Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Evaluating and Criticising Scientology' started by Mimsey Borogrove, Feb 7, 2017.
Mimse, on the climate change thing that folks get so "hot" about . . .
Climate change and geoengineering deceptions
Geoscientist J. Marvin Herndon, PhD, of the Transdyne Corporation, published a provocative paper April 21, 2017 in the Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science International, titled “Evidence of Variable Earth-heat Production, Global Non-anthropogenic Climate Change, and Geoengineered Global Warming and Polar Melting.” 
Readers may remember I’ve featured Dr Herndon’s innovative scientific research regarding weather geoengineering a couple of times: “Weather Geoengineering, Chemtrails, Aluminum and Alzheimer’s: The Four Horsemen Of The Weather Apocalypse,” and “Intentional Efforts To Cause Global Warming And Glacier Melting Indication Scientifically Found.”
One of the more revealing concepts Dr Herndon mentions in his recent article is something not many are willing to acknowledge as the cause of much grief affecting humans and the environment: “During the past 38 years, the standards of scientific inquiry have changed, particularly among those who depend upon government support. Logic-based challenges to current thinking have largely been replaced by consensus conformity.”
Sciences specifically affected by “consensus conformity” include, among others, the health sciences, especially vaccinology, or the ‘science’ of vaccines—more like pseudoscience, I offer, and microwave science, which lags behind from the World War II era in recognizing only thermal waves but not health-damaging non-thermal radiation waves .
Dr Herndon goes on to elaborate on “consensus conformity” with
But science is a logical process, not a democratic process. The idea that large, complex problems are resolved by something called “scientific consensus” has the consequence of misleading not only the public, but members of the scientific community as well.
As Dr Herndon states, “The oceans are our planet’s major reservoir for CO2.” OMG, how will they ever collect carbon taxes from the oceans? Or from humans, who exhale it with every outbreath? Isn’t that quite an insurmountable problem? Or, will they impose human CO2 taxes for our polluting the planet just by living and breathing on what cabal controllers ‘think’ is their scientific playground? Please excuse my tongue-in-cheekiness.
However, in Dr Herndon’s latest paper, we find questions , which need answering—and very soon.
As NOAA and NASA are both prime sources of data utilized in climate models and assessments, and are apparently participants in the global covert tropospheric geoengineering activity, how objective are their data?
Indeed, what are the purposes of spraying a toxic substance into the air we breathe on a near-daily, near-global basis? Surely, those closely connected with the operation know that it causes global warming and polar ice melting.
Do government leaders realize that the intent of these covert geoengineering efforts is to cause global warming? Or are leaders being deceived, told that the tropospheric aerosol spraying is to prevent global warming?
Is it being done to get at the petroleum and other natural resources beneath polar ice?
Is tropospheric geoengineering being done to cause global warming so as to provide a basis for the United Nations to take control of major elements of sovereign nations’ economies? Or are more sinister motives involved?
The military has researched weaponizing weather since 1947, but at what cost to human and environmental health? What have leaders been told that makes them acquiesce to a program that is no less than an assault on planet Earth?
Who profits from this?
Why are scientists promoting the idea of future geoengineering when they know, or certainly ought to know, that tropospheric geoengineering has been ongoing nearly worldwide for decades.”
Nevertheless, the scientific “nitty-gritty” aspects of Dr Herndon’s paper, I think, can be found in his discussion of “COVERT GEOENGINEERING CONTRIBUTION TO GLOBAL WARMING.” Here’s what he says in part:
Geoengineering is defined here as deliberate, large-scale activities aimed at modifying weather/climate systems [i.e., from the troposphere to the stratosphere to the ionosphere — all natural systems]. Weather modification programs have been employed by many nations at least since the 1960s, that is for over half a century, typically for agricultural purposes.”
