'Plain Torture'

Plain torture.

For the record.

In 3 days 2 of my bank cards have disappeared from my wallet, one left, for now.
No access to 1 account. ( and for sure, haven't 'lost' them, or left them in some place)


Update 31-01-2020.


Yesterday I searched everywhere for the last disappeared bank card: in my wallet first, of course; thoroughly, then on the table: in the pockets of my coats: thoroughly; in my bedroom; etc.etc: nothing; so I blocked the card online, as I did a day before with the other 'lost' bank card.

Today I put on my coat, put the shopping list in my pocket (which I had searched thoroughly) and there is the last 'lost' bank card: No surprise to me. Can't use it anymore; have to wait 4 days for the new one to arrive.

This morning, early, I went to the kitchen for a moment: just before I put my e-cigaret under the bedcover, after a few minutes I went back to bed: took the E-cigaret from under the bedcover:  Oh surprise: find the tank ( which you have to fill with the e-liquid) opened; it was closed before.
 This particular E-cigaret is difficult to open: you have to push a small button and at the same time pull the 'cover' backward, really not so easy, very safe, it never could open without this operation.
So I threw away the e-liquid that was still in and filled the tank again; precaution.

'Scepticism': Scientific dicoveries and insights considered 'Ímpossible'.

On this blog I want to share some articles, (links);
  a brief summary of scientific discoveries, insights that previously were considered to be 'Impossible';  madness, pseudoscience, etc., just as well as some scientific insights that later were declared as 'false', or were 'debunked'. ( some of them  are repeated in the different articles below).

Sometimes theories from the past are resurrected and remodelled.

 They briefly show a.o. the relativity of a lot of actual or past scientific insights, ideas, knowledge, theories en general and  some theories or insights (and consensuses) have been and are being highlighted  because of a.o. convenience in society.




RIDICULED DISCOVERIES, VINDICATED MAVERICKS,

http://www.amasci.com/weird/vindac.html


6 MAD SCIENTISTS WHO WERE DISMISSED AS CRAZY, ONLY TO BE PROVEN RIGHT YEARS LATER.


https://www.medicaldaily.com/mad-scientist-6-scientists-who-were-dismissed-crazy-only-be-proven-right-years-later-362010


10 MOST FAMOUS SCIENTIFIC THEORIES THAT WERE LATER DEBUNKED.


https://www.famousscientists.org/10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-were-later-debunked/



7 WORLD-CHANGING INVENTIONS THAT WERE RIDICULED WHEN THEY CAME OUT.


https://www.insider.com/inventions-that-were-ridiculed-2016-8#light-bulbs-1



7 SCIENTISTS WHOSE IDEAS WERE REJECTED DURING THEIR LIFETIMES.


https://www.famousscientists.org/7-scientists-whose-ideas-were-rejected-during-their-lifetimes/



10 DEBUNKED SCIENTIFIC BELIEFS OF THE PAST.


https://listverse.com/2009/01/19/10-debunked-scientific-beliefs-of-the-past/



MEDICAL BREAKTHROUGHS THAT WERE INITIALLY RIDICULED OR REJECTED.


https://www.medscape.com/features/slideshow/medical-breakthroughs



10 GROUNDBREAKING WOMEN SCIENTISTS WRITTEN OFF BY HISTORY.


https://listverse.com/2013/10/14/10-groundbreaking-women-scientists-written-off-by-history/


10 IMPOSSIBILITIES CONQUERED BY SCIENCE.


https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13556-10-impossibilities-conquered-by-science/

Are Psychopaths Running the World, by Alanna Ketler (CE).

An article by Alanna Ketler  (CE).

SNAKES IN SUITS: ARE PSYCHOPATHS RUNNING THE WORLD?

Link:https://www.collective-evolution.com/2020/01/25/snakes-in-suits-are-psychopaths-running-the-world/

Personal reflection:

 I think that one has to be cautious and be aware of a distinction between the  'disease' or 'disorder' and 'psychopathic symptoms', or; behavior,  as well as 'sociopathic symptoms': they could be induced, stimulated, or triggered by External factors.

(  In general; As with a lot of diseases, syndromes, etc., there can be many symptoms which are very similar, but which don't meet the actual (!) criteria for the diagnosis, as well as there are many 'diseases' or 'disorders' of which there is no known cause)

IN BRIEF

• The Facts:
  By comparing traits of psychopaths, as determined by experts, to those of people in corporate or political positions of power, we can see a clear link.
• Reflect On:
  Psychopaths feel no remorse, guilt or empathy for their actions. When we look at the many inhumane acts that are currently taking place on our planet, it begs the following question: Are psychopaths running our world?
• 
  

Often when we think of the word psychopath, we think of deranged serial killers that are hopefully locked up in prison for life. While there are many psychopaths who kill for reasons that are unfathomable to most of us and who are indeed in prison, there is an even greater number roaming free in our society and often using their condition to their advantage in any way possible. In fact, it is very likely that you know some–they might even be your colleagues.

Most of us do not know or work with any serial killers, at least not that we are aware of. So, what exactly is a psychopath and how can we define them? The dictionary definition is as follows:

“A person suffering from a chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behavior.”

As you can probably tell, a lot more than just serial killers will fit into this broad definition. In fact, according to Canadian psychologist Dr. Robert Hare, a world-renowned expert on psychopathy, an estimated 1% of the Earth’s population is psychopathic and around 25% of the population of male inmates at federal correctional facilities are psychopathic.

