U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal grilled wireless industry representatives, who admitted the industry has done ZERO health & safety studies on 5G technology. Meanwhile, dozens of independent studies indicate that 5G is a risk to all biological life. Watch the video below…
[WASHINGTON, DC]— During today’s Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing on the future of 5G wireless technology and their impact on the American people and economy, U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) raised concerns with the lack of any scientific research and data on the technology’s potential health risks.
Blumenthal blasted the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—government agencies jointly-responsible for ensuring that cellphone technologies are safe to use—for failing to conduct any research into the safety of 5G technology, and instead, engaging in bureaucratic finger-pointing and deferring to the industry.
In December 2018, Blumenthal and U.S. Representative Anna G. Eshoo (CA-18) sent a letter to FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr seeking answers regarding potential health risks posed by new 5G wireless technology. At today’s hearing, Blumenthal criticized Carr for failing to provide answers, and instead, just echoing, “the general statements of the FDA, which shares regulatory responsibility for cell phones with the FCC.” Blumenthal also decried the FDA’s statements as “pretty unsatisfactory.” A PDF of Carr’s complete response is available here.
During an exchange with wireless industry representatives, Blumenthal asked them whether they have supported research on the safety of 5G technology and potential links between radiofrequency and cancer, and the industry representatives conceded they have not.
Blumenthal stated:
If you go to the FDA website, there basically is a cursory and superficial citation to existing scientific data saying ‘The FDA has urged the cell phone industry to take a number of steps, including support additional research on possible biological effects of radio frequency fields for the type of signals emitted by cell phones.’ I believe that Americans deserve to know what the health effects are, not to pre-judge what scientific studies may show, and they also deserve a commitment to do the research on outstanding questions.”
“So my question for you: How much money has the industry committed to supporting additional independent research—I stress independent—research? Is that independent research ongoing? Has any been completed? Where can consumers look for it? And we’re talking about research on the biological effects of this new technology.”
At the end of the exchange, Blumenthal concluded,
So there really is no research ongoing. We’re kind of flying blind here, as far as health and safety is concerned.”
In November 2018, the National Toxicology Program released the final results of the longest and most expensive study to date on cellphones and cancer. Those studies found “some evidence” of a link to cancer, at least in male rats. However, the study only focused on the risks associated with 2G and 3G cell phones.
The latest 5G wireless technology relies on the deployment of many more new antennas and transmitters that are clustered lower to the ground and closer to homes and schools. There has been even more limited research with respect to the health ramifications of 5G technology, and the FCC has thus far failed to adequately explain how they have determined 5G is safe.
Additional Notes
Senator Blumenthal is speaking to industry witnesses in the Senate hearing video:
Mr. Brad Gillen, Vice President, CTIA
Mr. Steve Berry, President and CEO, Competitive Carriers Association
Mr. Shailen Bhatt, President and CEO, Intelligent Transportation Society of America
Mr. Michael Wessel, Commissioner, U.S.-China Economic & Security Review Commission
Note: Several of the organizations listed below are still promoting actions limited to contacting your elected representatives and pleading for help. With that being said, there is a resounding increase in awareness that a firmer response is now required.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of HallsOfKarma
or its staff.
Click on the icon at the upper right, to explore more of Halls Of Karma.
During the Obama administration, the Russians were allowed to conduct extensive international airspace magnetometer research of the instabilities inherent to the western third of the United States. The results of this study are the very weakness that Kim Jong-Un, who now has ICBMs with the capability of reaching this area, could take advantage of with one well-placed nuclear “trigger.” Sound far-fetched? Stay with me here.
Let’s go down the rabbit hole together…
Yellowstone National Park is actually an active supervolcano, and it is HUGE! As you walk around the park you may think: “I don’t see any volcanos?!” That’s because much of the entire park is a volcano – and the bubbling geysers and hot springs are an indication of the churning activity below the surface.
Please watch this short intro video to get you up to speed for the rest of this information before moving on…
“Only” a 10% chance of complete devastation in our lifetime? ONLY???
Let’s get some more details in mind before we talk about why that chance could be increased to approximately 99.9% by North Korea, or any other tactical nuclear power.
The Yellowstone Supervolcano
Beneath the spectacular beauty of Yellowstone National Park lies a ticking time bomb, a supervolcano that’s overdue for its next eruption. When that day inevitably comes, it will trigger the end of civilization as we know it.
The term “supervolcano” implies an eruption of magnitude 8 on the Volcano Explosivity Index, indicating an eruption of more than 1,000 cubic kilometers (250 cubic miles) of magma. Yellowstone has had at least three such eruptions: The three eruptions, 2.1 million years ago, 1.2 million years ago and 640,000 years ago, were about 6,000, 700 and 2,500 times larger than the May 18, 1980 eruption of Mt. St. Helens in Washington State.
Yellowstone Caldera
The last time the Yellowstone supervolcano erupted was 640,000+ years ago. The Yellowstone eruption area collapsed upon itself, creating a sunken giant crater or caldera 1,500 square miles in area. The magmatic heat powering that eruption (and two others, dating back 2.1 million years) still powers the park’s famous geysers, hot springs, fumaroles, and mud pots.
Here is another short info video with a few major points, please watch before continuing…
Here’s the kicker, recent discoveries have shown us that Yellowstone’s magma reserves are many magnitudes greater than previously thought, say scientists from the University of Utah.
Underneath the national park’s attractions and walking paths is enough hot rock to fill the Grand Canyon nearly 14 times over. Most of it is in a newly discovered magma reservoir, which the scientists featured in a study published in the journal, ScienceMag.
It may help scientists better understand why Yellowstone’s previous eruptions were some of Earth’s largest explosions the last few million years.
In the past 2.1 million years, Yellowstone’s volcano has violently erupted three times and “blanketed parts of the North American continent with ash and debris,” according to the US Geological Survey. Statistically, Yellowstone’s active supervolcano is long overdue for a colossal eruption. According to a Discovery Channel Documentary, an eruption of this magnitude would bury North America, drape the atmosphere in a sulfur haze, dim sunlight, and plunge the world into a volcanic winter.
Recently, in July 2014, ground temperatures rose high enough to dry out geysers and boil the sap in some trees. A few inches under the surface, thermometers recorded a temperature of 200 degrees Fahrenheit — nearly hot enough to boil water. So, national park authorities closed Yellowstone to keep people from burning their feet — or basting their tires on melting roads.
From that time: Firehole Lake Drive, a 3-mile-plus offshoot of the park’s Grand Loop that connects the Old Faithful geyser and the Madison Junction, is currently off limits. Park operators say the danger of stepping on seemingly solid soil into severely hot water is“high.”
“It basically turned the asphalt into soup. It turned the gravel road into oatmeal,” Yellowstone spokesman Dan Hottle said. While thermal activity under the park often gives way to temperature fluctuations that can soften asphalt throughout Yellowstone, Hottle said the latest wave was much worse than usual.
In April 2o14, a 4.8 magnitude earthquake struck near the Norris Geyser Basin in the northwest section of Yellowstone, which spans 3,472 square miles of Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho, caused no injuries or damages and did not make any noticeable alterations to the landscape, geologists said. Though benign by seismic standards, it was the largest to rattle Yellowstone since a 4.8 quake in February 1980 and it occurred near an area of ground uplift tied to the upward movement of molten rock in the super-volcano, whose mouth, or caldera, is 50 miles long and 30 miles wide.
Now Yellowstone is trembling at a higher level…
The biggest earthquake in 34 years, measuring 5.6 magnitude, hit Montana the morning of July 7th, 2017. The epicenter of the tremor was just 240 miles away from Yellowstone Park.
Panicked residents of Montana feared the worst when the quake struck, with concerns over the stability of the Yellowstone volcano that we are discussing here.
A spokesperson for USGS said: “The location and focal mechanism solution of this earthquake are consistent with right-lateral faulting in association with faults of the Lewis and Clark line, a prominent zone of strike-slip, dip-slip and oblique-slip faulting trending east-southeast from northern Idaho to east of Helena, Montana, southeast of this earthquake.”
Hundreds of quakes were recorded at the site, in the state of Wyoming, in just over two weeks – its most active period in five years.
The recent unprecedented earthquake swarms and other signals of activity have put scientists on high alert for a large-scale super volcanic eruption. In the following video, the scientists predict the worldwide effects of this cataclysmic eruption, which experts predict will produce energy equivalent to the detonation of 1,000 nuclear bombs.
What’s the catch to this story? Here’s where it gets not good!
The Russian president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems outlined two key geophysically weak US regions to attack in order to combat NATO’s aggression toward Russia.
In his article, Konstantin Sivkov justifies the option of “complete destruction of the enemy” because NATO has been “moving to the borders or Russia.” He outlined two geophysically weak US regions to attack in order to combat NATO’s aggression toward Russia.
Sivkov, listed as a “Doctor of Military Sciences,” described scenarios that involved dropping a nuclear weapon near Yellowstone’s supervolcano or the San Andreas Fault.
