'A scientist' has written a book saying that mankind does not originate on earth. This scientist is apparently called Dr Ellis Silver.
This could be useful, thought Gordon. So off to the internets he went.
The story appears to have begun on Yahoo News, and gives the impression this 'scientist' was interviewed in person. (But that would surprise me. It's probably churnalism like everything else.)
The article has no byline. I know buckets of people at Yahoo, but if any of you have a mainline into their New York editorial team, hook me up, because otherwise I am just looking for a princess on a Death Star.
Other than that, I can't find 'Dr' Ellis Silver anywhere on the internet. This is highly unusual for someone in academia -a field that relies entirely on tawdry self-promotion and backstabbing.
So it will probably turn out that this is some kind of weird cult publication.
The book is available on Amazon for two quid. Fuck it. I've paid more for cult literature. I'm in. So I bought it. And it's more or less exactly what you'd expect. We were brought here in physical form, probably. There is a faintly messianic speculation as to why. Then the second half of the book is trying to work out exactly which star system we are from.
So yeah. Quite culty.
That being said, it almost gets a pass mark for highlighting the ludicrous holes in scientific materialism's preposterous fantasy of mankind's biological beginnings. Half of 'Dr' Silver's evidence is better chalked up to 'needs moar sciencez' before we unilaterally declare it was little green men. But some of it falls squarely into 'there is a morphological case that needs to be answered that makes scientific materialism uncomfortable'. Like how we may all be pig/chimp hybrids.
- Our relationship to the sun. Specifically the extremely high levels of skin cancer we encounter versus any other organism with an epidermis. Part of this is -if we are indeed apes- precisely why it is we lost our hair. Our 'naked ape' status has been contentious in biological circles for more than a century, because it is an objectively unhelpful 'evolution' that should not have been 'selected' for. The defence of our nudity has led to some bizarre; and long-since-dismissed; attempts to suggest we returned to the sea as aqua monkeys for a few million years. But fur prevents skin cancer and provides for more efficient expiration at the equator, putting paid to the idea that it was 'too warm' in East Africa for fur (you'll note East African monkeys are just as furry as the rest). And fur confers warmth the closer you get to the poles. This is why furry animals, like bears, have thicker fur as you move up the latitudes. (Find me another animal that requires coverings just to live, by the way.)
- Concurrent with this is our
fucking'highly effective' subcutaneous fat layer, which is otherwise only found at such extreme levels of fuckednesseffectiveness in oceanic mammals. Although, personally, my 'Sitchin spider sense' tells me this has something to do with the pig part of our pig/chimp hybrid.
- The overwhelming majority of chronic conditions that afflict the majority of the human race are specific to our species. You simply can't find another animal that is quite so shit at living here, and requires quite so many hacks to do so. I see this clearly in the eternal question of the gnostics -what the fuck are we doing here and how did we get here?- in the Gospel of Thomas:
Jesus said, "The foxes have their holes and the birds have their nests, but the son of man has no place to lay his head and rest."
Seriously. Think about it.
- Our sleep cycle is tied to a 25 hour clock, rather than a 24 hour clock, which is the actual time it takes for our oblate spheroid to do its daily pirouette. Seriously, work that one out for me. What 'selection' threw our sleep out of sync with the actual planet upon which we apparently 'evolved' out of apes into half-pigs?
Take Dr Silver to bed? Yes. But don't go past second base.
Hey, remember the other day when the 'science' of palaeoanthropolgy gave up on trying to fit the hundreds of data points that disprove mankind's dispersal out of Africa at 150,000 years ago and decided we'd all just like it better if the past was The Lord of The Rings because they've found no less than two completely new hominid species in the last 18 months, and yet remain entirely confident that they totally know the story of mankind's origin?
Behold, science penises! A few of my favourite things probably.
Whilst I'm aware that evolutionary psychology is pretty much the Common Prayer Book to scientific materialism's Bible, every so often, it throws up some interesting points. I wrote about Sex At Dawn a few years ago and I still recommend it as a book.