Psychopathic Traits

It is important to note that, in contrast with the popular image of the ‘deranged psycho,’ psychopaths tend to be very well composed, take good care of their appearance and are very charming (think of Christian Bale as Patrick Bateman in American Psycho). Because of this you may have a difficult time spotting them out, as they are masters of deception and are able to fake a lot of the qualities that define regular people. Some other psychopathic traits, according to Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist, are as follows:

Glib and superficial charm

Grandiose estimation of self

Need for stimulation

Manipulative and cunning

Complete lack of remorse or guilt

Pathological lying

Have a parasitic lifestyle, often latching onto and taking from others

Have a history of early behavioral problems

Overly impulsive

Are very irresponsible

Unable to accept responsibility for actions

Unable to commit to long-term relationships

History of juvenile delinquency

Display criminal versatility

Experienced a “revocation of conditional release”

Lacks realistic long term goals

History of promiscuous sexual behavior

Have poor behavioral controls

Are callous and lack empathy

Have a “shallow affect” (psychopaths show a lack of emotion when an emotional reaction is appropriate.)

You can actually rate yourself to find out if you are psychopath. On each criterion, the subject is ranked on a 3-point scale: (0 = item does not apply, 1 = item applies somewhat, 2 = item definitely applies). The scores are summed to create a rank of zero to 40. Anyone who scores 30 and above is most likely a psychopath. Hare has used this test and checklist to detect which inmates are psychopaths.

Snakes In Suits

What many of us don’t realize is that psychopaths actually thrive in the corporate world. Hare has actually co-authored a book with Dr. Paul Babiak on this topic entitled, Snakes In Suits: Understanding and Surviving the Psychopaths in Your Office. Psychopaths manipulate others to accrue power, sometimes pitting them against each other in an attempt to divide and conquer. They are often attracted to bigger, dynamic corporations with very little structure or supervision. They generally don’t work well in teams because they don’t like to share information or skills and it brings them joy to watch others fail. They are addicted to power, status and money. Sound familiar?

Sadly, the corporate world is set up to favor psychopathic traits such as fearlessness, dominant behavior and immunity to stress. Because of this, psychopaths often find themselves in these types of positions, and then have an easier time climbing the corporate ladder and obtaining positions of great power. This is where they can do real damage to society.

Are Psychopaths Running The World?

Not only as corporate heads do psychopaths find success in our modern-day society, but also within our governments and political system — often as front-line politicians. This may come as a shock to you, but when you really look at some of the atrocities that are taking place on our planet, and if you’ve ever wondered how things that are so inhumane could actually be happening, well, therein lies your answer.

When you consider the war, genocide, senseless murder of civilians, treatment of the indigenous cultures of the world, chemicals in our food, air and water supply, acts of “terrorism”, war crimes and so many other unjust and cruel actions which are often instigated by our political leaders, it becomes easy to see how psychopaths actually fit the requirements for these types of roles quite well. As mentioned before they are masters of deception, pathological liars and often quite charming.

Many soldiers go to war and because they are conditioned to believe that they are fighting an enemy in the name of peace. They do as they are told and commit these heinous acts against other human beings. The reason why so many soldiers suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder is because it is not within human nature to murder other humans, and especially innocent civilians.

We already know how many politicians are crooked, but perhaps its time to start looking at them with the psychopath checklist in mind so that we can be better equipped to protect not only ourselves but our society from their malicious acts.

But Can’t We Help Them?

It is natural for anyone who is an empath or those involved in spiritual work to have compassion for these individuals and feel compelled to help them overcome their psychopathic behavior. However, most research has pointed towards the understanding that psychopaths are born, not made and therefore cannot be cured. This is one of the main differences that separates sociopaths from psychopaths. Another is that sociopaths have a conscience, albeit a weak one, and will often justify something they know to be wrong. By contrast, psychopaths will believe that their actions are justified and feel no remorse for any harm done. Sociopaths are made, and have a higher likelihood of overcoming their condition. However, many of those with sociopathic behavior will find themselves in similar corporate positions.

Hare’s research discovered that by attempting to heal or help a psychopath, you might actually be strengthening their cunning abilities, as they will find a way to manipulate you into believing that they are remorseful and understand how their actions were wrong.

The best we can do is learn to recognize the traits of psychopaths and be sure to stay clear of their actions and behaviors to protect ourselves from the wake of their inevitable destruction.

The "climate change" plan, article by Arjun Walia.

It's worth to reflect on the "public discours". An interesting and profound article form Arjun Walia.

Link article:
https://www.activistpost.com/2019/08/report-sheds-light-on-the-rockefeller-familys-covert-climate-change-plan.html

Report Sheds Light On The Rockefeller Family’s Covert “Climate Change” Plan

TOPICS:Arjun WaliaClimate ChangePropagandaRockefellerScience

AUGUST 6, 2019

Op-Ed by Arjun Walia

• The Facts: In the 1980s, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund became the authority of global warming. Why would they do this? Are these people really concerned about our planet or simply profiting and justifying heightened states of security for ulterior motives?
• Reflect On: Why are there so many brilliant scientists publishing papers and making points but are never given any attention? Why are they ridiculed and character assassinated by the mainstream? What is going on here?

The climate is changing, and it has been changing for a very long time. In fact, the climate has always been changing, and there are a myriad of factors that influence climate change like solar activity and much more. If you’re not educated on climate science, it’s easy to adopt the “doomsday” perspective that’s often dished out by mainstream media. However, when you look at what actual climate scientists are saying, it doesn’t seem like anyone on either side agrees with the media’s “climate hysteria” narrative.