[….]Big snip . . . lots of info also at this "tinyurl" http://tinyurl.com/mrzrgqn
In the Conclusions of his article, Dr Herndon offers these bone-chilling remarks:
Tropospheric aerosolized particulates, evidenced as coal fly ash, inhibit rainfall, heat the atmosphere, and enhance global warming. Evidence obtained from an accidental aerial release of an engineered material indicates there is an effort to melt glacial ice and thus enhance global warming. By ignoring ongoing tropospheric geoengineering, the IPCC climate assessments as well as the moral authority of the United Nations are compromised.
Fig. 7. Three aircraft flying simultaneously in the same physical environment in which contrail formation is possible in the air above Tucson, Arizona (USA) in 2011. Note that two display short contrails characteristic of rapid ice evaporation. The lengthy trail across the sky is not a contrail – otherwise it would have evaporated as quickly, and been as short, as the other two. Rather, the long trail is formed by emplaced particulate matter. Courtesy of Bornfree and Russ Tanner [from Dr Herndon’s paper]
Dr Herndon’s latest paper is written in scientific language. However, I encourage readers to ‘plough’ through it, as it explains much of what needs to be understood about how not only weather is being manipulated, but science, the environment and humans, as a result of clandestine mechanisms. I wish more humans were interested enough to oppose what’s happening to us and our beloved planet.
From this morning's reading . . .
This should excite some here while it irritates others
Science Unravels the Mystery of Everyday Telepathy
June 3, 2017
Buck Rogers, Staff Writer
There is a rift between the world as we see it and the world as it really is. Science and spirit are our primary tools for closing this gap in our understanding, and at the edge of this rift has always been psychic phenomenon like telepathy, premonition and the familiar sixth sense.
Many people experience these phenomenon with regularity, yet they escape scientific explanation, even though a large and historically deep body of experiential and anecdotal evidence exists. This library of evidence prevents dismissal of the psychic as either a figment of the imagination or the existence of an archaic belief system that still has imprints on the mind. This evidence implores to investigate further rather than reject.
Snipped . . . those interested know how to get the rest of this interesting article
Well, now, Mimsey! . . .
Here we see "science" has found that if you sit in front of another person for "10 minutes" and look into their eyes things change
Details at this link;
Looking into someone's eyes for longer than 10 minutes induces altered state of consciousness
A psychologist in Italy has figured out how to induce a drug-free altered state of consciousness by asking 20 volunteers to sit and stare into each other’s eyes for 10 minutes straight. Not only did the deceptively simple task bring on strange ‘out of body’ experiences for the volunteers, it also caused them to see hallucinations of monsters, their relatives, and themselves in their partner’s face.
The experiment, run by Giovanni Caputo from the University of Urbino, involved having 20 young adults (15 of which were women) pair off, sit in a dimly lit room 1 metre away from each other, and stare into their partner’s eyes for 10 minutes. The lighting in the room was bright enough for the volunteers to easily make out the facial features of their partner, but low enough to diminish their overall colour perception.
A control group of 20 more volunteers were asked to sit and stare for 10 minutes in another dimly lit room in pairs, but their chairs were facing a blank wall. The volunteers were told very little about the purpose of the study, only that it had to do with a “meditative experience with eyes open”.
Once the 10 minutes were up, the volunteers were asked to complete questionnaires related to what they experienced during and after the experiment. One questionnaire focussed on any dissociative symptoms that the volunteers might have experienced, and another questioned them on what they perceived in their partner’s face (eye-staring group) or their own face (control group).
Snipped . . .
Hey, Mimsey . . . . how is this for "What if this is not dub-in?"
Actual experiments carried out in the physical universe . . . .
Human 'consciousness' collapses the quantum wave function in a groundbreaking study
When it comes comes to quantum physics, it’s very common for researchers to come across information and results that leave them baffled, or simply don’t comply with the known laws of physics. The result is often more questions than answers — and that’s okay.
“We chose to examine a phenomenon which is impossible, absolutely impossible, to explain in any classical way, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality, it contains the only mystery.”
– Richard Feynman, a Nobel laureate of the twentieth century (from Dean Radin’s Entangled Minds: Extrasensory Experiences In A Quantum Reality)
Snipped . . . .