One bomb could catalyze the eruption of this supervolcano…
“Geologists believe that the Yellowstone supervolcano could explode at any moment. There are signs of growing activity there. Therefore it suffices to say that the impact of a relatively small munition of the megaton class could initiate an eruption. The consequences will be catastrophic for the United States, a country just disappears,” he said, according to a translation by Sydney Morning Herald.
Fears have been raised Kim Jong-un is planning to fire a nuke at the volcano and San Andreas fault line, triggering an earthquake and eruption.
Experts believe the hermit kingdom now has an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of reaching the US west coast.
Interestingly as noted above, Konstantin Sivkov – an analyst from Russia which has been accused of secretly helping North Korea’s missile programme, suggested a nuclear attack on Yellowstone just two years ago.
As the United Nations dithers, Kim’s rocket scientists have developed an ICBM that can fly up to 7,000 miles – more than enough to reach Yellowstone – and an H-bomb small enough to fit on it.
America’s military might and massive nuclear arsenal could easily overwhelm North Korea – making any launch a suicide mission.
But Kim may only need to fire one missile to wipe out the US completely.
Despite few people living in the Yellowstone National Park, any “super-eruption” would still kill 90,000 people in an initial explosion.
Up to 11 cubic miles of burning magma would run across the surrounding area.
The eruption would also fire ash 25 miles into the atmosphere – blotting out the sun and causing a nuclear winter.
A 10ft blanket of ash would cover the US for 1,000 miles in all directions.
Up to two-thirds of the US would be uninhabitable and Midwest farms would be covered – almost totally stopping food production.
North Korea tested a thermonuclear weapon as powerful as 250,000 tonnes of TNT and 25 times as big as the nuke dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, at the end of World War 2 earlier this month.
In a “purely coincidental” demonstration of what it could do to Yellowstone situation, the blast at the Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site – just 72 miles from the volcano Mount Paektu – set off a massive 6.3-magnitude earthquake.
Interestingly, there was a mysterious second 4.1-magnitude earthquake at the site 8.5 minutes later.
This has baffled seismologists, but it may have been the collapse of a tunnel at the underground test site, on the slopes of Mount Mantap.
The North Koreans used a concealment cavern and detonated a super bomb deep into Mount Mantap.
How much more evidence do we need of their intentions?
Seismologists speculate further that the secondary seismic event was an earthquake triggered by the test, a rock burst, which is a violent rock fracture around the many tunnels of the mountain.
IMHO, this is exactly the modus operandi I believe they are testing – a triggering of the Yellowstone supervolcano.
They are testing to determine exactly what the yield of a nuclear weapon will be necessary to disrupt the rock cap over the Yellowstone Caldera.
So, do we wait for the weasel to sneak one in on us? Liberals certainly think so. Let me know your thoughts in the comment section at the bottom of this page…
The rhetoric began decades before the whining millennials were even thought of. The end of the world. Behold the coming apocalypse as predicted on and around Earth Day, 1970:
“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” — Harvard biologist George Wald
“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” — Harvard biologist George Wald
“We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation.” — Washington University biologist Barry Commoner
“Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” — New York Times editorial
“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich
“Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born. By 1975 some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” — Paul Ehrlich
“It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” — Denis Hayes, Chief organizer for Earth Day
“Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions. By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” — North Texas State University professor Peter Gunter
“In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution, by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half.” — Life magazine
“At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
“Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” — Paul Ehrlich
“By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.'” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
“One theory assumes that the earth’s cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun’s heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born.” — Newsweek magazine
“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” — Kenneth Watt
Back to now, almost 50 years later, with Trump Derangement Syndrome fueling their unfounded fears, they are still spreading alarmist propaganda to advance the Globalist takeover.
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in Washington, D.C.
The “Climate Change” conspirators just need to get over it. Man has had little to no effect in causing it and if the best efforts of the Paris Agreements (which are non-binding, so basically it would be the U.S. taking the bullet and the bulk of the economic damage, just like the non-binding U.N. agreements) were carried out, the “scientists” themselves agree it would only lower the global temps by 0.02 degrees, by 2100, while they also say the if it isn’t lowered by at least 2 degrees by then it will be the end of the world.
Well, don’t sweat it, the natural cycles that have been going one for hundreds of thousands of years will lower the temps by much more than that without us doing anything.
Take note of the CO2 red line in this long term graph, we are at the lowest point in millions of years…
And the “man made” climate change theorists couldn’t me more wrong, the next graphic shows the natural climate cycles reaching back millennia, long before the “monkeys evolved into man.” The more jagged data toward today merely represents more detailed recording of events, but the general cycle is what counts…
Let’s shorten the time frame just for fun, and look at average July temperatures in the United States for the last hundred years…
Scientific climate history data and records prove unequivocally that you need to STFU, Chicken Littles!
Politicians are demanding the United Nations change their own climate reports to fit the man-made global warming multi-billion-dollar business agenda. Scientific and academic shills are simply publishing whatever the politicians and corporate nihilists tell them they want to share on mass media, just as the biotechnology Big-Ag industry does with GMO technology “studies.”
The “Solar Grand Maximum” (SGM) creates global warming and cooling, not humans and their antics
Every single global warming alarmist stops talking when someone simply says the words, “Solar Grand Maximum.” In fact, the solar grand maximum has ended, thus ending the “global warming” trend the alarmists have been pushing on Americans for two decades. You see, there are no humans on Mars, Pluto, or Jupiter, where planetary warming has been observed during the decades following the peak of the SGM. Climate changes on Earth are due to solar changes and our interstellar environment, not human behavior. We are arrogant and egotistical to believe in such a preposterous theory. The SGM is now moving into a solar grand minimum.
That means global cooling (a mini Ice Age) is on the horizon, which is simply a natural oscillation that occurs in very long solar cycles. In complete contradiction to the climate change hoax being perpetuated via social media and mass media today, true science reveals that sharp increases in global warming actually PRECEDE sharp increases in CO2, and not the other way around. Therefore, the Earth’s oceans are beginning to cool. Upon closer look, temperatures that span the last 100 years correlate with ocean cycles more than they correlate with carbon dioxide, and those ocean cycles are caused by solar and lunar cycles.
These facts are what every single global warming alarmist must ignore, blackout, and completely avoid to be able to push their false narrative.Global warming is completely fear-based. Sure, humans contribute to greenhouse gases, but the cumulative effect is a miniscule fraction compared to the natural causes, and to say humans are THE cause of climate change is all one big scare tactic fueling the mass hysteria for the biggest Ponzi scheme ever known to mankind – even bigger than the military industrial war complex.
World’s largest and most lucrative Ponzi scheme – Climate Control
2001: Al Gore’s net worth $2 million
2016: Al Gore’s net worth $100 million
Before leaving office as Clinton’s VP, Al Gore was not what most consider a “filthy” rich man, but thanks to the global warming SCAM, he’s now worth a cool $100 million. Gore invested in fake “green tech” companies and embezzled the loans and grants, then watched all those companies go bankrupt (all as part of the plan from the beginning). With no intentions whatsoever of funding companies that would build wind mills, or wind turbines, or solar panels, and use natural energy to help the environments and ecosystems, Al Gore is the fulcrum of the world’s largest and most lucrative Ponzi scheme – Climate Control.
Barrack Hussein Obama works the same plot and ploys, embezzling money from companies like Solyndra, where he grants them money up front, and they return part of that in campaign contributions, fueling his Ponzi schemes to stop the … “destructive power of a warming planet.” Essentially, Obama used taxpayer monies to fund his re-election campaign, by channeling it through fake green companies that never come to be anything productive. In fact, Solyndra became return investment for Goldman Sachs when they took it over after the “fall.” Other federal loans to the tune of $400 million were all but given to companies like Abound Solar, which of course, went bankrupt too, along with over 100 different “green” companies. Solar, along with the others, all give a portion of their riches back to the Democratic campaigns by the hundreds of thousands. Greedy scientists, academic shills, and even the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency, also participate in the money laundering scheme to make it all sound official.
The billionaires get richer while American taxpayers invest in a Ponzi scheme with no return except some temporary quelled fears about the burning temperature of Earth being staved off by some rogue, criminal politicians and globalists. (17) This is how the global scam adds up to billions and billions and even trillions of dollars. Now you see why the narrative is pushed SO HARD in the mass media. The criminal politicians are still using any extreme weather event to push their false narrative, including the recent floods that are devastating Louisiana. (18)(19) The EPA and Al Gore know no bounds. Meanwhile, the alarmists fly around in jets burning fossil fuel and lecturing people on how burning fossil fuel is warming the planet. It’s complete hypocrisy hurled at the taxpayers who live in fear while paying for a huge lie, all while the planet’s temperature gets a little milder.
Consider the following…
What is the takeaway of this confession? It is nothing less than a shocking admission that man-made global warming is all about politics — Marxist, socialist, collectivist politics — masquerading under the false labels of science and environmental concern.