The main argument among those who ascribe to the hysteria perspective is that CO2 levels are the highest they’ve ever been since we started to record them, currently sitting at approximately 415 parts per million (ppm). It’s not like climate scientists disagree on the idea that CO2 causes some warming of our atmosphere, that seems to be a fact that’s firmly established in scientific literature. But what’s never mentioned is the fact that CO2 levels have been significantly higher than what they are now; in fact, CO2 levels have been in thousands ppm and Earth’s temperature has been much warmer than it is now. The idea that human CO2 emissions are responsible for shifts and changes in the climate is not scientifically valid, yet policy initiatives that do nothing for our environment are being produced and put forward, putting large sums of money in the pockets of some very powerful people.

Our crop plants evolved about 400 million years ago, when CO2 in the atmosphere was about 5000 parts per million! Our evergreen trees and shrubs evolved about 360 million years ago, with CO2 levels at about 4,000 ppm. When our deciduous trees evolved about 160 million years ago, the CO2 level was about 2,200 ppm – still five times the current level. – Dennis T. Avery, agricultural and environmental economist, senior fellow for the Center for Global Food Issues in Virginia, and formerly a senior analyst for the U.S. Department of State (source)

CO2 causing a temperature increase is the backbone of the global warming argument, but does CO2 even cause the temperature to increase, or does an increase in temperature cause a rise in C02?

“The question is how does the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) determine that an increase in atmospheric CO2 causes an increase in global temperature? The answer is they assumed it was the case and confirmed it by increasing CO2 levels in their computer climate models and the temperature went up. Science must overlook the fact that they wrote the computer code that told the computer to increase temperature with a CO2 increase. Science must ask if that sequence is confirmed by empirical evidence? Some scientists did that and found the empirical evidence showed it was not true. Why isn’t this central to all debate about anthropogenic global warming?” – Dr. Tim Ball, (source) former professor in the Department of Geography at the University of Winnipeg

William Happer, American physicist and the Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Emeritus, at Princeton University, is one of what seems to be thousands of academics to go unheard by the mainstream media who shares the same perspective:

In every careful study, the temperature first rises and then CO2 rises, and the temperature first falls and then CO2 falls, temperature is causing changes of CO2 at least for the last million years, there’s no question about that. (source)

He also pointed out the major ice ages in Earth’s past when C02 levels were also extremely high, much higher than they are now, and did so to show how the correlation between C02 and temperature is “not all that good.”

In their paper on the Vostok Ice Core, Petit et al (1999), they show how CO2 lags temperature during the onset of glaciations by several thousands of years, but offer no explanation. They also observe that CH4 and CO2 are not perfectly aligned with each other, but offer no explanation. The significance is that temperature may influence C02 amounts. At the onset of glaciations, temperature drops to glacial values before CO2 begins to fall, suggesting that CO2 has little influence on temperature modulation at these times as well.

In 1988, the NASA scientist James Hansen told the US Senate that the summer’s warmth reflected increased carbon dioxide levels. Even Science magazine reported that the climatologists were skeptical.

The reason we now take this position as dogma is due to political actors and others seeking to exploit the opportunities that abound in the multi-trillion dollar energy sector. One person who benefited from this was Maurice Strong, a global bureaucrat and wheeler-dealer (who spent his final years in China apparently trying to avoid prosecution for his role in the UN’s Oil for Food program scandals). Strong is frequently credited with initiating the global warming movement in the early 1980s, and he subsequently helped to engineer the Rio Conference that produced the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Others like Olaf Palme and his friend, Bert Bolin, who was the first chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, were also involved as early as the 1970s. – Dr. Richard Lindzen (source)

Since 1999, this theory has been discussed in numerous scientific papers, but not one shred of evidence exists to confirm that a CO2 increase causes ‘extreme warming.’

Doubling CO₂ involves a 2% perturbation to this budget. So do minor changes in clouds and other features, and such changes are common. In this complex multifactor system, what is the likelihood of the climate (which, itself, consists in many variables and not just globally averaged temperature anomaly) is controlled by this 2% perturbation in a single variable? Believing this is pretty close to believing in magic. Instead, you are told that it is believing in ‘science.’ Such a claim should be a tip-off that something is amiss. After all, science is a mode of inquiry rather than a belief structure. The accumulation of false and/or misleading claims is often referred to as the ‘overwhelming evidence’ for forthcoming catastrophe. Without these claims, one might legitimately ask whether there is any evidence at all. Lindzen (source)

Another quote stressing this point:

Now here is the currently popular narrative concerning this system. The climate, a complex multifactor system, can be summarized in just one variable, the globally averaged temperature change, and is primarily controlled by the 1-2% perturbation in the energy budget due to a single variable – carbon dioxide – among many variables of comparable importance. This is an extraordinary pair of claims based on reasoning that borders on magical thinking. It is, however, the narrative that has been widely accepted, even among many sceptics. This acceptance is a strong indicator of the problem Snow identified. Many politicians and learned societies go even further: They endorse carbon dioxide as the controlling variable, and although mankind’s CO2 contributions are small compared to the much larger but uncertain natural exchanges with both the oceans and the biosphere, they are confident that they know precisely what policies to implement in order to control. Lindzen (source)

The quotes above comes from Richard Lindzen, an atmospheric physicist who has published more than 200 scientific papers and books. He was the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and he is actually the lead author of Chapter 7, “Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,” of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Third Assessment Report on climate change (the organization that’s pushing the global warming and climate change agenda).

