Tag Archives: technology

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

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

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


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.


Zero G Fakery: More Plausible Than You Thought….

This is a really great video, speculative to be sure, but speculative within the bounds of lots of corroborating perpendicular evidence. I really DO believe the I.S.S. is being faked, one way or another, and honestly when we consider what can be constructed in terms of things like CERN and so many other places, building a mock space station on Earth and employing fake zero gravity would be comparatively small potatoes. (I do think they use wires in some of the older ISS footage, however…)

It’s The Happiest Place On Earth, As Long As You All Get Your Shots…

Currently the mass media is highlighting an alleged measles “epidemic” going on right now in California, where the outbreak is being linked to international visitors to Disneyland. Every time anyone gets sick with a disease for which there is a vaccine, the “vaccine debate” is ignited once again by the propaganda machinery and those stubborn, backwards (or possibly just lazy) souls who still haven’t been vaccinated are publicly maligned and shamed for essentially being the ones responsible for being the weak link in society’s great scientific wall against disease…

I remember when as a fourth-grader, we learned about the deadly perils of such diseases from playing “Oregon Trail” on our classroom’s Mac II, (ah, floppy disks… Kids today have no idea), where little Bobby or Suzy usually died somewhere around crossing the Dalles from a sudden case of influenza or mumps or measles. The thing is, so far, in this “outbreak” in California, not a single person has been reported to have died. It says approximately 20 kids at Orange County High missed 3 weeks of school. I’m sure they didn’t have a swell time, not saying it wasn’t unpleasant. But the degree of fear-mongoring and panic that is inevitaby spread through every one of these events is far from subtle. This article even explains how Disneyland is reassuring the public that all employees are being required to show proof of immunity from measles before returning to work, and how they are offering vaccines to all employees. Good ol’ “Uncle Walt”, still looking after us…

Ever since I started learning the truth about vaccines, one of the things that was so striking to me, especially at the beginning, was how nobody seems at all suspicious about how freely they are being made available to everyone. We live in a country where they seem to find a way to charge you for almost everything, (even the stuff that’s really good for you), and yet employers, schools, heck, even grocery stores are willing to hook you up for free! Well, it’s because they want healthy employees, students, and customers, of course of course. To think anything else would be, well, a sign of mental illness… 😉

Portals and Prisons…


This morning, I loaded up my mp3 player with some fresh content as I prepared to launch into my routine of making breakfast, washing dishes, and getting things moving along in the daily routine, as I usually do. (don’t have a dishwasher, so doing dishes by hand almost inevitably involves listening to one of my regular podcasts while I scrub away) Today, it happened to be Derek Gilbert’s latest interview from “A View from the Bunker”, as he spoke with author Dr. Michael Lake about his new book ‘The Shinar Directive’. Fabulous stuff. In many ways, it really reminded me of just how much information and understanding was all simultaneously assaulting my previous understanding of the Bible and the cosmos it describes, almost five years ago.

As phenomenal an idea as the “Genesis 6 paradigm” (the belief that fallen angels or “Watchers” mated with human women and had hybrid offspring) is to most church-reared folks, it is really just the launching point into an entire spectrum of ideas and events which shake most of our preconceived assumptions about the universe we live in, as is well explained in the aforementioned interview, which starts off with a great discussion of the person of Nimrod, a central part of Dr. Lake’s book.

Nimrod, as Dr. Lake explains, actually achieved something even beyond what the Watchers themselves were able to accomplish, that is, he “became a Gibborim”, a “mighty man before the Lord” (Genesis 10:8). Many scholars have limited this verse to simply meaning that he was a great warrior, hunter, king, but in fact, a deeper look reveals that what this is saying that Nimrod actually found a way to actually become a “nephilim”, through some manner of dark occult practice which the scripture (understandably!) does not expound upon, and became the figure who to this day stands as the epitome of what they hope and strive to become themselves, and what they hope to actually succeed in building as the coup de grace against God and His angelic army. Essentially, it could be regarded as the Tower of Babel 2.0, a gate to the heavens which Satan and his minions believe will give them the chance they’ve been waiting for to storm His presence and dethrone Him once and for all. I certainly never heard about those kinds of things in Sunday School…
Recently I saw the film “Snowpiercer“, which honestly I must say has to instantly rank right up at the top of the list of movies containing multiple layers of gnostic symbolism and interpretations. Seriously, I’d say it rivals the Matrix trilogy in terms of how much embedded ideas could be found within this screenplay, and as a result I’m still in the process of unpacking it all, but there is plenty that jumps out from onset, indeed just from the premise alone. Like all good examples of gnostic/NWO/fight-the-system movies, it works from several angles, the first being the more obvious allegory of humans fighting against an oppressive totalitarian system run by other humans. But, for those who have begun to understand what the underlying belief system of Gnosticism is truly all about, by the end of the film, we can start to recognize the similar themes being presented in terms of it working as a metaphor for “oppressed beings” seeking to find a way out of the prison they are in, built by a deluded and maniacal “Creator” who is always portrayed as having no inherent sense of morality in the end. The “tyrant god”, who must ultimately be outwitted and out-maneuvered in order to achieve true, lasting freedom…

