythology and oral traditions, down to present-day pop culture, this broader motif comes back again, and again, and again…

There certainly seems to be something about the human condition which instinctively recognizes an underlying, incessant, pull…

To escape, to surpass, to emerge, to exit…

Not only in the context of individual people’s specific circumstances, whether embedded in real history, or just a work of fiction, but, in the broadest sense. Somehow, our individual experiences which innately reject confinement, resist restriction, abhor oppression, these seem to connect us all to the larger, human story. A larger quest. A deeper need.

And of course, the Flat Earth topic is fascinating in how it serves to bring particular facet of our human nature into such sharper focus.

Is at least part of the reason why so many people have such a violent and repulsive reaction to the idea of an enclosed world? Does it perhaps have to do with even more than just all the propaganda and programming, all the humanistic pride invested in our perceived scientific understanding, and actually connect to soomething on a more sub-conscious, even spiritual level..?

Is it possible that the fraudulent invention of a massive, virtually infinite, deep space cosmology, was ultimately easy enough to pass off, because deep-down, we hate the idea of there being walls of any kind? Hate even the suggestion of limitation?
And how does the recognition of the Earth and cosmos itself being a much more confined, finite thing, relate to all the other forms of restriction, oppression, and control being perpertrated upon humanity by this ever-encroaching system being built all around us…?

What do these “Elite”, really know..?

What are they hiding? What are they seeking to accomplish?
Is it more land? Far off somewhere across an icy, infintie plain?

Is it the Firmament? Do they hope to finally break through to waters above?

Do they intend to use secret technology to create some kind of inter-dimensional portal, effectively hopping the wall by defying the laws of time and space..?
What are they doing? What is going on? And what does it mean for us? Are we trapped? Is there some realistic dream of ascension? Can we too transcend whatever limits exist in the cosmos, and ourselves one day soar into the heavens, whatever that actually means…?

What IS on the other side…..???

These are of course the sorts of questions which are inevitably raised when one comes face to face with the prospect of an enclosed world cosmology. The Question of the Creator, the Builder, the Designer. The Question of what it’s all for, what we’re all “in here” to do…

Some people want to merely focus on the Flat Earth itself, as some kind of unifying principle, some kind of banner under which everyone should be content to find community and common ground, and while I very much appreciate these sentiments to a certain degree, ultimately I find myself reflecting upon the fact that way back in the earlier stages of history, when virtually ALL cultures and peoples believed in an enclosed world, this commonality did not by itself translate into the absence of all the same ills we tire of today. It did not mean the absence of tyranny, the absence of empire, the absence oppression, or war, or plunder. It did not prevent mankind from splitting into endless factions based on the struggle for power and resources. It did not bring peace…

And interestingly enough, in virtually all of these ancient cultures which shared the broader belief in an enclosed cosmology, there was one singular perspective which set itself out as distinct from the rest…

The majority of these ancient kingdoms and cultures held some form of the view that civilization itself was initiated and guided by an array of advanced beings who descended from the heavens above. The Annunaki, the “gods”, the Watchers, the serpent-kings… They were described by many names, but in every case they were revered as the ones who held the keys for mankind to learn the secrets necessary to perfect himself, and one day ascend back to where these magnificent creatures originated from…

But then in the midst of all these traditions, there was one which stood apart.
In the conviction of this small, isolated line of people, the only being worth trusting was the Creator Himself. The Eternal one. The God who made everything, even the host of angelic creatures, in both the heavens, and below.

And this God, this Creator who claimed to stand above all other figures of worship, had a most singularly unique appraisal of the condition of man…

Unlike the teachings of all the other so-called “gods”, this message did not claim that humans could one day climb the ladder of progress to the eventuality of a long-sought quantum leap in consciousness. There was no cyclical wheel of birth, death, and rebirth, no mountain of pious works to hope to accomplish, no secret rituals to learn and unlock the mysteries thereof..

You see, among all these centers of civilization and alleged progress, was a universal sense of longing, a striving, a recognition of the underlying need to break free. To escape… And these false, finite, fallen “gods” provided an endless array of ways by which men and woman sought to enlist the assistence of these beings, in the quest for enlightenment, for ascension.