A number of times, Lindzen and many others have been quite outspoken regarding the conclusions of this document that are drawn by politicians, not scientists. There will be more on that later in the article.

According to Dr. Leslie Woodcock, emeritus professor at the University of Manchester (UK) School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical Science, is a former NASA scientist:

The term ‘climate change’ is meaningless. The Earth’s climate has been changing since time immemorial, that is since the Earth was formed 1,000 million years ago. The theory of ‘man-made climate change’ is an unsubstantiated hypothesis [about] our climate [which says it] has been adversely affected by the burning of fossil fuels in the last 100 years, causing the average temperature on the earth’s surface to increase very slightly but with disastrous environmental consequences. The theory is that the CO2 emitted by burning fossil fuel is the ‘greenhouse gas’ causing ‘global warming’ — in fact, water is a much more powerful greenhouse gas and there is 20 times more of it in our atmosphere (around one per cent of the atmosphere) whereas CO2 is only 0.04 per cent. There is no reproducible scientific evidence CO2 has significantly increased in the last 100 years. Anecdotal evidence doesn’t mean anything in science, it’s not significant…(source)

In the IPCC documents, we can see how tenuous the link between climate change and CO2 emissions are, specifically in their findings titled ‘Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis.’ Here was one of their recommendations:

Explore more fully the probabilistic character of future climate states by developing multiple ensembles of model calculations. The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future exact climate states is not possible. Rather the focus must be upon the prediction of the probability distribution of the system’s future possible states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions.

If we go back to the 1995 2nd Assessment Report of the UN IPCC, we can see how much the agenda overshadowed and muted the actual science. The scientists included these three statements in the draft:

1. “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed (climate) changes to the specific cause of increases in greenhouse gases.”
2. “No study to date has positively attributed all or part (of observed climate change) to anthropogenic (i.e. man-made) causes.”
3. “Any claims of positive detection of significant climate change are likely to remain controversial until uncertainties in the natural variability of the climate system are reduced.”

The “Summary” and conclusion statement of the IPCC report was written by politicians, not scientists. The rules force the ‘scientists’ to change their reports to match the politicians’ final ‘Summary.’ Those three statements by ‘scientists’ above were replaced with this:

1. “The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.”

Here’s another great point made by Lindzen:

How did we get to this point where the science seized to be interested in the fascinating question of accounting for the remarkable history of the Earth’s climate for an understanding of how climate actually works and instead devoted itself itself to a component of political correctness. Perhaps one should take a broader view of what’s going on. (source)

Below are some more comments by him regarding the politics of climate science. It’s something I compare to the politicization of medical science and the corporate takeover of medical science by big pharma. Medicine is another area where we see brilliant minds creating awareness and publishing papers that, for some reason, get ridiculed and the authors are subjected to character assassination.

The 97 Percent Claim

The mainstream media and people who support the idea that humans are warming the planet often quote the fact that ’97 percent of scientists agree with them.’ First of all, this is not true, and again, we don’t know if humans are warming the planet.

This claim is actually a come-down from the 1988 claim on the cover of Newsweek that all scientists agree. In either case, the claim is meant to satisfy the non-expert that he or she has no need to understand the science. Mere agreement with the 97% will indicate that one is a supporter of science and superior to anyone denying disaster. This actually satisfies a psychological need for many people. The claim is made by a number of individuals and there are a number of ways in which the claim is presented. A thorough debunking has been given in the Wall Street Journal by Bast and Spencer. One of the dodges is to poll scientists as to whether they agree that CO₂ levels in the atmosphere have increased, that the Earth has been warming (albeit only a little) and that man has played some part. This is, indeed, something almost all of us can agree on, but which has no obvious implication of danger. Nonetheless this is portrayed as support for catastrophism. Other dodges involve looking at a large number of abstracts where only a few actually deal with danger. If among these few, 97% support catastrophism, the 97% is presented as pertaining to the much larger totality of abstracts. One of my favorites is the recent claim in the Christian Science Monitor (a once respected and influential newspaper): “For the record, of the nearly 70,000 peer-reviewed articles on global warming published in 2013 and 2014, four authors rejected the idea that humans are the main drivers of climate change.” I don’t think that it takes an expert to recognize that this claim is a bizarre fantasy for many obvious reasons. – Richard Lindzen, from his paper “Straight Talk About Climate Change,” where he goes into greater detail.

This is a deep topic and there are many points to make. Here’s a great video by Alex Epstein, founder of the Center for Industrial Progress for Prager University, explaining the 97 percent myth and where it came from.

Below is a video from Lindzen that sums up the issue quite well.

The Other Side of The Coin

A 2013 study in Environmental Research Letters claimed that 97% of climate scientists agreed with the ‘humans changing the climate’ narrative in 12,000 academic papers that contained the words “global warming” or “global climate change” from 1991 to 2011. Not long ago, that paper hit 1m downloads, making it the most accessed paper ever among the 80+ journals published by the Institute of Physics (as Lindzen mentions above, many of these papers are being published by scientists outside of climate physics), according to the authors.

A recent article that presents more scientific studies was published in the Guardian, titled ‘No Doubt Left About Scientific Consensus on Global Warming, say experts.’

Why So Much Conflicting Information?

Obviously, there is an ongoing debate surrounding climate change, and many people still think something fishy is going on here. It’s similar to the vaccines argument, or a host of other issues that never receive any attention from the mainstream media. Instead of presenting the concerns of scientists from the other side, or the side often labelled ‘skeptics,’ these scientists are often heavily ridiculed by mainstream media.