There is a wonderful video at the link showing the actual experiments demonstrating that we (spiritual Beings) actually have the power and capacity to affect and change the behavior of the physical universe
Drat those SP psychs! Ripping off the tech again!
Well, get a load of this . . . no "anecdotals" here . . .
Life after death is real, concludes scientific study of 2,000 patients
In the largest such study ever conducted, researchers have found evidence that consciousness continues even after brain activity has ceased. This evidence of life after death came from a study led by researchers from the University of Southampton and published in the journal Resuscitation.
“Contrary to perception, death is not a specific moment but a potentially reversible process that occurs after any severe illness or accident causes the heart, lungs and brain to cease functioning,” lead researcher Dr. Sam Parnia said. “If attempts are made to reverse this process, it is referred to as ‘cardiac arrest’; however, if these attempts do not succeed it is called ‘death.’ ”
Nearly 40 percent of those interviewed recalled experiencing some form of awareness after cardiac arrest (being pronounced clinically dead).
Snipped . . . .Perhaps the study’s most significant finding was what may be the first-ever clinical confirmation of an OBE. In this case, a 57-year-old social worker accurately reported things that were happening around him after his brain activity had ceased.
“This is significant, since it has often been assumed that experiences in relation to death are likely hallucinations or illusions,” said Dr. Parnia said, “occurring either before the heart stops or after the heart has been successfully restarted, but not an experience corresponding with ‘real’ events when the heart isn’t beating.
“In this case, consciousness and awareness appeared to occur during a three-minute period when there was no heartbeat. This is paradoxical, since the brain typically ceases functioning within 20-30 seconds of the heart stopping and doesn’t resume again until the heart has been restarted. Furthermore, the detailed recollections of visual awareness in this case were consistent with verified events.”
The man’s memories were not only accurate but even helped the researchers place his experience in time.
“The man described everything that had happened in the room, but importantly, he heard two bleeps from a machine that makes a noise at three minute intervals. So we could time how long the [experience] lasted for,” Dr. Parnia said.
Snipped . . .
The headline and verbiage in the article do not coincide with the author of the studies comments:
While Dr. Parnia’s position regarding the validity of the NDE phenomena stands in contrast to most other near death experience researchers he continues to push forward. His AWARE Project asks cardiac arrest patients who experience a NDE to recall hidden pictures placed above their bed. This methodology has been criticized by NDE experts who give it little chance of yielding positive results. Dr. Parnia responds, “I don’t know if [the tests will] be successful or not. That’s an important point to make. As I said, I don’t have a particular stance. It’s possible that these experiences are simply illusionary and it’s possible that they’re real. Science hasn’t got the answers yet. So we have to go fair-minded. Right now what we have is a setup that can at least, we hope, objectively determine an answer to the question.”
Further, the actual studies conclusion in the abstract states:
Conclusions: CA survivors commonly experience a broad range of cognitive themes, with 2% exhibiting full awareness. This supports other recent studies that have indicated consciousness may be present despite clinically undetectable consciousness. This together with fearful experiences may contribute to PTSD and other cognitive deficits post CA.
It appears that there may be some level of consciousness that survives, but the study only suggests that may only be in the first 3 minutes. It is interesting nevertheless.
These days I don't think about the cult & it's doings very often, but, this " what if wasn't dub in" is pretty funny to me,
Here's why, being the - drum rolls please - mighty " Clear Cog " is - flashy fanfare please - ' I'm mocking it up ".
Would someone of you " Masters of Tek as written by Source " kindly explain the difference to dumb me the exact difference in " mocking it up " & " dub in " ?
I mean that one baffles me. I even tried a " demo " ( for the first time in quarter of a century 1 ) of this " mocking it up " & " dub in " !
I even drug out a big fat heavy dictionary to no avail in discerning how to split this hair between " mocking it up " & " dub in ".
Maybe one of you sharp people can explain to me what this " mocking it up " is and then how that ain't " dub in ".
help ! Looks like just more double speak to me.
Terril can you help ?