Countless generations in times past devoted themselves to the worship of these idols, in the hope of finding that elusive way out, through magical arts, through arduous pilgrimages, through the building of elaborate temples and monolithic structures, even through the sacrifice of their own children. Yet the longing endured, the key to this prison of humanity never being attained…

Mankind could never escape his own self, his own internal nature, and this is what sets the God of Abraham apart from all others. The God of the Bible, in contrast, tells us the unwelcome news that no matter what mystical secrets we might try to seek out, no matter what spiritual disciplines we might apply, no matter what towers we build, no matter what machines we might construct, there is simply, no way out.

No way out, on our own, because ultimately that which imprisons us is not the lack of some secret knowledge, or third-eye activation, or our “ego”, or even the physical universe itself, but rather, our own rebellious souls.

The reality of the sinful condition of man, as taught in the Bible, is unlike anything else, in any other philosophy, theology, or cosmology. It is the prison which we are by far most hesitant to acknowledge, and as such we prefer to instead pound against ever other type of wall imaginable, in our ceaseless quest to break free from the feeling of bondage. We continue turning to idols, appealing to dreams of progress, of eventually conquering the universe, whether in the context of materialistic space-travel, or transcending the physical altogether and achieving “pure consciousness”…

But Jesus…

Jesus, as the central figure of the Bible, (in both the Old and New Testament..) stands alone. As the pivotal piece of the Biblical message, which proclaims first a finite, fixed, enclosed, immovable Earth, and then us, fallen humanity, finite, enclosed, imprisoned in our sin, only Jesus provides a way of escape. A way out…
There is an irony in the comparison of both enclosed, Flat Earth cosmology, and Big-Bang Copernican cosmology, in the sense that in BOTH paradigms, one can set out to study and understand everything in the cosmos from the Earth, to the Sun, moon and stars, and yet, never take the time to intently study the reality of their own heart. Never stop and take stock of their own life, their own state, their own innermost being…

This is what I challenge EVERYONE to do, above all else. Before seeking to comprehend the amazing reality of the earth, or the heavens, to simply get honest with yourself. To ask yourself if perhaps indeed this prison of sin in your own life, as the Bible describes, might indeed be some of the most powerful evidence of all that what the Bible says is really true.

Because the most beautiful news in the entire World, is that Jesus broke down the prison door. He laid down His own life, in order to become the Door, the Gate, the Portal, to Everything that humanity has hungered to get back to since the Beginning… He is the only way out. The only bridge between Heaven and Earth, between death and life, the only opening the impervious Firmament seperating us from the Creator Himself, through which we can freely walk through and enter into the Kingdom of the Father.

Many people out there are under the impression that the Bible is simply another tool of control by the lying, murderous, “Elites”, but yet, if you dare to open up the Bible yourself, and read what it itself says, I am convinced that you will quickly begin to see how utterly false this claim really is. Those who seek to control humanity and break through the barriers apart from God, are only kidding themselves. In their futility they insist upon creating their own door, to eternity, to godhood. But you and I can make that same mistake.

I pray that there are at least a small few of you out there, who hear this, and recongize that there is something resoundingly true about what I am saying, and if so, that you would seek the One who holds the Key. That you would seek Jesus. Ask Him. Cry out to Him. He will hear you. He always does. He’s right there waiting.

I Saw This Book at the Library Yesterday…

Howdy. Once again, long-time no-write, but, things have been busier than ever. Saw this last night, “How to Fake a Moon Landing”, prominently displayed on the top of the shelf at my local library, in the children’s section, right next to all the books on the solar system. Had to throw this up on the ol’ blog. I mean, what does this say about the overall state of affairs, when children’s authors can get a book like this published? It means yes, you and I live in a world where more and more people are indeed questioning the veracity of the Apollo Moon missions. This book aims to catch kids young, and (using comic strip explanations) debunk those “crazy conspiracy theories about the faked moon landings” before they get a little older and find themselves watching entertaining videos on youtube of the astro-nots bouncing up and down on their cables, set to polka music.

This really does just crack me up. Damage-control mode, is what it is… “Watch out for those kooky ‘science-deniers’ kids… They’re crazy and they’ll brainwash you into becoming a backwards, science-denying hater of the government and all scientific progress!!”

Check out these pages from the book:

27d5d9cd9bf71af23b681567638cf6b4._SX640_QL80_TTD_
8ec54c33f21fa4e3aaad56baa02bc1c3._SX640_QL80_TTD_
4812115688_779ab0487a_b
Moon-Hoax-Mythbusters-Darryl-Cunningham
4811490863_cce203e4c3_bfakemoonlanding-156