Some of the points that have stuck with me:
Genetically, we are midway between the bonobo and the chimpanzee. Not that I put much stock in genetic implications because our two strands of DNA have become four, the Human Genome Project turned out to be a complete rinse of universities and and biotech investors, rice has more genes than humans do, and the cells for your arms and legs are genetically identical but check it out, yo, elbows and fingers. NEVERTHELESS...
The thrust (heh) of the book is that -for whatever it's worth- we share more or less the same amount of genes with the chimpanzee as we do with the bonobo. But when the Darwinists were con-cock-ting (HEH!) their silly little story of the apes we are Darwinistically similar to, they arbitrarily picked the one that organises war gangs, rapes and murders children, hoards females away from other males and kills any interloping foreigners and then sometimes eats them. Which is the chimp.
As opposed to choosing the highly social monkey, that initiates an orgy rather than a mass murder when it encounters another troop, which doesn't commit murder or gender violence, which sings its babies to sleep even if they are genetically unrelated, which has a high degree of double and triple mating amongst both genders, where females initiate sex just as often if not moreso, and is often gay for each other. (I love the bonobo.)
You could see a conspiracy here if you like -because it is another example of how materialists will tell you that you are nothing but a lucky, brutish ape- but it is just as likely to be the remnants of unexamined, casually sexist, Victorian prudishness about intercourse that no one has bothered to correct until some sexy Spanish scientists decided to write a book that de-Anglo-Saxoned our presumed monkey heritage.
A number of morphological observations have stuck with me. The principal one is that monkeys that hoard their females into harems have tiny penises. We're apparently cousins to the Great Apes like the gorilla... but they are pindicks compared to their bodyweight (and objectively compared to humans) because the genetic competition is expressed in the phenotypic arena... the biggest male monkeys kill the other male monkeys and get all the laydeez. And then they have big monkey babies.
Humans -and me, especially- have the largest penises of any animal in the monkey kingdom. Large penises are associated with extremely sexual behaviour, multiple partners, gangbangs, orgies, loud female sexual vocalisation and so on... because the genetic competition happens in the womb: there's loads of spunk in there, and the fittest spunk gets the egg. (There's some weird stuff in Sex At Dawn about how cultures with a high degree of double-mating, principally Africa and the Nordics, have larger penises due to comparative female sexual freedom and prolonged absence of primary males -on Viking ships, in hunting parties, etc- which facilitates sneaky hanky panky back in the village. This is in comparison to mainland China and India, where you are historically more likely to find harems and the sexual control of women, which is true, and certainly does match worldwide penis size data, but is still... speculating beyond what is probably necessary. If evolution works the way we think it does, how quickly can dicks grow? Serious question. Definitely not asked for personal reasons.)
I don't need to tell you which one better matches mankind's experience of life and culture. And so
my our great swinging dick is another one of those morphological oddities that completely disproves materialistic Darwinism, whilst simultaneously pointing with its enormous tip at a whole host of other morphological questions that need to be answered.
It becomes then a question of how much we should extract from materialism's Book of Common Prayer, a strange bedfellow indeed. Because our junk and pleasure in using it don't really fit with scientific materialism and you just know I'm about to say divided for the chance of (sexy) union.
One of these days, I'll compile my morphological questions; pig valves, big penises, 25 hour sleep cycles, etc; into a New Labour-style pledge card and take them to my geneticist friends at King's College, but in the mean time:
You were expecting... Jesus?
I met Russell Brand once, at the Hospital Club in London. I was/am neither pretty nor female so it was an intro and a handshake before he moved onto more appealing people in our group. So, for whatever that brief meeting is worth... I like him. He was more fun than any of the other celebrities I met there. (Although sharing an elevator with Matt Lucas in full drag comes a close second.) But then... it doesn't bother me that Peaches Geldof joined the OTO, either. From actual OTO people, she is serious about her spiritual exploration and it's not like she's out there twerking or signalling the illuminati. She's doing The Work. Who gives a fuck who her dad is?
As for Russell... yes, I'm sure we all despaired of the poorly-spelled images shared all over facestalk from your stupidest 'friends of friends'... but seriously, internets, what were you expecting? Jebus? It's overwhelmingly likely that he never physically existed. In equal measure, I despair of the redditization of internet discourse where someone is publicly flayed for not being fucking perfect.