Dub in def 1 tech dict:- any unknowingly created mental picture
that appears to have been a record of the physical universe but is
in fact only an altered copy of the time track.
Mock ups are knowingly and at cause created. So the difference
is one is done on ones own determinism the other isn't, and in fact
one is effect of it. But there are of course similarities.
Mocking up is pretty much mainstream therapy nowadays and is usually
referred to as visualisation. It probably goes beyond therapy and is
training of the mind to achieve something.
Not sure if I ever experienced dub in but I definitely created mock ups.
One example is on house GPM on OT 2 I eventually mocked up the house
with a wife/girlfriend. Got more reads that way. I think the orthodox would
consider that squirreling.
At one stage creative processing was considered the most powerful
tool in the scientologists kit bag. Kudos to Hubbard for running with that.
He didn't originate it. Magick and probably many other schools of thought
used it earlier.
Terril, did you ever notice on R3R the pc tended to run " track" on whatever they were now ? An EO would run incidents about being an EO, oh, X thousands of years ago ?
or a salesman ran being a salesman? A tennis player ran playing tennis ' back there ?
Didn't they strike you odd ?
If it was a dub in - how come it was reading on the meter ( only run reading items, remember ? )
I get old Hubbards slippery differentiation of mock up & dub in - but really ?
Mock up & dub in sure seem the exact same thing.
Mix the clear cog ( mocking it up ) with dub in ( your version = making it up ) & what's the dang difference ?
The smoke & mirrors get so thin !
Like you, I don't think about scn that much anymore. But I do remember how I thought about this when I was in scn. I'll explain "I'm mocking up my own reactive mind" as I understood it.
To me, this did not mean, "I'm making up stuff to tell the auditor." It meant I, the thetan, made a decision to take pictures of events in the physical universe which contained force and mass, and to become the effect of these pictures. I had agreed to be the effect of this mechanism called the reactive mind, which I was creating. That, to me, was "mocking up my reactive mind."
Dub in was stuff you ran in session that hadn't actually happened the way it seemed to you. These were pictures that weren't real. At the time I didn't worry about differentiating them from "real" pictures, 'cause Ron said it didn't really matter. Was I mocking that up too? Well, I guess.
How much of the track stuff was real? I'm now inclined to think probably none of it. Do past lives exist? I don't know. I take an agnostic position on that currently. But I don't worry about it.
What if it wasn't what Hubs told us it was?
Can I take it that ' stuff that isn't true ' is dub in ?
Then, if I'm mocking it up . . . . is it 'true' ?
If we were mocking up our bank, uh, wasn't bank the sum total of our insanities ( per that fella who called hisself source ).
[[[[[[[[[[ Did sauced on drugs & booze ever men source ? ]]]]]]]]]]
Re: What if it wasn't what Hubs told us it was?
That thought even occurred to me back then, but I didn't dwell on it.
Re: What if it was a mock up?
Well, I suspect that the believers among us will defend that a person can " run " this : A pain in the zorch
and, lo and behold, get " meter reads " and appropriate " tone arm action " as they run this " earlier similar " to it's " full EP ".
Then, God bless their Hubbard infected soul, will write a raving " Success Story " & even share their " wins " at graduation on Friday night !
Perhaps one day they'll burst out of that self inflicted bubble of stupidity, but, meanwhile I'm going to no longer be trying to shed some truth on their delusions.
What if WAS dub-in?
It's all dub in. Like a dream, we just make this shit up to have something to do. We are here anyway, so, all this is dub in.
Sort of a reverse ' body-in pawn ' if you will.
What if we're really somewhere else & all this is just a dream we're having ?
[ Oh, shit ! How much trouble can I get in for telling the truth ? ]
Cat's out of the bag. Let's play ! You can put it here & you can take it away !
Roger, lately I've come to believe that every thought that was ever thought still exists. It only needs someone tuned into that frequency / wave length / vibration - whatever one wants to call it - to be ab;e to be in communication with it.
Have I mastered it ? Nope.
But I sure get flashes from the past !