snowpiercerfishtankIt is always about “escaping the Matrix”, escaping the “Cube”, the prison, the maze, the oppressive system. The genius of this gnostic “plot device” is that it appeals to what is often times a genuine reaction against real human examples of sin and misuse of authority, when in actuality we are being sucked into cheering for the cause of snowpiercerrevoltthe fallen angels who feel that God has callously and ruthlessly judged them for rebelling against Him, convincing themselves that they are in fact the benevolent ones, the true saviors of humanity, the “rebels” against an evil galactic empire…

The scene at the end of the film, where the freedom-fighters reach the “Engine” is perhaps the most revealing, in terms of just blatant visual cues. The room housing the “eternal engine” resembles a typical Hollywood portrayal of a “Stargate” if anything does, yet, in an interesting plot twist, the ultimate way of escape lies in blowing open the “gate” to the frozen outside world, rather than stepping into the role of becoming the conductor oneself. Like I said, there is a LOT that could be unpacked from this movie, but in the end we can at least say that it serves as yet another example of these same gnostic themes showing up with increasingly regularity in the latest Hollywood releases, alongside films like Noah, Transcendence, Maze Runner, Hunger Games, X-Men, Lucy, The Purge, and on and on and on…

It’s sort of funny, actually. One of the first things I came across when I encountered this realm of what some might call “fringe Christianity”, was this guy on youtube talking about “Nephilim Stargates“, and at the time I thought, “Wow, what a NUT!” 519hrrGgZeL__SY344_BO1,204,203,200_

But, alas, several years later, I count myself among those who now look at the Bible as the Word of God, and very much do see it describing things like interdimensional portals, and genetic manipulation, and a “Shinar Directive” which very much does link those in occult societies today to the person of Nimrod thousands of years ago. The objective is really quite unchanged, and even being loudly proclaimed all around us, if only we stop and take notice…

I Just Couldn’t Help Myself…

I never do this. I swear I don’t. Ok, I RARELY do it. But today I did, and I didn’t hold anything back. It was because it was something that touched upon a particular nerve that, I confess, really is hard for me not to react to. It shoots to the core of so much of what I have labored in and wrestled with and battled over in my own heart and mind. It’s what you might call a “pet peave”, but then again, “peave” doesn’t really come close to describing how this particular attitude and mindset amongst Christians continues to aggravate me, to an ever-increasing degree, whenever I come across it. I came across it today here:


It reads as follows…

Conspiracy Theories. Don’t.

Should you pay attention to that idea of a conspiracy theory? Let’s dive into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Okay. I know right up that conspiracies do happen. People do try to cover things up and pull them off together. Usually however, we have some idea that this is definitely going on. Eventually, it all comes down on those who do it. For instance, Watergate was a conspiracy of sorts, and frankly, it didn’t really last too long.

The main conspiracies I’m talking about are the kind that are popularized by too many Christians and are also the same mindset found in a number of atheistic circles. For Christians, these often involves “satanic plots” to control our children and indoctrinate them. Much of the time, you know that the Illuminati has to be behind it all!

Because, you know, the main way to send that secret message is to go through the half time show on Super Bowl Sunday. How is it that the Illuminati managed to reach all these dancers and send a secret message to people watching the Super Bowl? Before going off on how it is something you think is part of hidden satanic symbolism, why not just consider something else?

Maybe it’s just a tasteless performance.