President Donald Trump speaks about the U.S. role in the Paris climate change accord on Thursday, June 1, in the Rose Garden of the White House…
Click on the icon at the upper right, to explore more of Halls Of Karma.
Congress sent President Donald Trump a multi-billion dollar poke in the eye Monday, refusing to slash medical spending as Trump proposed and instead giving the National Institutes of Health a $2 billion raise.
Trump had proposed slashing NIH by $1.2 billion for the rest of 2017 to help pay for his proposed increases in defense spending. Instead, Congress gave the NIH an extra $2 billion for the next 6 months, bumping its total 2017 budget to $34 billion.
Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole, a Republican who chairs the appropriations subcommittee that oversees NIH funding and who sits on the budget committee, said funding medical research is something Republicans and Democrats agree on easily.
pork bar·rel
ˈpôrk ˌberəl/
noun
the use of government funds for projects designed to please voters or legislators and win votes.
“political pork barrel for the benefit of their respective sponsors”
In 1990, Congress established funding for the Human Genome Project and set a target completion date of 2005. Here we are in 2017, and they are asking for more funding for their “humanitarian” project.
A seemingly commonplace meeting kicked off a firestorm of controversy. Last May, more than 100 experts in genetics and bioengineering convened at Harvard Medical School for a meeting that was closed to the public — attendees were asked not to contact news media or to post about the meeting on social media.
The same group is getting back together in New York City next week.
To the meeting organizers, last year’s secretive measures were, counterintuitively, to make sure as many people heard about the project as possible. They were submitting a paper about the project to a scientific journal and were discouraged from sharing the information publicly before it was published.
But there’s another reason why this group of scientists, while encouraging debate and public involvement, would be wary of attracting too much attention. Their project is an effort to synthesize DNA, including human DNA. Researchers will start with simpler organisms, such as microbes and plants, but hope to ultimately create strands of human genetic code. One of the group’s organizers, Jef Boeke, director of the Institute for Systems Genetics at NYU School of Medicine, told CNBC that incorporating synthesized DNA into mammalian (or even human) cells could happen in four to five years.
This project follows in the footsteps of the Human Genome Project (HGP), the 13-year, $2.7 billion project that enabled scientists to first decode the human genome. “HGP allowed us to read the genome, but we still don’t completely understand it,” said Nancy Kelley, the coordinator of the new effort, dubbed GP-write.
But why all the secrecy, for this supposedly incredible, life-changing breakthrough? What are they hiding?
The entire concept of the project is a total farce!
Genetics is an attempt by materialistic scientists to offer a purely materialist view of inheritance and development of not just physical bodies but non-physical inherited attributes such as instinctive behaviors and cellular function.
According to the theory of genetics, physical gene sequences contained in chromosomes found in each cell in your body are a “blueprint” for all your body’s physical structures, biochemical functions and inherited behavioral patterns. This blueprint, the theory goes, contains ALL the instructions needed to create a complete human form with all its physical structures, physiological functions and inherited behaviors fully represented and complete.
Because of the enormous complexity of the human body, organ function, cell structures and instinctive behaviors, it was once believed that humans must possess somewhere around 2 million protein-coding genes. The Human Genome Project was launched in 1990 with the widespread belief that when it was finished, it would “unlock” all the mysteries of the origins of disease in humans. It was also believed that when the human genome fully mapped, scientists would be able to create humans in any form they wanted, including humans with extra arms or legs, humans free of all disease, humans with “enhanced” physical powers, and so on.
At the start of the Human Genome Project, everybody “knew” that humans were far more complex than, say, a roundworm, which only has about 20,000 protein-coding genes. This is why estimates of the number of genes in a human ranged from 100,000 to 2 million. Scientists were absolutely sure that humans were far more complex than a tiny roundworm, and therefore humans needed far more genes.
The Human Genome Project suffers an “epic fail”
The first draft of the Human Genome Project was published in the year 2,000. Far from being a breakthrough that would end all human disease, its findings utterly shattered the mythology of genetics as the sole explanation for all inheritance and physical development. Why? Because the Human Genome Project found that humans have only about 20,000 protein-coding genes, roughly the same number as the roundworm.
Huh? A human being has about the same number of protein-coding genes as a roundworm? Yes. And that’s straight out of the mouths of human genome researchers who are, themselves, hard-core materialists.
By comparison, the common fruit fly has about 15,000 genes, only marginally less than a human. And yet it is obvious to any intelligent observer than a human being is considerably more complex than a fruit fly and a roundworm. So why didn’t the Human Genome Project find a lot more genes that code proteins in humans?
Genetic inheritance theory shattered…
The findings of the multi-billion-dollar Human Genome Project shattered the mythology of genetic materialism, sending nearly the entire scientific community into a tailspin and forcing “the great genetic cover-up” to begin.
Human genes simply needed “more research” to be understood, scientists exclaimed. And since the year 2000, that research has continued to no avail. The cover-up continues…
The truth is that there isn’t enough data storage in 20,000 genes to hold a blueprint for a human being.
Human DNA data storage capacity…
Allow me to explain this from a computer science point of view, as many of you know I founded a very successful computer software company and was the head of R&D for many computer science projects, including the popular new SCIENCE.naturalnews.com which uses advanced statistical algorithms to analyze scientific concepts across millions of published studies.
The human genome contains about 3 billion “base pairs” of genes. Each base pair can exist in one of four possible combinations of the four bases that make up DNA: Adenine (A), Thymine (T), Cytosine (C), and Guanine (G).
From a digital storage point of view — as DNA is “digital” in its format — a base pair is equivalent to two bits of binary data, which can represent four possible states as follows:
00
01
10
11
In computer storage vernacular, a “byte” is eight bits of data, such as:
01011010
Four DNA base pairs, then, makes one byte of data.
Given that there are roughly 3 billion base pairs in the human genome, this equates to roughly about 750MB of data storage capacity.
It turns out this number is shockingly small. 750MB is smaller than the file of a typical modern video game. It’s smaller than a movie on a DVD, in fact. It’s so small that a typical miniature thumb drive you might buy at Best Buy can actually store over 20 times as much data (that’s merely a 16 GB thumb drive). You can buy a 16GB SD card right now on Amazon.com for a mere $12.
750MB of data is so small that no one can explain how it could possibly account for a human body with extraordinary complexity while somehow encompassing physical, structural, functional and behavioral inheritance as well.
To get a grasp of the complexity of the human body, realize that your body is made of 60 – 90trillion cells. Each cell is its own ecosystem with highly complex functions including cell energy production, waste removal, cell membrane function, the nucleus command control center, and so on.
Your body manufactures 10 million red blood cells every hour. It has a capacity to heal damaged tissues almost everywhere. Your skin and intestines are being slowly replaced with new cells every minute. Your immune system is incredibly complex and highly capable, representing the most advanced system of nanotechnology that modern science has ever witnessed.
On top of all this, you are born with innate behaviors and the ability to develop, all on your own, the behavioral skills to walk, talk, focus your eyes, digest foods, eliminate waste, sweat, breathe and much more. Meanwhile, your body accomplishes billions of chemical reactions every second without you even knowing it. Somehow, every cell, organ and organ system in your body knows what to do to keep you alive and functioning.
Your body and its functions are unimaginably complex. Simply cataloging the structure and function of all the cells in your body right now would take countless terabytes of data — more than a million times larger than “megabytes” of data.
Yet the entire human genome delivers only 750MB worth of data storage. Obviously, this is wholly insufficient to describe the entire structure, function and development of a human being. No matter how the desperate materialists try to keep us focused on human genes, it flat-out isn’t possible to store a full blueprint of the human form in 750MB of data.
The human genome, therefore, is not the entire blueprint of human development. Although some genes do obviously code for some physical characteristics (such as eye color), genes alone do not contain the full blueprint. There must be something else that also contributes morphological information in addition to DNA.
The Human Genome Project, to the shock of nearly all materialists, ultimately proved exactly the opposite of what scientists had hoped. It proved that genes alone do not explain inheritance.
The materialists were horrified by this finding. To this very day, they are pouring over human genome data, desperately trying to find some “meta data” that would explain all inheritance. What they refuse to acknowledge is that there is a non-physical field of inheritance patterns that functions as an overlay to the human genome, interacting with it and enhancing its scope with non-physical encoding of additional information needed to develop a complete human form.
That field is called the “morphic resonance” field, and it was proposed by one of the most brilliant, revolutionary scientific thinkers of our time, Rupert Sheldrake, a biologist and author of “Science Set Free.”
Morphic resonance fields infuriate materialists…
The idea of morphic resonance infuriates materialists — and nearly all modern-day scientists are materialists — because the presence of a non-physical field of information naturally leads to the most dangerous idea of all to materialist science: the idea of consciousness.