A great example is this dialogue, which is quite old now, between Lindzen and Bill Nye. It’s not hard to see that Nye has no idea what he is talking about, and he’s simply being used because, at that time, he had a large following.

The reason why so many people are unaware of the arguments made by climate ‘skeptics’ is because their points are never presented by mainstream media in the same way the other side’s are. The media controls the minds of the masses, but thankfully this is changing.

 We Here At CE Care Deeply For The Planet

We here at CE care deeply about our planet and creating harmony on it. Since we were founded in 2009, we’ve been creating massive amounts of awareness regarding clean energy technologies and the harmful industries polluting and destroying our planet. The issue is not with finding solutions, we already have those for the most part, the issue is with the systems we have that prevent these solutions from ever seeing the light of day. In fact, we have been heavily involved with multiple clean energy projects and assisting them in coming into fruition.

Opposing the ‘doom and gloom’ global warming narrative does not mean we do not care for our environment; in fact, it’s quite the opposite. We feel that politicians meeting every single year for the past few decades have done absolutely nothing to clean up our planet, and instead have been coming up with ways to simply make money off of green technology that cuts CO2 emissions.

If the people in power, with all of their resources, really wanted to change the planet, it would have happened by now.

While our focus is on CO2, not nearly enough attention and resources are going into re-planting our planet, cleaning up our fresh water lakes and oceans, and changing our manufacturing habits to cause less waste and less pollution. If anything, this should be our main focus, especially when it’s not really clear that C02 is an issue.

Environmental and species protection should be our first priority, but it’s not. I believe this green revolution is a distraction and, in many ways, further harms our environment by taking our focus off of what’s really important and putting it on something that is not impacting our planet in a negative way.

The Rockefeller Report

In the 1980s, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund became the sole authority of the global warming agenda. The fund boasts of being one of the first major global activists by citing its strong advocacy for both the 1988 formation of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the 1992 creation of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The global elite have always benefited in some way shape or form from crises, we’ve seen it over and over again with war.

What is important, however, is to acknowledge the role of the Rockefeller family –which historically was the architect of “Big Oil”– in supporting the Climate Change debate as well as the funding of scientists, environmentalists and NGOs involved in grassroots activism against “Big Oil” and the fossil fuel industry.

Debate on the world’s climate is of crucial importance. But who controls that debate?

There is an obvious contradictory relationship: Whereas “Big Oil” is the target of Global Warming activism, “Big Oil” through the Rockefeller Family and Rockefeller Brothers Trusts generously finance the Worldwide climate protest movement. Ask yourself Why? – Michel Chossudovsky, Canadian economist and Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Ottawa

You can access the full report here. It was published by the Energy & Environmental Legal Institute in 2016.

An Example of Other Factors Influencing The Climate – A Coming Ice Age?

Nils-Axel Mörner from the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics Institute states,

By about 2030-2040, the Sun will experience a new grand solar minimum. This is evident from multiple studies of quite different characteristics: the phasing of sunspot cycles, the cyclic observations of North Atlantic behaviour over the past millennium, the cyclic pattern of cosmogenic ra-dionuclides in natural terrestrial archives, the motions of the Sun with respect to the centre of mass, the planetary spin-orbit coupling, the planetary conjunction history and the general planetary solar terrestrial interaction. During the previous grand solar minima—i.e. the Spörer Minimum (ca 1440-1460), the Maunder Minimum (ca 1687-1703) and the Dalton Minimum (ca 1809-1821)—the climatic conditions deteriorated into Little Ice Age periods.

The idea that solar activity is not affecting Earth’s climate is extremely fishy and doesn’t make much sense when you go through the literature, but it seems to be brushed off within mainstream academia, and hardly studied. It definitely made me scratch my head when IFL Science, for example, put out a statement saying “The Sun simply does not have that large an effect on our climate compared to human activity.” This is a very ridiculous and irresponsible statement. It’s also important that readers recognize there isn’t even any course to back up such a false claim.

Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!

Don’t believe what is written, research what is written. What’s worse is the ridicule factor, the way mainstream publications attack any narrative that presents an explanation for climate change that is not human induced. Something is very wrong with this picture, regardless of your stance on the ‘global warming’ phenomenon. There is more on this later in the article.

The paper  by Morner  goes on to make some very important points:

So as you can see, the comment from IFL science quoted above, again, is simply not true. I’ve provided one of many sources available here, and I encourage other writers to do the same.

The author goes on to conclude:

During the last three grand solar minima…global climate experienced Little Ice Age conditions. Arctic water penetrated to the south all the way down to Mid-Portugal, and Europe experienced severe climatic conditions…The Arctic ice over expanded significantly…By 2030-2040, we will be in a New Grand Solar Minimum, which by analogy to past minima must be assumed to lead to significant climatic deterioration with ice expansion in the Artctic..We now seem to be in possession of quite convergent data…This precludes a continual warming as claimed by the IPCC project, instead of this, we are likely to face a new Little Ice Age.

According to the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS,

A new model of the Sun’s solar cycle is producing unprecedentedly accurate predictions of irregularities within the Sun’s 11-year heartbeat. The model draws on dynamo effects in two layers of the Sun, one close to the surface and one deep within its convection zone. Predictions from the model suggest that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s to conditions last seen during the ‘mini ice age’ that began in 1645. (source)

A few years ago, the National Astronomy Meeting in Wales was held, where Valentina Zharkova, a mathematics professor from Northumbria University (UK), presented a model that can predict what solar cycles will look like far more accurately than was previously possible. She states that the model can predict their influence with an accuracy of 97 percent, and says it is showing that Earth is heading for a “mini ice age” in approximately fifteen years.