Now this is saying nothing about the morality of what goes on in said performances. I am not at all endorsing that. What I am saying is that you need to be on the watch for thinking that there are several conspiracies afoot. For a Christian, this can result in a heightened paranoia and to the rest of the world, you just look ridiculous. We already look ridiculous for believing in Jesus. There’s no reason to add to that.

Atheists don’t always do much better. You can think about plots in Christianity to destroy everything that disagreed with Christianity and then of course, the process of canonization, that was all just a total plot! Very rarely is any actual real historical study done on the topic. Unfortunately in our internet age, too many people find something on the internet and think it’s true. We all laugh at the idea of “I read it on the internet so it must be true”, but too many people have that same mindset.

The thinking also leads to a heightened arrogance. Sure, everyone else misses the main message, but I know what it is. I am not going to be fooled the way everyone else is. If you do not see it, well you just haven’t really reached this level of insight and thinking. Of course, a possibly even worse case could be that you’re part of the conspiracy.

One point to keep in mind when researching these claims is see who is being cited as a source. Too many times conspiracy theorists regularly cite each other and validate one another’s claims. Try to find a source that you think will be as objective as possible. Of course, total objectivity could be impossible, but try to get as close as you can.

For Christians also, please especially avoid conspiracies related to end times madness. I have seen too many times the idea of secretly implanting chips in us that are supposed to be the Mark of the Beast. Honestly, I have reached the point where my eyes just start rolling immediately at this. It’s not just because I’m a preterist. If you’re a futurist, you should avoid this as well.

There are far too many important things to study than the idea of possible conspiracies. If some Christians would seek to interpret their Bible as well as they try to interpret a show at halftime on Super Bowl Sunday, we’d all be better off.

In Christ,

Nick Peters

(my response is as follows…)

So, you basically see the apex of “paranoid Christian conspiracy theories” as centering around things like Satanic messaging embedded in Super Bowl half-time shows..?

I guess you can’t be faulted for that. There are after all bajillions of youtube videos which invest themselves in exposing and decoding such things.

However, I must interject as to your overall resistance to Christians being too “paranoid” about Satanic conspiracies in general. Since you clearly seem to be writing from the perspective of a Christian yourself, I am curious as to how exactly you parse this out, in relation to what the Bible actually has to say about Satan and his intentions towards this planet and the entire human race….

You make a rather puzzling statement how even though you’re a preterist, you believe that futurists should avoid getting sucked into “end time madness” as well. Not sure how you can claim to not have a certain amount of bias on that one, but no matter. As a preterist, how exactly DO you see history playing out, might I ask? Are we just going to keep “progressing forward” as things get better and better? Is there no Second Coming of Christ at all in your view?

Anyhow… Your article is more or less built around the typical argument of “Well of course conspiracy happens, but hey, they’re small and easy to spot, and so we should be able to make a distinction between those “realistic” examples of conspiracy, and the full on “crazy” ones…” (is that a fair description?) Yet, there are much bigger “substantiated” examples of massive-scale conspiracies than Watergate, and far more sinister as well…

Hitler and the Nazis “conspired” to eradicate Jews and the “non-desirables” from Europe (and ultimately, the world) through the implementation of a highly organized system whose sole function was to destroy human life with assembly-line efficiency. (I suppose you don’t think there was anything “satanic” going on with any of that…?) The rest of the world allegedly had no knowledge of this massive program (there were rumors, of course, but to believe in them would’ve mean believing a pretty intense “conspiracy theory”)

The Manhattan Project involved thousands upon thousands of people all working on various aspects of a project whose intention was to create the most devastating weapon the world had ever seen. It was as though an entire city was all working together on a singular secret project, yet the rest of the American public was completely unaware the whole time, until later when the project was disclosed.

The Federal Reserve as well was formed in secret, and confessed by the men who created it as something they “conspired” to do, using all sorts of chicanery to put the production of the U.S. dollar into their private control. (The “Federal Reserve” is definitively NOT a Federal institution, but a private bank). This is not “theory”, but open, documented fact.

But as to your question about “How is it that the Illuminati managed to reach all these dancers and send a secret message to people watching the Super Bowl?” The answer to that one is really quite simple, in that you obviously don’t need to brainwash every dancer on a stage for a performance filled with Satanic symbolism. (duh!) Every music video, every stage performance, and for that matter, every film, tv show, news program, etc., is produced, directed, and edited by a comparatively small number of people. Those are the people who can put whatever symbolism, message, meaning, or imagery they choose into anything they produce…. The people dancing and singing and acting and reading the teleprompters are really just living puppets.