This idea that your body as a whole, as well as each cell in your body, can tap into a field of information which encodes the “memory” of what a human form is supposed to be threatens the very pillars of materialistic science, upon which nearly the entire pharmaceutical industry is based, by the way. This is why materialist scientists are desperately attempting to defend the human genome as the single source of all the information needed to develop a human body, even though the human genome clearly doesn’t have the storage capacity to represent an entire body (not to mention inherited physiological functions and behavioral inheritance).
Keep in mind that if you read about Rupert Sheldrake from any materialistic science website — including Scientific American which is 100% pro-Monsanto, pro-GMO and anti GMO labeling, by the way — you are going to read vicious attacks against Sheldrake from desperate materialists who brand morphic resonance as “magical thinking.”
This is especially comic, given that these same materialists believe the entire universe in which we live spontaneously appeared from nowhere without cause or reason through a process they call the “Big Bang.” Somehow, the big bang isn’t magical thinking to the materialists, but the idea of a non-physical field of inheritance is magical thinking. It’s almost like these people have never heard of gravity: yet another invisible field that affects all living things.
How does your hand know it’s a hand?
Another key problem with the theory of genetic inheritance is that even though all the cells across your body are supposed to contain the same exact genetic code, somehow the cells in your hand knew they were supposed to grow into a hand, not a foot or an ear, for example.
Conventional genetics has no explanation for this. How does a cell “know” it’s supposed to be a specialized cell functioning as a tiny part of the whole? If every blood cell in your body contains the DNA for your entire body, how does it “know” to form itself into a blood cells and not, for example, a skin cell?
Rupert Sheldrake’s morphic resonance explanation provides an answer. The cell taps into a knowledge field — a non-physical pattern blueprint — and through influence with that field, the cell knows to activate only the genes that code for it to form a blood cell. The local physical genes accomplish the protein coding, but the morphic resonance field directs the pattern of which genes to activate. This is how morphic fields interact with DNA.
The human genome, in other words, works hand in hand with a non-physical information field that keeps physical form development organized so that the resulting form is a human. The morphic resonance field “knows” the pattern of being human because it is a pattern that has been reinforced by billions of other humans who came before you and contributed to the resonance of the field.
This explains the missing link in DNA — the fact that DNA alone cannot store the entire blueprint of the human form. The master blueprint is actually found in the non-physical morphic field. Local DNA are simply “protein builders” that follow the morphic resonance blueprint.
Just like there is an energetic pattern for a human being, there’s also a different energetic template for an oak tree, and it overlays the genes from an oak tree seed, directing it to form a fully-grown oak tree. For every cell, every organ, every organ system and every life form on our planet (and across the universe), there is a morphic resonance field that provides the template overlay which affects local gene activation.
Keep in mind that Sheldrake’s theories absolute infuriate materialist scientists. The journal Nature actually suggested that Sheldrake should be burned at the stake… like a witch, I suppose. TED talks essentially banned Sheldrake from speaking because he dared mention the idea of “consciousness.”
Everywhere across the fatally closed-minded community of materialist science, Sheldrake is considered to be worse than a demon… he is a non-believer in the Church of Materialism! And there is no greater sin to today’s cult-like science community than non-belief in materialism.
This is why Sheldrake’s ideas will be viciously attacked, demonized and denied… up until the day they are finally embraced and accepted as the “new science of life.” In a hundred years, Sheldrake will likely be remembered as far more important to science than even Charles Darwin. His ideas are not merely revolutionary, but desperately needed to advance science beyond the limiting realm of materialism. If science does not expand its scope beyond chemical structures, it will never understand life and will always remain mystified and frustrated about why genes still don’t control much in the way of inheritance.
Watch for more coverage of Rupert Sheldrake here on Natural News, where our ideas are rooted in science yet not limited by the artificial confines of materialism. We also hope to interview Sheldrake soon and bring you the interview that TED won’t allow you to hear.
Beyond the debunked science, questions for faith believers…
1. Where is the gene for creativity? If creative works (songs, poems, fiction novels, etc.) are merely the work of mechanistic brains following genetic instructions, then all the lifelong works of creative individuals (musicians, artists, novelists, etc.) must somehow be encoded in the DNA before birth. Where is all this creativity encoded?
2. How does a blood cell know to make itself into a blood cell and not a skin cell?
3. Why is most physical inheritance unable to be traced to DNA? (The “heritability problem.”)
4. If there is not enough storage capacity in the human genome to fully describe the human form, then where does the rest of the blueprint come from?
5. Where is the genetic code for love, compassion and cooperation, without which human civilization never would have survived?
6. If human consciousness is an illusion, as materialists claim, then it can have no impact on human behavior, which is purely mechanistic, they insist. So then why did the “illusion of consciousness” evolve in human beings if it serves no purpose? This contradicts one of the more fundamental tenants of natural selection.
7. Are you, yourself, purely a mechanistic biological robot suffering under the illusion of consciousness? And if so, then why should we listen to anything you have to say in the first place?
A great tribute to the FAUX SCIENTIST, Bill Nye, and all of his communist, koolaid drinking sheep who believe the sky is falling.
via Walton And Johnson | KPRC AM 950 Together since 1983… No show has a more unique mix of “stream of consciousness,” opinionated and compelling talk, guests, musical elements, fictional characters, famous impersonations, Great skit writing and production coupled with powerful audience interaction.
Bill Nye became famous in the 1990s with a PBS kids’ show called Bill Nye The Science Guy. His new series for Netflix is called Bill Nye Saves the World.
See the difference there?
The title of the first show suggests objectivity. The title of the new show implies ideological activism with a touch of a messiah complex.
Any alleged “scientist” who claims that his main goal is to “save the world” has forfeited his right to be called a scientist. Same principle applies for journalists. If your goal is to uncover anything but the unvarnished truth—no matter where the truth may take you or how brutally it may undermine your ideological leanings—then you are starting off with answers rather than questions and have corrupted the entire process.
Take, for example, the ideologically loaded but intellectually vacant term of “climate change denier.” Also flung against Holocaust and vaccine skeptics, the term “denier” itself is a grossly dishonest construction—it implies that the “denier” agrees with the accuser but is lying about it. It starts from a premise of bad faith and eliminates the possibility that someone might simply disagree—or even have sincere questions.
Most dangerously for any true devotees of intellectual inquiry and the scientific method, it declares unequivocally that the matter is forever settled. Merely daring to question certain aspects of the Holocaust is illegal in 16 European countries. It is frequently suggested that parents who refuse to vaccinate their kids should also be jailed. And Bill Nye has publicly toyed with the idea of jailingclimate change skeptics. He recently told Tucker Carlson that there is to be no more questioning over whether “climate change”—which was called “global cooling” in the 1970s and then “global warming” until the embarrassing fact was revealed that average global temperatures stopped rising in 1997—is real and that humans are the primary cause of it:
It’s not an open question. It’s a settled question. Human activity is causing climate change.
“There is no such thing as ‘settled science.’ That itself is an unscientific notion.”
There is no such thing as “settled science.” That itself is an unscientific notion. There is always a possibility that key variables haven’t been considered and that new information could lead to entirely different conclusions. And if you think that people who disagree with you should be jailed, you are not a scientist, you’re a totalitarian.
Unlike the majority of people—who seem to allow their ideology to automatically form their opinions for them—I don’t have an opinion on the massively complicated topic of anthropogenic climate change because I readily admit I am not even remotely well-informed enough on the matter to venture an opinion without feeling like a moron about it. I will note that the Climategate controversy of 2009 made me slightly skeptical of the zealotry of those who’d wish to jail anyone that challenges the party line about it. And the mantra that 97% of scientists agree with the party line—a quotient bandied about by committed globalists such as Barack Obama and John Kerry—has been thoroughly eviscerated because it was based on a single flawed study that included even the “deniers” as part of the 97%.
The fact that over 31,000 scientists have signed a petition saying that humans aren’t causing global warming should cast at least a tinge of honest doubt about whether the matter is “settled.” So should Al Gore’s prediction that the North Pole’s ice cap would disappear by 2013, when the fact is that it has increased significantly in size since 2012. So should the fact that a hearty 95% of global-warming models have proved to be wrong.
Beyond all that, I will note that everyone I’ve ever seen who aggressively pushes the idea that man-made climate change will rapidly destroy the earth also insists that we’ll need a global governmental mechanism with a centralized taxing authority to combat it. In this case, I’m not talking about 97%—I’m talking about all of them. Therefore, it doesn’t seem entirely wackadoodle to me if I question whether global finance is using “climate change” as a ruse to consolidate global power.
…one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.
So try as I may, I cannot yet disentangle climate-change zealotry from statist fanaticism.
But Bill Nye Saves the World strays far afield of climate change into topics that are entirely ideological and speculative, yet are still framed as entirely “scientific.”