"Oh, if Russell hates the elite, he should give away all his money." What a nice thing to say about a former homeless person. I imagine he'd kill you with a knife if you tried to take even a single pound from him. "It's poverty tourism." He's an ex-junkie. At worst, it's poverty recall. Oh, and my favourite, courtesy of Red Ice; which for me is like kicking cigarettes, dammit; "it's an illuminati plot by the BBC to get everyone to vote Labour again."
Gods. Fucking. Dammit.
Here is a man who has actually experienced the lowest lows the developed world has to offer. He hustled his way through the meat grinder of professional media to escape, and whilst doing so, discovered Transcendental Meditation and the probably objective fact that you are pure consciousness temporarily experiencing physicality for your own divine purpose. I promised myself that I would never use these words but... it is what it is. He is what he is. Which is a left-leaning celebrity who doesn't like the way the world is run. There is much to like in what he says. But keep waiting for that Jesus bus if you want, idiots.
Russell's an unashamed media whore. It helps that he is actually talented but, regardless, I imagine media whoredom beats homelessness hands down. As the resulting broadsheet fallout indicates, his whoring doesn't actually mean he's completely wrong. Take Russell to bed? Obviously. You could live to 120 and never have sex like that again. (Though, protection is advised.)
Speaking of sex with Russell Brand, his much-discussed guest editing of The New Statesman was arranged via his girlfriend, Jemima Kahn, who is an associate editor there.
She is also the daughter of the notorious Sir James Goldsmith, a man publicly mourned by Thatcher itself, whose family so defines blue blood that after competing with the Rothschilds for centuries, they recently inter-married twice. Oliver Stone based the character of Sir Larry Wildman in Wall Street on Sir James, if that puts it in perspective for you.
All of this means that, despite Russell's calls for a revolution, he will most certainly not be spending Christmas in a soup kitchen this year. And, as the bar empties, and our pickings get slimmer, we move onto an even more dubious potential bedfellow. Jemima's dad.
This is an interview conducted in 1994, a few months after NAFTA, on the eve of GATT treaty going live, an outcome this unashamed corporate pirate vehemently opposed. His reasons? Global corporations would not only offshore blue collar American jobs, but white collar ones, and it would hollow out the entire middle class, destroying western society and that's not what economies are for.
How were the last twenty years for you? Were they more or less exactly as described by Sir James?
Please, please watch as this global privateer sounds an alarm that turned out to be one hundred percent accurate, and just look at the incredulousness of the American media mouthpiece as Sir James makes his case.
I really do hope you watch it, because, along with various pieces of the archonology series, are an important lead-up to this braying moron shill of the Clinton Adminstration, bending reality backwards to try and make their policies make sense. It does make one wonder what people will think of our 'news' broadcasts in only 19 years time. This woman's lines are so stupid, and so wrong that, in 2013, you would half suspect she was MKULTRA. But she's not. She's just singing from the book of wrong.
What am I to do with this? Sir James fucking Goldsmith was right. We replaced civilisation with global corporations and it destroyed the world. Should we dismiss his analysis out of some kind of tribalism, should we ignore data points emerging from unpalatable sources? Or should we get a bit more sophisticated with our bedfellows?
Like the one I actually found Sir James through.
Speaking of people I am actually in love with, one of them turns out to be, not only a Republican, but a former member of the Bush I administration. Much as my uncontrollable love would probably please my parents, I'm pretty sure it will invalidate my Oyster Card for any destination on the Northern Line. And I still like to drink in the People's Republic of Islington from time to time.
Catherine Austin Fitts has appeared on this blog a number of times. Initially to do with ufology, but my admiration for this woman has grown beyond that. There is often a piece missing in alt-research, and that is first hand experience of what is going on.
You have 'whistleblowers' and you have 'leaks' and anonymous disclosures on YouTube. But here is a person with a completely verified career on Wall Street and in Washington who actually saw how the archons are making the sausages and said "fuck this." And she has had her life and her fortune destroyed thrice over -including having software seized by the Federal government and kept for years- because of it.
If you have ninety minutes, and are looking to have the archonology series explained to you with more patience and less swearing, by someone who was actually there, then I implore you to watch this video of her presentation from August of last year.