Zharkova and her team came up with the model using a method called “principal component analysis” of the magnetic field observations, from the Wilcox Solar Observatory in California. Looking forward to the next few solar cycles, her model predicts that from 2030 to 2040 there will be cause for a significant reduction in solar activity, which again, will lead to a mini ice age. According to Zharkova. You can read more about that here.

Again, these are just a few examples of multiple scientists pointing to these facts.

Is There An Agenda At Play Here?

In a recent episode of ‘The Collective Evolution Show’ on CETV, Joe and CE team member Richard Enos dig deep into the science and break down the agenda behind the carbon tax and the related carbon emissions trading scheme. What becomes clear in our overall discussion is that the conclusions of scientists are not really getting out to the general public. All efforts are geared to try to make people believe that human activity through the burning of fossil fuels is the main cause of global warming, and that the science behind this is solid and well-established, even though it isn’t. If you haven’t signed up already for CETV, go here so you can get access to the full discussion.

CETV is a platform we created to combat internet censorship, which is another topic. Why are they silencing and ridiculing certain narratives? Why not just oppose them with information and evidence?

The Takeaway

Many things in our world, including science, have become extremely corrupted. We see it with medical science and the influence from big pharma, and we see it with regards to federal health regulatory agencies like the CDC and FDA being compromised by corporations. Climate science is no different, which is why we see the mass ridicule of those who oppose the agenda by mainstream media.

Our Earth needs help, it needs to be cleaned up, and deforestation must halt as we are experiencing massive species extinction. None of this has anything, in my opinion, to do with human CO2 output.

---

Arjun Walia — I joined the CE team in 2010 shortly after finishing university and have been grateful for the fact that I have been able to do this ever since 🙂 There are many things happening on the planet that don’t resonate with me, and I wanted to do what I could to play a role in creating change. It’s been great making changes in my own life and creating awareness and I look forward to more projects that move beyond awareness and into action and implementation. So stay tuned 🙂 arjun@collective-evolution.com

This article was sourced from Collective Evolution.

EMF AND THE LINK WITH AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES.

In 1993 I was diagnosed with the 'Syndrome of Sjögren'; an autoimmune disease, by an internist- immunologist at the university hospital in Rotterdam. This doctor seemed to be an authority in this area, as he told me he had a lot of patients in the Netherlands and Belgium as well, in those days.
(I wrote a blog about this on April 20, 2019, https://marleendingenouts.blogspot.com/2019_04_20_archive.html)

There was no known cure; an (originally) anti-malaria medicine could possibly give some relief; I went there for about two years for a follow- up. For reasons I shared on this blog, I never went back to this doctor.

There are many people diagnosed with autoimmune diseases.

Nowadays there are studies published about the connection between autoimmune diseases, ór autoimmune reactions, symptoms; triggered by electrosmog or electromagnetic fields.

Some informative articles:


Electromagnetic fields and autoimmune diseases: ( 2014)

https://journal.preventionandresearch.com/materiale_cic/766_3_2/6599_electroma/article.htm

 Is technology, electrosmog to blame for your autoimmune disease?

https://www.thyrosisters.com/electrosmog-to-blame-for-your-autoimmune-
disease/

Reliable disease biomarkers characterizing and identifying electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity as two etiopathogenic aspects of a unique pathological disorder.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26613326


And:
A groundbreaking study shows shielding emf improves autoimmune disease.

https://www.collective-evolution.com/2018/02/16/groundbreaking-study-shows-shielding-emf-improves-autoimmune-disease/

 Note: University Hospitals sometimes do research, with patients involved
- uninformed-, 'under the radar'


DISAPPEARANCE, REAPPEARANCE FROM E-CIGARETTE.

23-1-2020

THIS AFTERNOON I WANTED TO FETCH MY E-CIGARETTE, I KNEW I HAD IT IN MY HAND WHEN I FELL ASLEEP, LAST NIGHT.
SO I LOOK AT BOTH SIDES OF MY HEAD PILLOW; NOTHING, IN MY BED; NOTHING; UNDER MY PILLOW; NOTHING, UNDER THE BED ETC, EVERYWHERE; NOTHING. A MINUTE LATER I LOOK AGAIN AT THE SIDE OF MY HEAD PILLOW: THERE IT IS....I ACTIVATE IT AND  TAKE A 'SMOKE' : IT FEELS AS IF A HOLE IS BURNED INTO MY LUNGS.. ,AND A 'SOFOCATING' SENSATION; NASTY. THIS HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE.
 (I FILLED IT WITH NEW LIQUID THE DAY BEFORE AND THE COIL IS RECENTLY CHANGED AS WELL), I TRY AGAIN, SAME BURNING AND SOFOCATING SENSATION; SO I REMOVE  THE LIQUID AND FILL IT WITH NEW LIQUID FROM THE BOTTLE; TRY IT, NO BURNING AND SOFOCATING SENSATION AT ALL ANYMORE.

WHERE IS THIS E-CIGARET DURING THE TIME IT HAS DISAPPEARED?? AND WHO/WHAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS?

Repetition; micro crystals and the link with telepathy.

A repetition of an article shared on this blog.