In an entirely barf-worthy dance routine called “Sex Junk,” Nye has actress Rachel Bloom thrusting her chubby rump around in an attempt to dismiss the notion of sexual dimorphism, which was almost universally accepted as scientific until, oh, about three weeks ago. In the fourth season of Bill Nye The Science Guy, Nye himself committed the hate crime of alleging that there are two genders and that they are determined by whether one is born with XX or XY chromosomes. Apparently at some point, Nye became a trans-scientist.
In a perhaps even creepier animation called “Ice Cream Sexuality” on Bill Nye Saves the World, the vanilla ice-cream cone stands as a thinly veiled uptight white Christian male who is eventually seduced by differently flavored cones into a multi-racial, multi-gender ice-cream orgy.
In another segment, a male Indian staff writerchides the nearly all-white audience for culturally appropriating Eastern religious symbols, and they gleefully lap up his condescending scolds like the eager power bottoms they are.
Pardon me for noticing, but what the fuck does any of that have to do with science?
Bill Nye—whose only scientific credential, if you could even call it that, is a Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering—isn’t the only one who’s guilty of injecting progressive ideology into science. Back in January, the organizers for last week’s March for Science in DC tweeted:
The tweet was accompanied with a cute little black power fist and a rainbow icon.
Again, try not to send me to a gulag for pointing this out, but none of those topics is even remotely related to science. They are all purely ideological and hyper-emotional.
Amusingly, the fact that Nye has stage-dived right into the progressive shark tank is starting to bite him in the posterior. When he was originally announced as one of the star performers in the March for Science, a loud squalling chorus of protest erupted because he’s a white male, and as everyone knows, white males are overrepresented in science not because they’re good at it, but because they’re racist and sexist. So despite his abject kowtowing to anti-scientific progressive delusions, the swelling rainbow masses who yearn to breathe free still see him as nothing more than Bill Nye the White Guy.
The Internet of Things That Can Be Hacked grows daily. Lightbulbs, trucks, and fridges all have computers inside them now, and all have been hacked by someone. But at least you don’t put those inside your body.
The makers of the We-Vibe don’t admit any wrongdoing. But they will pay $3.75 million after allegations that the app was collecting user’s “highly sensitive information.”
Two years ago, someone had the good idea to put a bluetooth connection inside a vibrator, and the We-Vibe 4 Plus was born. The vibrator can connect with a smartphone app that its makers say “allows couples to keep their flame ignited – together or apart”: that is, it can be controlled remotely, while, say, making a video call.
Other vibrator manufactures are also using the vulnerable app, but have yet to be targeted by legal actions. If you own any bluetooth connected device, beware!
At the Def Con hacking conference in Las Vegas, two independent hackers from New Zealand, who go by the handles goldfisk and follower, revealed that the way the vibrator speaks with its controlling app isn’t really secure at all – making it possible to remotely seize control of the vibrator and activate it at will.
In their talk, Hacking the Internet of Vibrating Things, Follower argued that despite titters at the back of the room, the security of a sex toy should be taken seriously. “The company that makes this vibrator, Standard Innovation: They have over 2 million people using their devices, so what’s at stake is 2 million people.”
“A lot of people in the past have said it’s not really a serious issue,” he added, “but if you come back to the fact that we’re talking about people, unwanted activation of a vibrator is potentially sexual assault.”
Potentially worse still, the pair discovered that the app itself was phoning home, letting the manufacturer discover some very intimate information about users.
And, oh boy, did they collect some sexy details, the Register reported — like what time and how intense you like it and the temperature of the device. They even found the vibration modes you prefer: With the We-Vibe 4 Plus, there are 10 modes, but you can also create your own custom vibe. Your personally blended mix of pulse, wave, wave, pulse, tide, bounce, cha-cha-cha could be in the hands of hackers.
The lawyers for the anonymous plaintiffs contended that the app, “incredibly,” collected users’ email addresses, allowing the company “to link the usage information to specific customer accounts.”
Customers’ email addresses and usage data were transmitted to the company’s Canadian servers, the lawsuit alleges. When a We-Vibe was remotely linked to a partner, the connection was described as “secure,” but some information was also routed through We-Connect and collected, the lawsuit says.
The unhappy users allege in their lawsuit that they never agreed to the collection of this data. Standard Innovations maintains that users “consented to the conduct alleged” — but instead of taking the case to court, the company agreed to settle.
An estimated 300,000 people bought the Bluetooth-enabled devices.
Under the terms of the settlement, anyone who bought an app-enabled vibrator can receive up to $199 dollars; anyone who actually connected it to the app can collect up to $10,000. The actual amount paid out will depend on how many people file claims; the company estimates people who bought the app will get around $40, and people who used the app around $500.
The high-end vibrators cost between $119 and $199, if purchased through the We-Vibe website.
Standard Innovation also agreed to stop collecting users’ email addresses and to update its privacy notice to be clearer about how data is collected.
In a statement, Standard Innovation called the settlement “fair and reasonable.”
Getting off while plugged in? You might want to make sure your hardware is protected.
Since its inscription, the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution has proven problematic. Weapons are not what they were in the 18th century and neither are people — at least in the lifestyle sense. Thankfully, we have an entire branch of government dedicated to resolving intractable questions into incomprehensible answers. The court has routinely ruled that the Second Amendment does not grant an absolute right to weapon ownership, but that it does grant Americans the right to — within statutes determined by states — own guns. But what about laser guns?
If that sounds like a flippant question, it isn’t. Last month, engineers from Lockheed Martin shot a hole in a Ford F-150 from a mile away. They were working on hardware to compete in the nascent laser weapons market against other offerings from Northrop Grumman. These weapons are certainly traditional in their point-and-shoot forms, but things are never simple when it comes to what are arguably the 27 most controversial words in American law.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
That’s not exactly a well-crafted sentence by modern standards, and so not exactly a perspicuous principle. It’s not clear whether it’s intended to grant members of a militia the right to keep and bear arms, or, instead, to grant all U.S. citizens the right to keep and bear arms. There is no mention of lasers. Let’s see if the justices can clear it up.
In 2008, the Supreme Court decided a case that directly informs our current inquiry. District of Columbia v. Heller sought to settle whether a D.C. “prohibition on the possession of usable handguns in the home” was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled, with five votes against four, that the prohibition was unconstitutional. The late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority’s opinion to explain the decision, and now-retired Justice John Paul Stevens penned the dissent.
The majority opinion broke down the amendment into a prefatory (introductory) clause and an operative clause. The operative clause states that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” while the prefatory clause introduces and accounts for that dictum. In short, then, the majority opinion argued that “the people” was intended to mean all U.S. citizens, just as elsewhere in the Constitution “the people” represented all U.S. citizens.
The dissent disagreed, arguing that this so-called prefatory clause limits who “the people” of the operative clause encompasses. In other words, “the people,” insofar as they are connected to the well regulated militia, may “keep and bear arms.”
So far, so simple. Now let’s talk about arms.
Scalia’s written opinion argued that our interpretation of what constitutes “arms” can be no different than what the Founding Fathers intended. “The 18th-century meaning is no different from the meaning today,” Scalia wrote. “The term was applied, then as now, to weapons that were not specifically designed for military use and were not employed in a military capacity.” No matter that the weapons of today do not resemble the weapons of yore: Scalia argued that we cannot pick and choose which constitutional rights remain applicable in modern times and which do not.
“We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications… and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search… the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.”
No less, Scalia agreed with the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Miller, a 1939 case that ruled sawed-off shotguns — being, as they are, inessential to the maintenance of a well regulated militia — were not protected by the Second Amendment.
“Miller said… that the sorts of weapons protected were those ‘in common use at the time.’ We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’”
Sawed-off shotguns were designated as Title II weapons — along with machine guns and crazy explosives — under 1968’s Gun Control Act, which made them strictly regulated. People who wanted to own these highly destructive weapons still could own them, but had to register them with the federal government, pay a tax, and be approved.
Later, he goes on:
“It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.”
Not looking good for laser guns. Though laser guns are militarily effective, and would be extraordinarily “useful against modern-day bombers and tanks” — cf. Air Force fighter jets equipped with laser guns to burn through targets — they’d definitely fall into the “M-16 rifles and the like” category. They’re most certainly “dangerous and unusual weapons,” and, as such — unlike handguns — could still be prohibited.
In addition, laser guns would likely be classified as Title II weapons after some legal tinkering. The relevant U.S Code definition, 26 U.S.C §5845, states that a shot can be “discharged through the energy of an explosive” within “any other weapon” not subjected to additional restriction. Lasers are not discharged from explosions — not as such.
Title II weapons, even in originalists’ eyes and despite their military applications, can be broadly controlled and outright restricted. The Second Amendment may federally uphold your right to arm yourself, but you still can’t own a sawed-off shotgun and, unless things go south in a hurry, you’ll probably never own a laser gun.
The new gun allows its owner to “carry with confidence, conceal in style,” the Minnesota startup’s website reads. The product could be seen on the site with an unfolding handle revealing a trigger and muzzles for the bullets where headphones would usually plug in.