I specifically mention the date because I've been going backwards a year on things I have previously watched, and rewatching them in light of what has since transpired. Her comments about Monsanto and how any so-called fiat currency is still unofficially backed by a commodity... when it isn't gold, then control of the sea lanes and oil supply effectively means the US dollar is backed by oil. (Consider its position as the world's largest energy exporter now.) What was terrifying was her suggestion that the next commodity to back a possibly global currency was food. Forcing a small number of patented GM strains into the food supply of the world effectively gives control of this most essential of resources to a handful of companies, principally Monsanto.
There is also the historical information about how she was pretty much in the room when it was decided to move four trillion US dollars -in retirement funds and government money- offshore, leaving the United States to exist on a hamster wheel of IOUs and fraudulent mortgages. Trying to get that money back onto the books is a big part of the subtext of the manoeuvring we see in the Brazil/Germany/Russia/US central bank game to do with gold and reserve currencies.
We were blessed with an advisory board of very capable and committed pension fund leaders. In April 1997, we had an advisory board meeting at Safeguard Scientifics where the board chair led a venture capital effort. I gave a presentation on the extraordinary waste in the federal budget. As an example, we demonstrated why we estimated that the prior year’s federal investment in the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania area had a negative return on investment.
It was, however, possible to finance places with private equity and then reengineer the government investment to a positive return and, as a result, generate significant capital gains. Hence, it was possible to use U.S. pension funds to increase retirees’ retirement security significantly by investing in American communities, small business and farms — all in a manner that would reduce debt and improve skills and job creation. This was important as one of the chief financial concerns in America at that time was ensuring that our retirement plans performed financially to a standard that would meet the needs of beneficiaries and retirees. It was also critical to reduce debt and create new jobs as we continued to move manufacturing and other employment abroad. If not, we would be using our workforce’s retirement savings to finance moving their jobs and their children’s jobs abroad.
The response from the pension fund investors was quite positive until the President of the CalPers pension fund — the largest in the country — said, “You don’t understand. It’s too late. They have given up on the country. They are moving all the money out in the fall (of 1997). They are moving it to Asia.” He did not say who “they” were but did indicate that it was urgent that I see Nick Brady — as if our data that indicated that there was hope for the country might make a difference. I thought at the time that he meant that the pension funds and other institutional investors would be shifting a much higher portion of their investment portfolios to emerging markets. I was naive. He was referring to something much more significant. [More.]
In the above video, Catherine describes what she calls the 'central banking and warfare model', where central banks print money that is then forced into the hands of invaded foreign economies in exchange for their cheap natural resources. This describes the last few centuries of the European imperial project to a tee. (Spice, people, diamonds, coal, tea, wood, oil.)
The movement of trillions of dollars offshore into high-investment, low-tax areas, is the left hand to the intelligence world's right hand laundering of money and drugs into poor American neighbourhoods, leading to, among other things, family breakdown and the repossession of properties acquired as a result of subprime loans.
This is literally a breakaway civilisation of money and intelligence (at one point she describes how much of the money moved out of the country was moved into space projects), and it is what the rest of the planet is attempting to leave behind.
But perhaps the main reason to get into bed with Catherine is her inspirational optimism when it comes to decentralised, healthy, local economies. She makes the point that whenever someone says the free market doesn't work, we ought to try it first. What we have had so far is not a free market, it is literally organised crime.
In a former job in the mobile/telecoms, we looked at the use of pre-paid mobile phone credit as a form of currency in remote parts of Africa... it allows the pre-agreement of price for livestock -and actual payment in the form of SMS-transferred phone credit- before the inventory is transported to markets often many days away. The removal of economic 'waste' (price risk) from the local economy had a net positive impact on increasing the buying power of other local sectors. (The shepherd can turn around and buy locally-made fence posts, knowing how much he's going to get for his goats, etc.)
The idea that pension funds should be used to invest locally on an equity basis rather than a debt one, in combination with full clarity and control over how government funds are allocated is so fucking obvious it drives me nuts. It would mean a universal growth of wealth in the exact areas the people contributing to the pension funds want to retire, anyway, which would remain prosperous and provide employment for their families.