 Micro crystals in the pineal gland and piezoelectricity.
 Link with 'wireless communication', 'telepathy':  and with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5G (?).

In this article is mentioned: you have to believe: personally I don't 'believe' in belief, nor mystification; lack of ( public) insights, knowledge; all the more.

The PINEAL GLAND is located within the human brain though its full potential is only beginning to be realized by modern scientists.

The pineal gland was the last endocrine gland to have its function discovered. Its location deep in the brain seemed to indicate its importance. This combination led to its being a "mystery" gland with myth, superstition and even metaphysical theories surrounding its perceived function.

Rene Descartes called the pineal gland the "seat of the soul", believing it is unique in the anatomy of the human brain in being a structure not duplicated on the right and left sides. This observation is not true, however; under a microscope one finds the pineal gland is divided into two fine hemispheres.

The pineal gland is occasionally associated with the sixth chakra (also called Ajna or the third eye chakra in yoga). It is believed by some to be a dormant organ that can be awakened to enable "telepathic" communication.

It is already known to release various chemicals into our body, including a derivative of the feel good chemical serotonin, called melatonin. This hormone affects the modulation of our waking and sleeping patterns, but also affects our sex drive according to the seasons. Though scientists still admit that they still don't yet have a complete picture of the pineal gland's functions.

It is located in the hidden center of the brain. It is pine cone shaped and no bigger than a raisin. Incredibly, it is actually bioluminescent, so glows within the darkness of the brain as if lit by a tiny light bulb, and has also been found to be sensitive to light. Interestingly enough, the anatomy of the gland actually consists of a

♦ Lens
♦ Cornea
♦ Retina

Just like our eyeballs. Also, according to scientist Dr Grahame Blackwell, a large number of small crystals have been found in the gland called calcite micro-crystals. They bear a striking resemblance to the calcite crystals in the inner ear, that have been shown to exhibit the qualities of an electric field known as piezoelectricity. If the pineal gland crystals exhibit the same qualities, then this would provide a means whereby an external electromagnetic field might directly influence the brain.

At close magnification the Calcite Micro-Crystals are visible on the actual gland

Therefore, it is probably not surprising why over centuries of human history, esoteric groups consider the pineal gland (or All Seeing Eye) to be our built-in wireless transmitter, enabling us to connect to higher frequencies and spiritual worlds.

You can see representations of this pine shaped gland, in the form of a pine cone, across Europe and Egypt. The Vatican built the court of the pine cone, which is adorned with a large stone pine cone in front of it's entrance. It is also found on the staff of the Pope, and the Egyptian god Osiris.

The all seeing eye is also known to the Freemasons and other esoteric groups as the eye of providence. It can be found carved into medieval churches all over Europe. It can be seen above the French Declaration of Human Rights in a 1789 painting. It is also clearly illustrated on the back of the $1 dollar bill, floating above an Egyptian pyramid. An exact example of masonic symbology. Many believe that little attention has been given to pineal gland symbology in our society, because people with power do not wish to share its secrets with the general public.

Hopefully the examples in this chapter (Evidence & Belief) will help cement a stronger belief in the power of the universe. You will find that knowing that there is evidence of something's existence, helps you to believe that it is real. Remember, you need to believe in the universal law of attraction in order to make it work for you. Belief is an essential ingredient...

New Crystal in the Pineal Gland:
Characterization and Potential Role in Electromechano-Transduction

Baconnier Simon(1), Lang Sidney B. (2), De Seze Rene(3)

(1) DRC, Toxicologie Expérimentale, INERIS, 60550 Verneuil-en-Halatte, France. E-mail : simon.baconnieretudiant@ineris.fr

(2)Department of Chemical Engineering, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, 84105 Beer Sheva, Israel. E-mail :lang@bgumail.bgu.ac.il

(3) As (1) above, but E-mail : Rene.De-Seze@ineris.fr

ABSTRACT

The pineal gland is a neuroendocrine transducer secreting melatonin, responsible for the physiological circadian rhythm control. A new form of biomineralization has been studied in the human pineal gland. It consists of small crystals that are less than 20 μm in length.

These crystals could be responsible for an electromechanical biological transduction mechanism in the pineal gland due to their structure and piezoelectric properties. Using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS), we identified crystals morphology and showed that they only contain calcium, carbon and oxygen elements. Furthermore, the selected-area electron diffraction (SAED) and near-infrared Raman spectroscopy established that the crystals are calcite.

We will now focus on the physiological effect of microcrystals in pinealocyte cell culture under Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic-Fields (RF-EMF).

INTRODUCTION

Because of the fast development of mobile telecommunication, the interaction of Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) with biological environment becomes a public health concern. Although the action of non-ionizing radiation on biology is still unclear, several hypotheses of interaction have been suggested: hot spot phenomena, ADN/RF-EMF interaction, EMF effect on cellular development (oncology) [1-3]. But no convincing study brings to the conclusion of an effective risk of RF-EMF for health.

The pineal gland converts a neural signal into an endocrine output. The most important hormone it secretes is melatonin the main role of which is to control the physiological circadian rhythm [4].

Two biomineralization forms can be observed in the pineal gland. Concretions so called “brain sand”, a polycrystalline complex of few millimeters long, and microcrystals the length of which does not exceed 20 micrometers. While concretions have been extensively studied [5-9] no study has been published on the microcrystals.