“That’s where Ideal Conceal comes in, smart phones are EVERYWHERE, so your new pistol will easily blend in with today’s environment. In its locked position it will be virtually undetectable because it hides in plain sight.”
Will we not have cops drawing their weapons when someone pull out a smart phone to “shoot” a video of them? The implications are staggering!
Ideal Conceal CEO Kirk Kjellberg told the us that the lightweight invention aids gun owners hoping to avoid a Second Amendment debate.
“Part of what this allows people to do is carry a weapon without engaging in that conversation,” Kjellberg said. “This way, you don’t have to have a .38 or .44 strapped to your waist, you can carry it in your front pocket.
The smart phone shaped gun can hold two bullets. It cannot be fired while in the closed position.
CEO Kirk Kjellberg tells NBC affiliate he got the idea for the gun at a restaurant, after getting his permit to carry — and quickly realizing he’d like to be more concealed.
“This little kid says, ‘Mommy, Mommy, that man’s got a gun,’ so the whole restaurant looks at you like you’re about to shoot the place up,” Kjellberg said. “So I thought to myself there’s got to be another way to be able to carry without bothering other people.”
The company tells us the gun will cost $395 when it goes on sale later this year. Kjellberg says he’s already received 2,500 emails from people who want to buy one.
Critics of the gun argue that a regular smart phone is already much more useful, and that there are already several apps if one wants a pocket-friendly means of killing.
Remember those multiple ocurrances of Russian “bombers” that came within 50 miles of out Western Coast, that we took no apparent action against?
How about the earthquake “swarms” that have been taking place in that half of the country, supposed caused by “fracking?”
Quite possibly the end of the world as we know it?
Well, it appears they are connected, and our Government totally lied to us again about what was going on. They were in on the mysterious Soviet “invasion or our airspace” incident.
US officials, it should be noted, characterized this purely scientific mission as a “bombing run” that came within 50 miles of California, but which their Air Forces were able to repel by their launching of F-15 fighter jets.
This report, however, states that this scientific mission was necessitated by a “severe mysterious magnetic anomaly” detected by the Kosmos 2473 satellite on 3 June occurring in the Yellowstone region of the Western United States which resulted in what is called an “earthquake swarm.”
The information relating to the linking of these two “events”, this report says, was further verified by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) magnetic anomaly maps and data for North America showing a strange magnetic “disturbance/ripple” emanating from Brooks Range and ending at Yellowstone on 3 June, both of these areas, it is important to note, being part of the Rocky Mountains that stretch more than 4,830 km (3,000 miles) from the northernmost part of British Columbia, in western Canada, to New Mexico, in the southwestern United States.
Of grave concern to Russian military authorities relating to these “events”, General Bondarev says in his report, was the “catastrophic effect” they had on the advanced “magnetoception” inertial navigation systems employed by many US-NATO-Russian warplanes which use these highly sophisticated aircraft flight devices.
Though no Russia military aircraft were near the “disturbed magnetic zone” emanating our from Yellowstone on 3 June, this report says, two US military aircraft were at its “boundaries” in the Southern California region on 4 June while this “event” was still “active” causing them both to crash.
The two US fighter jets crashing on 4 June, this report continues, were identified as a US Navy F-A-183 that went down when the pilot was attempting to land aboard the carrier Carl Vinson, and a US Marine Harrier AV-8B jet that crashed into a residential community in Imperial, about 90 miles east of San Diego, both of them occurring within hours of each other.
This report notes that no civilian aircraft would have been affected by this “magnetic anomaly” as only the most advanced military aircraft employ these “geomagnetic-satellite” coordinated flight systems which enable them to “hug the terrain” not unlike the magnetic systems used by birds and insects to navigate.
Russian concerns relating to “magnetic anomalies”, it is important to note, are related to the rapidly shifting north magnetic pole which since 2005 has been moving at a rate of 40 kilometers (25 miles) a year from Arctic Canada toward Siberia.
Frightening independent research from last year (2013) further warns that this shift is still picking up speed and according to this researcher should reach Siberia in at least within 2 years. [See video HERE(banned in US)]
One of the effects of the rapidly shifting magnetic north pole being noticed the most, this report notes, are the airport runway systems being disrupted because of it, and as we can read one such 2011 example which occurred in the US:
“Tampa International Airport was forced to readjust its runways Thursday to account for the movement of the Earth’s magnetic fields, information that pilots rely upon to navigate planes. Thanks to the fluctuations in the force, the airport has closed its primary runway until Jan. 13 to change taxiway signs to account for the shift, the Federal Aviation Administration said.
The poles are generated by movements within the Earth’s inner and outer cores, though the exact process isn’t exactly understood. They’re also constantly in flux, moving a few degrees every year, but the changes are almost never of such a magnitude that runways require adjusting, said Paul Takemoto, a spokesman for the FAA.”
The most chilling aspects of General Bondarev’s report relating to these “events” are the equations he uses in postulating that what is now occurring in North America with these “mysterious magnetic anomalies” occurring over a large expanse of the Rocky Mountains, and when combined with the rapidly shifting magnetic north pole and growing evidence of global climate change, give “huge credibility” to what is called “The Expanding Earth Theory”.
Or in simple terms, this report ends, “We may be on the verge of a catastrophic North American “event” that could possibly change the world forever, we should be prepared.”
And besides the fault lines running up and down the West coast, here is the primary concern, the Yellowstone Supervolcano!
Yellowstone National Park is actually an active supervolcano? Yes, it is, and it is HUGE!
As you walk around the park you may think: “I don’t see any volcanos?!” That’s because much of the entire park is a volcano – and the bubbling geysers and hot springs are an indication of the churning activity below the surface.
Yellowstone Supervolcano
The term “supervolcano” implies an eruption of magnitude 8 on the Volcano Explosivity Index, indicating an eruption of more than 1,000 cubic kilometers (250 cubic miles) of magma. Yellowstone has had at least three such eruptions: The three eruptions, 2.1 million years ago, 1.2 million years ago and 640,000 years ago, were about 6,000, 700 and 2,500 times larger than the May 18, 1980 eruption of Mt. St. Helens in Washington State.
Yellowstone Caldera
The last time the Yellowstone supervolcano erupted was 640,000+ years ago. The Yellowstone eruption area collapsed upon itself, creating a sunken giant crater or caldera 1,500 square miles in area. The magmatic heat powering that eruption (and two others, dating back 2.1 million years) still powers the park’s famous geysers, hot springs, fumaroles, and mud pots.
Here’s the kicker, recent discoveries have shown us that Yellowstone’s magma reserves are many magnitudes greater than previously thought, say scientists from the University of Utah.
Underneath the national park’s attractions and walking paths is enough hot rock to fill the Grand Canyon nearly 14 times over. Most of it is in a newly discovered magma reservoir, which the scientists featured in a study published on Thursday in the journal Science.
It may help scientists better understand why Yellowstone’s previous eruptions, in prehistoric times, were some of Earth’s largest explosions in the last few million years.
Even if the next explosion is many thousands of years away, Yellowstone’s cavernous heat tanks poke up an occasionally surprise. The last lava flow was some 70,000 years ago, USGS says.
But more recently in 2003, ground temperatures rose high enough to dry out geysers and boil the sap in some trees. A few inches under the surface, thermometers recorded a temperature of 200 degrees Fahrenheit — nearly hot enough to boil water.
So, national park authorities closed Yellowstone to keep people from burning their feet — or basting their tires on melting roads.
Beneath the spectacular beauty of Yellowstone National Park lies a ticking time bomb, a supervolcano that’s overdue for its next eruption. When that day inevitably comes, it will trigger the end of civilization as we know it. See how recent earthquake swarms and other signals of activity have put scientists on high alert for a large-scale super volcanic eruption. Then, witness the worldwide effects of this cataclysmic eruption, which experts predict will produce energy equivalent to the detonation of 1,000 nuclear bombs.
What’s the catch to this story? Here’s where it gets not good!
It appears that the Russians had ulterior motives in using their equipment to help study this and share the information.
The Russian president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems outlined two geophysically weak US regions to attack in order to combat NATO’s aggression toward Russia.
Sivkov, listed as a “Docter of Military Sciences,” described scenarios that involved dropping a nuclear weapon near Yellowstone’s supervolcano or the San Andreas Fault.
The Russian president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems outlined two geophysically weak US regions to attack in order to combat NATO’s aggression toward Russia.
Sivkov, listed as a “Docter of Military Sciences,” described scenarios that involved dropping a nuclear weapon near Yellowstone’s supervolcano or the San Andreas Fault.
Catalyze the eruption of Yellowstone’s supervolcano
In the past 2.1 million years, Yellowstone’s volcano has violently erupted three times and “blanketed parts of the North American continent with ash and debris,” according to the US Geological Survey.
Some scientists argue that Yellowstone’s active supervolcano is long overdue for a colossal eruption.