But finally, as to your point about our belief in Jesus making us look “ridiculous” to the rest of the world…

You’d better believe the world is going to think you’re “ridiculous” for believing in Him, and if you think that’s something you need to try and mitigate as much as possible, then wow, that frightens me…

Think about it. You lament how Christians need to better interpret their Bibles, but when we pick up the Bible and actually read it, it is full of the most “fantastic” stories and ideas and claims you could imagine. It claims that God made man and woman, put em in a garden, then some serpent/devil creature comes along and tells them to eat it, and if they do, they’ll become like God, become “enlightened”, so they do it, but they don’t become gods, only trapped by sin, and then they realize they’re nude, get kicked out of the garden, etc., etc., God later floods the whole earth yet saves eight people. He raises up a people to be His own, saving them through plagues and miracles and seas that split in two and water that pours out of rocks. He smashes cities with parades and trumpets. He kills giants with pebbles. He turns kings into beasts, and makes other beasts speak. He closes the mouths of hungry lions, keeps people singe-free in fiery pits, and takes people on underwater ocean cruises inside the stomach of aquatic wildlife. Then this “Jesus guy” comes along, and whoa baby, does HE ever do some weird stuff. Making the blind see, the lame walk, casting out these invisible spirit things who apparently were taking control of people all over the place… He even was killed, and then was claimed to have risen from the DEAD and could walk through walls and teleport and such. Then they say He floated up into the sky, back to “heaven”, after which His followers stayed here and told everyone about it, and cast out these invisible evil things that are supposedly flying around everywhere, but we can’t see or hear them, and this Jesus guy is supposedly still alive and even “coming back” one day, yet, in this totally crazy book at the end, it talks about this “dragon” character and how he’s totally been fighting against this Jesus dude the whole time, and is going to try and kill everyone who loves him, and is even at some point going to gather “all the kinds of the earth” to make war against Him……

Yet… You don’t at all see the Bible itself that fully encompasses the “fantastic” and even the “conspiratorial”……?
(end of my original comment)

Now, there are only a couple other points I’d want to add to my already ridiculously long retort to this article.  First, to the pred-purple-jellyfish-crossota-millsae_10670_600x450oint insinuating that “conspiracy theorists” are guilty of the mindset “I read it on the internet so it must be true”.  You hear this all the time, and it’s really a sucker-punch, a pathetic attempt to discredit information or ideas by pointing to the fact that the internet played a part in the exchange of this information and ideas.  It’s really quite a tired and poor argument, honestly.  Never mind the irony that this accusation is itself being put forth in a blog post, on the internet (so should we disregard the author altogether as total nonsense because he’s sharing his thoughts online?) but the underlying implication going on here is that of course the people looney enough to believe in grandiose “conspiracy theories” or in such nonsense as the “illuminati” couldn’t actually have done their due diligence and looked for a weighty compilation of independent yet agreeing sources, or well-examined and authenticated evidence, no, they must have simply watched some youtube video made by some unemployed, anti-social middle-aged bum living in their parent’s basement.  It’s just substituting insult for argument.  Such accusations and ad hominem attacks come from people who have never even heard of, let alone looked into themselves, such vast compositions of true, bona fide research and data-analysis as found in things like Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.  (oh wait, sorry, that’s a link for a website, and if it’s on the internet, it must be baloney…) 😉  I guess that’s why corporations, governments, media outlets, etc. all have chosen to eschew putting their information online as well, because it would only serve to discredit them….(!?)

deep-sea-creatures-002Secondly, there is the other common claim that “this thinking also leads to a heightened arrogance”.  It’s funny, because this is exactly the SAME sort of thing you hear on a regular basis from atheists and other non-Christians who find your claim that the Jesus is the only way to God, that heaven and hell are real, and that all the other religions are false and deceptive to be the absolute epitome of arrogance!  All the belief systems are wrong, and deceived, and leading people to hell?  Why, what narcissism!  What gall!  As though the people who have come to put their faith in Christ and His word have done so simply as a function of their own internal desire to be above everyone else, to condemn them, and have some sort of self-created sense of exclusivity in the world…  Yes, atheists can be pretty adept at smacking Christians around with this one, and yet Christians will then turn right around and use the exact same logic to try and silence their brothers and sisters who they find to be totally off the deep end…fish