It would be tempting to combine this idea with the Totnes Pound in a trial somewhere in the west country that still has a large, locally managed retirement fund. (Street, maybe? Clark's is still there.)
Totnes Pounds are exchanged for the exact same number of GBP stored in a bank. Extending this idea into equity partnerships and government investment, you would have a stop-gap solution for retaining the wealth and benefit of local investment, growing the local tax base and improving quality of life across the board.
Amusingly, as the continual printing of the pound continues to debase its buying power, if enough neo-Totnes pounds are exchanged for local goods, continue to circulate and the value is retained in the local area, you would actually be de-debasing the local currency as its buying power remained stable compared to the GBP debasement over a long enough period of time. (Think about it: The GBP in the bank erodes in buying power over time as more and more of them are printed. But the community would finally have democratic control of a non-interest-bearing money supply. I imagine that's when the Bank of England would step in and spoil the party.)
"They defend the first domino"
It has been remarked that the coverage of the recent anniversary of the assassination of JFK contained more government, party-line propaganda than even 9/11. At least with 9/11, each year there is a little bit more "well, maybe".
According to David Icke, this is because "they defend the first domino". He says so in a recent, extended interview here:
David Icke is a very British sort of mystic. He doesn't have the beaming, polished creepiness of Tom Cruise, or the Prada spectacles of Deepak Chopra.
He has shitty teeth, an M&S shirt, a silvery mullet, a football injury, a pot belly, a one bedroom flat in a crappy seaside holiday town and a love of ale.
Modern British approaches to Seeking have always been highly anachronistic. In the late 1800s, a bank note engraver by the name of George Smith spent so much time hanging around inside the British Museum that the Keeper of Oriental Antiquities more or less took pity on the young guy and gave him a volunteer job translating some of their thousands of Assyrian tablet fragments.
At one point, George realised he may have found something and called for the expert tablet cleaner. Britain being Britain, the guy was on holiday, so George had to wait in increasing agitation for the cleaner to get back. When he eventually did, the cleaner handed the tablet back to the evidently-OCD bank note engraver.
It was the Epic of Gilgamesh.
You know what George did? He took all his clothes off and danced around the Hall of Oriental Antiquities, so overcome was he with the excitement of being the first person to have read the story in over two thousand years.
(Sidebar sync: Regarding the Annunaki/finance families/bloodlines/central banking hypothesis of Dr Farrell et al. We received the story of The Flood and the quest for the immortality of our alien overlords from a guy who literally made currency for the bank at the centre of the Empire. Somebody's spinning somewhere, eh?)
So I actually have a tremendous affection for David Icke, because I see him as part of a long, only-occasionally-salubrious history of British mystics with a vision to share. (Mentioning no names.) And I don't even mind confessing that I have his upcoming book on pre-order. He considers it his best book and his magnum opus. That's enough for me. I would probably read Tom Cruise's magnum opus, too. Strange bedfellows, yeah?
Yes, he believes the Queen is an interdimensional shape-shifting lizard. But that sits somewhere in the middle of the range of ludicrous beliefs I see expressed just on the magical internets... to say nothing of mainstream religion. People in glass reptile enclosures shouldn't throw stones.
As for consumption preferences, I prefer his video appearances. Watch his eyes and facial expression as he's trying to explain perceptual reality in answer to a question. I know magic when I see it.
And I quite like his expression 'they defend the first domino'. Archonology, Apocalypse Pharmaka, ufology, parapolitics. Once you knock down the first domino; WTC 7 or the Phoenix Lights or the geological age of the Sphinx, for instance; then suddenly you are presented with another one which they are also lying about. One that is easier to knock down. And so it goes.
This is a pleasing turn of phrase that I choose to extract from a strange bedfellow relationship with David Icke. Even for the most voracious of occultist, you eventually find yourself in an echo chamber of overpriced grimoires, book-shilling blog posts, overreactions to comments on tumblr and not all that much else.
Sometimes we should seek the higher ground. Sometimes we should just seek the ground we pass by every day, on our way to more familiar haunts.
Who knows what dominoes we may find unprotected?