“Geologists believe that the Yellowstone supervolcano could explode at any moment. There are signs of growing activity there. Therefore it suffices to push the relatively small, for example the impact of the munition megaton class to initiate an eruption. The consequences will be catastrophic for the United States, a country just disappears,” he said, according to atranslation by Sydney Morning Herald.
According to a Discovery Channel Documentary, an eruption of this magnitude would bury North America, drape the atmosphere in a sulfur haze, dim sunlight, and plunge the world into a volcanic winter.
Trigger a mega tsunami to ruin America’s infrastructure
Another option would be to drop a nuclear bomb near California’s San Andreas Fault. “A detonation of a nuclear weapon there can trigger catastrophic events like a coast-scale tsunami which can completely destroy the infrastructure of the United States,” he said, according to the Sydney Morning Herald’s translation.
Putin Once Casually Said He Could Destroy America In A Half-Hour
Putin hosted a lavish banquet at New Century, Moscow’s richest equestrian club, for members of the Valdai Club and distinguished academics and journalists from around the world.
Putin addressed his guests on topics ranging from the “Russian government’s loss of public trust to his own indispensable leadership.”
He later directed his focus on the US and addressed the Americans in attendance, “You ask me whether we are going to change,” he said. “The ball is in your court. Will you change?”
He went on to express his disapproval of US plans to build a missile-defense system that he believed would pose a deliberate threat to Russia’s national security.
Putin then added that the only reason the US had any interest in relations with Moscow was that Russia was the only country that could “destroy America in half an hour or less.”
Schoen and Kaylan conclude, “It would be a difficult to find a statement more revealing about Putin’s true position regarding the United States.”
The Largest Nuclear Bomb Ever:
Russian Tsar Bomba
Nuclear Weapons: A Time-Lapse History in 4 Minutes…
Striving for Armageddon–The Increasing Danger of a Possible Nuclear World Extinction
“The fact of the matter is that it is completely impossible to fight and win a nuclear war because the effects of nuclear weapons are so large and so indiscriminate that the only possible outcome of any strategy would be indistinguishable from attacks aimed at killing as many people as possible. It doesn’t matter what your strategy is, if you use these things that’s the outcome.”
Professor Ted Postol, Professor Emeritus of Science, Technology, and National Security Policy at MIT. [From the MIT Science, Technology and Global Security Working Group page: Prior to coming to MIT in 1989, he worked as an analyst at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and as a science and policy advisor to the Chief of Naval Operations. He has received the American Physical Society’s Leo Szilard Award in 1990 for “incisive technical analysis of national security issues that have been vital for informing the public policy debate” and the Hilliard Roderick Prize in Science, Arms Control, and International Security from the American Association for the Advancement of Science for “outstanding contributions that advance our understanding of issues related to arms control and international security.” In 2001 he received the Norbert Wiener Prize from Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility for uncovering numerous and important false claims about missile defenses and in 2005 was awarded the Whistleblower Award by the Federation of German Scientists and the German Section of the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms. His current research includes work on ballistic missile defense technologies, fraud in the U.S. missile defense program, and reducing nuclear dangers in South Asia as well as those due to the deteriorating Russian nuclear infrastructure.
The question I am raising today is whether or not the danger of an accidental nuclear war between The United States and Russia is higher today than it was at most times during the Cold War. The answer to this question is unknowable using quantitative means, but I believe the information we have points strongly to the conclusion that the danger of nuclear war is now considerably higher than it was during most of the time we now call the Cold War.
The reasons for this are both immediate and historic. If we are to be able to reduce the chances of an event that could well result in the complete destruction of the world we know, we need to confront and understand why we are now in our current predicament so we can begin to find ways to back away from this brink.
Although I will focus here on the technical aspects of this dangerous situation, the circumstances that have led to it have both political and technical dimensions.
On the political side, the relationship between Russia and the United States is spiraling downward creating tensions that are higher than at most times during the Cold War. A large part of this downward spiral is due to the unwise Russian reaction to what has certainly been a much more unwise 25 year long period of hostile US actions towards Russia.
Basically, the United States has treated Russia like a defeated and reviled foe during this 25 year period—and I have many personal experiences I could share with the audience on this. Although the analogy is far from perfect, it is as if the mistakes that are widely ascribed to the Treaty of Versailles after the end of the First World War have been repeated as if there is no memory of the consequences.
In addition, US and Western diplomacy has treated legitimate Russian concerns about security in the area they call the “near Russia” region (or “near Russia” zone) as if none of Russian concerns have any merit.
If you disagree with this assessment—and I know a lot of people who do, partly because of the circles I move in—consider how the United States would react if Russia mounted a major effort to influence the domestic politics of Panama, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Mexico by forming military alliances that were accompanied by commitments to sell arms and to provide military support to the governments of these countries.
There are experts who have a far better knowledge of the political ins and outs of Russia’s relationship with the West than I do, and since I am a technical expert I want to focus on the technical problems that clearly and unambiguously greatly increase the chances of an accidental war that could lead to the US and Russian central strategic nuclear forces becoming engaged. So this is where I will focus my basic remarks.
First of all, I need to make it clear to everyone in this audience that the Russians have an extremely fragile early warning system. Unlike the United States, they have been unable to build a working space-based early warning system. They simply do not have one.
The lack of a capable Russian early warning system is one of the greatest dangers to the United States. You don’t have to be worried about Russia—you ought to worry about the United States. Yet the US government—and I have had many, fruitless attempts to try to get this matter addressed—has done nothing at all to think about the ways to address this problem. In fact the US government has mostly spent its effort, at least during the Clinton Administration—now they don’t even think about it—making believe that they were doing something about it, when in fact they weren’t. And I have lots of proof of that.
The ability to see the launch of ballistic missiles from space makes it possible to have the longest warning time of ballistic missile attack that is possible. It is a general misconception that the extra warning time, provided by these space-based early warning systems, is the most important contribution to US security that these systems provide. This is actually not the case.
The most important contribution of space-based early warning systems is general information about the launch of ballistic missiles on the global scale.
The only country in the world that has some capability to destroy parts of US nuclear strike systems is Russia. Any attack from Russia aimed at destroying, or trying to destroy, US counter strike capability would have to be executed as a massive coordinated strike. Our current space-based infrared systems would make it possible,within less than a minute, to know whether or not such a strike is underway. So basically it’s situational awareness.
Since the Russians have no space-based early warning system, they can only observe events with radars. And the Russians have worked very hard on their radar early warning system.
Radars are limited to line-of-sight.
Since the Earth is round, line-of-sight limits severely constrain what these radars can see. That is, the line-of-sight limitation does not allow the radars to see events that occur below the earth horizon. This was exactly the limitation that led to a false alert of the Russian early warning system in 1995. [See “False alarm, nuclear danger – The radar and satellite networks meant to warn Russia of the imminence of a missile attack are breaking down, heightening the risk of accidental nuclear war,” by Geoffrey Forden, Pavel Podvig and Theodore A. Postol, IEEE Spectrum, March 2000, V37, Number 3.]
The character of that false alert made it appear that the United States might have been making a nuclear precursor attack against Russia. At the time of this potential precursor attack, there was no tension between Russia and the United States. However, because the Russians could not see over the horizon, they had to guess that what they were observing was not what it appeared to be.
If such an event occurred today, especially if there were an intensified crisis over the Crimea, Ukraine, Georgia, or whatever, the assessment of Russian military and political leaders that no attack was underway would be much more difficult to settle on.
One can be sure that the Russian military is closely following this US technical effort. In fact I have had direct communications with a former chief of the general staff of the Russian strategic rocket forces, directly confirming that there is an active area of research and monitoring by Russian military analysts. This, of course, is absolutely of no surprise.
The products of these analyses are certainly sent up to the highest levels of Russian government. In particular, Russia now has a leader who has a very substantial background in security matters. Whether or not one dislikes or admires Mr. Putin, it is undeniable that he has an extensive interest and concerns in Russia’s security posture.
So we now have a situation where the political relationship has spiraled downward, the US relentless preoccupation with building nuclear war fighting machines is well analyzed and understood by the Russian political leadership, and the Russian early warning system is wholly inadequate for providing the kind of reliable and unambiguous data that could assure Russian political leadership that they are not under attack in certain ambiguous situations.
Hence, I conclude that the chances of an accident that could lead to the launch of Russian nuclear forces is now at least as likely as it was during the Cold War, and in my view, it is probably higher than it was during most, although not all, of the time we call the Cold War.
I would like to finish this discussion by changing direction a bit, and show you how US and Russian nuclear war planners see the world relative to the actual realities. This is of vital importance that I think all of you should understand.
The US is striving for greater accuracy in delivering nuclear warheads. The question a reasonable person might ask is, Why? These weapons are so destructive.
The first problem is that nuclear war fighters treat nuclear weapons as if they are instruments of conventional warfare that can be used in scaled up versions of conventional wars.