In this article the microcrystals were analyzed with different biophysical techniques. Their physicochemical properties and particularly piezoelectricity would give them an active role in a potential mechanism of electromechanotransduction in the pineal body. We are currently planning a study on the effects of Global System for Mobile (GSM) waves on these microcrystals in cellular culture and their influence on the pineal body physiology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The microcrystals were isolated from the pineal bodies using a procedure developed by Weiner and Price [10].

Small pieces of the pineal body (about 10 mg) were placed in a micro-centrifuge tube containing 1.5 ml of 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (diluted commercial bleach) and sonicated for 20 minutes. After allowing the sample to settle for 1 minute, the supernatant liquid was transferred to a second micro-centrifuge tube and centrifuged at approximately 9000 g for 1 minute. The pellet containing the solids was immediately washed twice with 95% ethanol and then resuspended in approximately 50 μl of 100% ethanol. It should be emphasized that, at no point, did any of the samples come into contact with solutions containing calcium ions.

SEM samples were collected on transmission electron microscopy grids and analyzed with a JEOL JSM 5600 SEM. Microanalysis studies were performed with a NORAN EDS Analyzing System. Because the microcrystals were initially too thick for High Resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy 2 (HRTEM) observation, they were first crushed between two glass slides. They were then studied with a JEOL-2010 transmission electron microscope equipped with an analytical ISIS system for energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS).

Near infrared Raman spectra of isolated crystals and pure calcite were obtained with a Bruker IFS 66 FTIR spectrometer equipped with an FRA 106 Raman module and a Ramanscope microscope. Measurements were made with a 40X objective (spot size ~25 μm). The spectral resolution was 2 cm-1. The samples were excited at 1064 nm using a diode-pumped Nd:YAG laser at about 5 mW power. Second Harmonic Generation (SHG) studies were made with a Nd-YAG laser which produced radiation at 1064 nm and the detected SHG was at 532 nm.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The SEM studies of single microcrystals permitted high-quality morphological analysis. The most common morphology was a very rough cylindrical body with sharp extremities (Fig. 1) that comprised about 95% of the samples observed. The crystal size varied from 1 to about 20 μm. The EDS analyzer coupled to the SEM identified calcium, carbon and oxygen to be the principal elements. Among biominerals containing those atoms, only calcium carbonate and calcium oxalate are potential candidates. The electron diffraction patterns taken from the particles were indexed in terms of a hexagonal unit cell.

Near IR Raman spectra were measured on both the microcrystals and on pure calcite powder. The agreement of the peaks was excellent (Fig. 2), confirming the identification of the crystals as calcite (calcium carbonate). We were unable to detect SHG neither in pure hydroxyapatite powder nor in the large pineal concretions. The similarity of the intensity of the SHG in pure calcite to that observed in earlier work on pineal tissue samples [11] and the absence of SHG in the large concretions let us think the calcite microcrystals would be the source of the SHG in the previous observation.

The pineal microcrystals appear as a stack of thin rhombohedrons with their flat faces normal to the long axis of the crystal (Fig. 3). These complex structures can be classified using the texture point group nomenclature of Shubnikov et al. [12]. The texture may be noncentrosymmetric because of the structural organization of the sub-unit, even though the single crystals do have a center of symmetry. This symmetry breaking would allow both SHG and piezoelectricity.

Calcite in otoconia, microcrystals found in the inner-ear otolith, has been shown to exhibit piezoelectricity [13, 14].

These crystals have a structure similar to that of the pineal microcrystals.

By that very fact the piezoelectric property of the crystals would allow them to interact with the electrical component of electromagnetic fields. A simplified formula applied to those crystals (f = v/2d) lets us think that these crystals could be sensitive to RF-EMF in the range of 500MHz to 2.5GHz depending on there size. This range contains portable wireless frequencies, GSM (872-960MHz), DCS (1710-1875MHz), UMTS (1900-1920MHz, 2010-2025MHz), or BlueTooth (2400-2483,5MHz). Piezoelectric determination of minute grain requires developing new methods based on either MEMS Precision Instruments microtweezers or direct correlation between electro-optic and piezoelectric properties in crystal with optical microscopy.

We introduce a novel approach of the biophysical effects of weak microwave radiation.

CONCLUSION AND PERSPECTIVES

We report here the presence of a new form of mineral deposits in the pineal gland. The calcite microcrystals would have piezoelectric properties with excitability in the frequency range of mobile communications. Their interaction with GSM waves could constitute a new mechanism of electromecano-transduction on the pinealocyte membrane, influencing by the fact the melatonin production.

The RF-EMF electrical component interaction with the crystals could induce a morphological modification of the crystals, a vibration depending on the EMF frequency. This morphological change, even tiny, could involve a modification of their cellular environment, by a localized modification of the cellular membrane of related cells.

The membrane changes could alter the adrenergic suggested and/or calcium channel function.

A similar mechanism of magneto-transduction was revealed by Kirschvink in connection with magnetite crystals of the brain and their interaction with the magnetic component of RF-EMF [15].

Pinealocyte can "communicate" through their gap junction [16, 17]. The deformation caused by the crystal vibrations could thus by simple activation of one or two pinealocytes, activate a whole area of pineal cells and thereby act on the pineal physiology.

The scientific project to be developed is to determine the influence of RF-EMF GSM on pinealocyte and pineal gland physiology through the electromechano-transduction produce by the pineal microcrystals. Using ELISA tests and Laser Scanning Confocal Microscopy we are going to study the evolution in melatonin production and variation in cell calcium flux in primary pineal cell culture.

From harvest Insight @ http://www.harvestinsight.webs.com/

Source: nexusilluminati.blogspot.ro