But alas, I AM off the “deep end”, learning to embrace the tides of life and let the currents take me, instead of hiding in my own little cove and pretending that entire roaring ocean doesn’t exist.  And the further I go into those “Deeper Waters” Mr. Peters, the deeper they seem to get.  The weirder, and crazier and more amazing and beautiful and scary and awesome and almost unbelievable they become.  Only HE can plumb the depths of all that is and has been and will be in this vast and incredible universe that He has made, but He has promised to be with us, always, as we swim through even the darkest, and deepest, and most shark-infested of waters…


Why Is The Propaganda Box Producing So Many Shows About Living Off The Grid..??

Last night my wife and I saw this preview for a new upcoming reality show on TLC:

I confess, we watch a fair amount of reality tv shows in our house. We were there to see Jon and Kate’s marriage dissolve on national television, chain-smoker Phil finally die of a heart attack on Deadliest Catch, Honey Boo Boo fart-joke her way into the hearts of millions, and the Duck Dynasty clan celebrate their combination of million-dollar holdings and down home swamp family values. But lately, over the past couple of years, we have noticed an interesting trend in the pseudo-reality show realm, the increasing number of programs that in some way or another involve people living, by choice, in circumstances less than all of what modernity has to offer.

First there were all these “Survivalist” shows featuring guys like Bear Grylls, or that other survivalist guy, or the survivalist duo of guys, or the survivalist married couple. Lots of eating grubs and drinking from coconuts etc. Then you started seeing all these shows based in the wilderness of Alaska, like “Ultimate Survival Alaska“, on the National Geographic channel, where four teams were racing through the Alaskan wilderness, having to traverse all kinds of natural obstacles.   A litany of Alaska-themed shows has sprung up, such as “Alaska: The Last Frontier” and  “Life below Zero“, (which is actually pretty good), both of which feature families and individuals trying to live off the land.  There’s “Out of the Wild”, and “Alaskan Bush People“, the latter being a show which featured a family in very much the same manner that this new TLC show appears to be imitating and trying to expand upon.  To the east of Alaska, our Canadian neighbors have given us “Ice Lake Rebels“, which documents the lives of those living as inhabitants of house boats on a lake frozen for most of the year in Yellowknife Bay in the Northwest Territories.  The show “Mountain Men” features (of course) mountaineer-types living off the land in Alaska, the Rockies of Montana, and the Appalachians. But this new “reality” genre goes far beyond the Frozen North, with shows like “Naked and Afraid”, “Live Free or Die“, and “The Legend of Mick Dodge“.   Mick Dodge is a man who the cameramen follow around the forests of the Olympic Peninsula in Washington State, where he has lived as a sort of mick_dodgeroaming woodsman for decades now, bivouacking in mossy tree stumps and caves, eating things like wild mushrooms and fresh salmon.  In a similar vein, I have also taken notice of several shows dealing with various “prepper” topics, such as “Doomsday Preppers“, “Doomsday Castle” and “Doomsday Bunkers”.

There are really too many shows like this to try and list every last one of them, but you get the gist. The real question for me however, has been, “Why exactly are they so keen to highlight this broader topic, with all of it’s subcategories and tangential pursuits…?”

Obviously, the surface-level answer would be simply that an increasing number of people are interested in these kinds of “alternative” lifestyles, whether they are actually interested in possibly trying it out themselves one day, or simply because the mundane routine of suburban living has somehow made the act of watching someone eat larvae out of a log or try not to freeze to death overnight seem entertaining when compared to the thrilling adventure supplied by driving our climate-controlled S.U.V.’s to the grocery store and back. But I would say that just because a large segment of the population finds a topic interesting/appealing, doesn’t automatically mean that the controlling hands at the helms of the major networks will oblige and produce content in that direction. There’s always a reason. Always an agenda.

Has anyone else noticed this surge in going-back-to-nature programming? Could this spate of survivalist, living-off-the-grid t.v. shows really have something to do with being a response to the increasing number of people getting weary of things like smart-meters and endless energy-rate hikes and internet surveillance..? Do you think it does more to romanticize and glorify these kinds of less-is-more approaches to life, or do they in the end actually serve to show just how difficult, if not darn near impossible, such a goal is in the societal context we now find ourselves in? Is it being relegated as something that is nice to imagine, but not so much to personally attempt, in some lame wave of reverse-psychology against giving any serious consideration as to how we might take tangible steps towards detaching ourselves from this artificial and entropic matrix closing in all around us…?