This conventionalization of nuclear war planning is a product of the Cold War and is still being pursued by the technical efforts within the United States, and with less success, but with energy, within Russia as well. It is derived from a profoundly false belief that a nuclear war would have military objectives no different from that of a conventional war.
In conventional warfare each adversary tries to take advantage of confusion and chaos to isolate and destroy an enemy’s forces piece by piece. By concentrating superior forces against weaker enemy forces, one can destroy the enemy forces so quickly that they cannot do nearly as much damage in return. So you really want to isolate the force and just chomp them up.
In order to achieve this goal when fighting an adversary who is roughly the same size and capability, military planners try to find ways to concentrate their forces so that they can locally have numerical and firepower superiority. In order to do this, it is critical to be able to disrupt or destroy an enemy’s command structure, communications, and mobility. This is generally achieved by attacking command and control nodes, bridges, railheads, and the like.
If this goal is achieved, it is then possible for a skillfully commanded military force to take advantage of the chaos and disorder so as to crush an equally capable enemy force by destroying it piece by piece.
Could I please have the first slide, please?
Let me show you what a Russian nuclear war-fighting plan might look like, which is simply a mirror of US nuclear war plans. This is a notional plan. This is by no means real. Although it could be certainly real and worse.
This slide shows how a nuclear war fighter might think about a target area like New York City. The war fighter would first identify targets that are important for paralyzing the enemy’s ability to fight. These targets would include bridges, communication centers, railheads, political and military leadership and command centers.
What the planner would do is to identify these targets they want to destroy. Bear in mind they’re thinking of these weapons like they are conventional instruments of conventional war. Particular targets can be very hard to blast if you’re talking about destroying them physically in terms of just breaking them up into pieces. You may not need to do that but that’s what the planners think in terms of.
So for example if you had some port facilities here you might put a nuclear weapon on this port facility because docks, dock facilities require tremendous amounts of over-pressure—blast pressure—to destroy them.
You might have a Command Center under the World Trade Center; you see that little circle there shows the lethal range from the point of view of the war planner because this shelter is underneath the Trade Center and you need to bring tremendous amounts of blast to collapse the internal structure. I’m not saying this is realistic, I’m just telling you…
Then you have all these bridges—the bridges of course are points where mobility would allow your enemy to move forces in some kind of fictitious conventional war. You might have a railhead, for example, at Grand Central Station. You might have a political leadership target at Gracie Manor. And so on.
So you could have a whole bunch of targets that you could well find you need to service (in the words of the way the nuclear planners think) relative to the situation we actually face.
Within the mythology of nuclear war fighting, the elimination of these targets would reduce the enemy’s ability to move equipment, communicate, coordinate, so you can basically eliminate their ability to fight back.
The net result is that many additional warheads need to be targeted for redundancy since some of the number of warheads can be expected to fail during flight. All in all it is easy to see how a large number of warheads could be needed. Basically you need to destroy these targets, they’re very hard. And also you need to assure that they’re destroyed which means you have to have redundancy.
This is why targets need to be specifically identified and often attacked with individual nuclear weapons. In the case of targets that are very hard, individual weapons need to be targeted on each installation of concern.
To give you a concrete example that is anchored in history, Hiroshima was destroyed by a single nuclear weapon that had a yield of roughly 12.5 kilotons. In 1960, George Kistiakowsky (who was then a science advisor to President Eisenhower) went out to Strategic Air Command and looked at what they were doing. One of the things he did was he asked for information about how the US was targeting a Russian city that was about the size as Hiroshima, just to get an example.
At that time the nuclear war plans called for a single 4.5 megaton bomb followed by three 1.1 megaton bombs for the attack on this Hiroshima-size city.
To put this in perspective, they committed 7,500 kilotons to an attack on a city that had been destroyed only 15 years earlier by a single 12.5 kiloton weapon (600 times more ordnance). That’s where the idea of overkill begins to make sense.
Now part of the rationale for all the extra ordnance, was to gain assuredness that the target would be hit by at least several of these nuclear weapons.
Another part of the rationale was to assure that each of the individual targets of interest within the city were adequately damaged. Having a high damage level is an extremely important part of nuclear war planning psychology. This leads to these very large numbers. The next slide is aimed at showing the actual physical scale of events.
In order to get a sense of the reality of the situation, I have put together a diagram—you’ll see this (probably Steven will show the same one)—I chose an 800 kilton warhead because Steven Starr, wisely, chose a warhead that is standard in the Russian arsenal. [See: “What would happen if an 800-kiloton nuclear warhead detonated above midtown Manhattan?” by Steven Starr, Lynn Eden, Theodore A. Postol, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist, February 25, 2015] And basically the scale is about a mile. Steven will be giving a talk on nuclear weapons effects later, so all I want to illustrate here is scale.
Notice here—these lines show you the accuracy—the upper line shows you the accuracy that’s currently achievable with US Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs)—it’s a circle of diameter about 600 feet. They are working very hard to get down to a circle of about 400 feet with the nuclear modernization program.
The next slide shows the fireball from a nuclear explosion. The fireball from an 800 kiloton warhead is simply a bubble of superheated air created by the energy initially deposited into the surrounding air by a nuclear explosion. In this case the fireball is shown at about one second during its evolution. It is roughly 1 mile in diameter and it is radiating light and heat at a rate roughly 3 times that of the equivalent surface area of the sun.
To give you a sense of the actual physical effects, this shows you the fireball from a nuclear explosion of 800 kilotons over this area. Down here I’ve just shown a white, semi-transparent cloud to emphasize that the light and heat coming out of this fireball is tremendously large. It’s about 2.5 to 3 times the light and heat coming out of the equivalent surface of the Sun. Of course the Sun heats the Earth from 90 million miles pretty effectively and of course this detonation is very close.
What happens is, the amount of light and heat from the fireball is so intense that stone surfaces literally will shatter from the heating rate. It will thermally disintegrate—not necessarily burn, but thermally disintegrate. Metal and roads will melt or evaporate and essentially set anything combustible on fire within a few miles of the detonation point. Of course you would not be able to see through this haze in this depiction. It is just there to highlight the surfaces on Earth underneath the blast.
It will be intense enough that at five or six or more miles from the detonation point, it will set so many fires that a firestorm in all areas will follow.
Here is a depiction of what happens 30 or 40 seconds after the fireball shown previously. The fireball hasn’t begun to rise yet—it will buoyantly rise to a tremendous height. What happens is the fireball initially acts like a fast moving piston—it is simply super-heated air from the deposition of energy from the exploding nuclear weapon. It acts like a fast moving piston on the surrounding air, causing a shockwave.
[In this next slide] The shockwave reaches the ground and then is reflected from the ground. So you have a reflected and primary shock. You have a pressure wave of enormous intensity and physical length, physical width, and you have very high winds that knock down structures and lift large amounts of target debris into the air. You can see this debris carried into the air in the form of the pedestal and the debris cloud.
[next slide] Eventually, a counter-intuitive process happens. Eventually the fireball will rise buoyantly to an altitude of maybe five miles before it stabilizes. During the process of rising it creates gigantic after winds on the ground of roughly 200 to 300 miles per hour, internal, just from the sucking action of this rising fireball that move inward rather than outward.
So these are the effects associated with a single nuclear weapon – which raises the question why do you need all this accuracy?
It shows the objectives of the US nuclear force modernization program. The force modernization program is almost solely aimed at making it more feasible for the war fighters to execute their imagined attack plan against New York City.
If this has the appearance of being completely insane and disconnected from any plausible reality, I have achieved my goal here today.
The fact of the matter is that it is completely impossible to fight and win a nuclear war because the effects of nuclear weapons are so large and so indiscriminate that the only possible outcome of any strategy would be indistinguishable from attacks aimed at killing as many people as possible. It doesn’t matter what your strategy is, if you use these things that’s the outcome.
Yet US nuclear war planning treats this totally fraudulent theory of war fighting as if it is the goal of US forces.
So this brings us back to the question of deterrence. And I’ll end here.
If the only realistic hope of deterring potential adversaries is by threatening them with the physical and socially mortal consequences of reprisal, then although this option may be extremely uncomfortable for many of us, it is all that we have. That’s what it boils down to.
Striving to be able to do more only creates the appearance that you think you can fight and win a war against a potential adversary – in this case we’re talking about Russia.
The net result is that the Russians have no choice but to wonder what the United States might do in a crisis. The Russians have a substantial fraction of vulnerable nuclear forces, and they do not have the early warning capability to assure themselves that these forces are not being attacked.
This is not a situation that should make anybody in this room comfortable.
It increases the chances that a horror beyond existential experience could result from simple human error.
The idea that by continuing to raise the level of threat against Russia via the kinds of improvements that are now being implemented in the US nuclear force modernization program might well be counted as possibly the most dangerous insanity in human history.
icon at the upper right, to explore more of Halls Of Karma.
available at Amazon!
available at Amazon!
HALLS OF KARMA 
You must be logged in to post a comment.