What do you think, does it work towards portraying the people who are living by such ideologies as brave and ingenious, or as crazy as paranoid?

Welcome to the Networked Society….

This is one of the creepiest technology-related commercials I’ve seen yet… The “internet of everything”. It’s coming. It’s more or less already here. It’s going to be so awesome. Solve all of our problems, turn the world into one big sustainable utopia. Can’t wait till they start chipping pregnant women in order to keep an eye on the health of their babies… I think the most noteworthy, and most frightening, aspect of this whole ad, is how it depicts the streams of lights, zooming around, connecting everything. Probably the most perfect visual depiction of the concept of how spirits could possibly “ride” the entire global network, and essentially be themselves embedded into every conceivable aspect of our lives. They sure manage make the Mark of the Beast system look pretty darn idyllic. Who wouldn’t want to live in a world like that. Everything is sunny and happy and safe. Skynet will take good care of us all… I found this video while looking for an online copy of this commercial, which I saw last night, featuring Ericsson’s “Vehicle Cloud” system. (but I was unable to find a version that I could successfully embed into wordpress).

“We’re the Blood in your Machines”….

After my having just wrote my recent iParody, wherein I jokingly referred to Apple CEO Time Cook as “worshipful master”, I almost fell out of my chair today when I heard Bono call Cook “zen master” during their awkward onstage presentation of the new U2 album “Songs of Innocence”, which was (oh so altruistically) “given away free” (or conversely, spammed to, without wanting it) half a billion iTunes subscribers yesterday, in what ultimately has to be one of the lamest corporate/celebrity stunts yet. (I suppose the similar release of the “U2 iPod” ten years ago would still be in the top ten…)

But ok. Since Bono & Co. apparently have absolutely no shame in their willingness to be used as props of propaganda by the iLITES, I can’t feel much shame either about jumping on the bandwagon and pointing out not only the overall hokeyness and tone of desperation such a move conveys, but also of course the deeper, spiritual messages embedded in all of it. Sure, Bono is being “playful” when he bows to Cook and calls him “Zen master”, and makes the comment about “we are the blood in your machines”, but the joking merely a way of glazing over the incredible degree to which all involved parties really believe such concepts to be true. That’s when these kinds of statements can be recognized to be quite prophetic, or creepy, or both.

U2’s monistic spiritual themes aren’t particularly hard to flesh out, but I suppose that’s part of why it’s so disconcerting when you think about the fact that they have long been one of those few, rare groups who have managed to pass themselves off to a good many Christian music fan as being vaguely in line with a Biblical message. In some ways they have been some of the most central icons for the “Emergent Church” generation, who have very much embraced the idea of being “relevant” through social action, enthusiastically embracing/trusting technology, and “inclusive” spirituality.

u2sunsymbol But is it just a message of run-of-the-mill, worldly relativism, or is there perhaps something more going on? What’s up with all the sun worship symbolism? This new microphone gimmick of Bono’s is quite interesting, to say the least. This new album is supposed to contain songs which by and large talk about significant moments from the band member’s pasts and childhoods, yet much of the lyrics (like most of their material) leaves plenty of room for many levels of interpretation. The song “This is where you can reach me” is supposed to inspired by the time the band saw the Clash play back in 1977, yet I was hard-pressed to find any lines in the song that really made any logical connection to that topic at all, but instead contains lines like:

We come from an ancient place
Beyond what we can see
We’ve come to colonise your night
And steal your poetry


I dunno. I honestly can’t figure out if Bono/U2’s obsession with trying to associate themselves with 70’s punk bands like the Clash and the Ramones is really just them being nostalgic about their own rock ‘n roll idols as teenagers, or if there’s something more to it than just that. Maybe it’s just a way of trying to re-inject some edginess back into a band brand that is still trying to do all it can in it’s role as prophets for the New World Order. Bono doesn’t seem ready to retire his sunglasses just yet. (Perhaps he thinks he’s gonna need them for when the sun-god finally rises again…?) Either way, all I know for sure is that I don’t want their “blood” in my “machines”…