On 6/21/09, CalLizetteSmith wrote:
At Wolframalpha.com I entered “orgonite” and was rewarded with a lot of facts about “oreognite” , some kind of mineral.
Cal Smith
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thx, Liz–par for the course. The other search engines send people to the fakers , though of course Karl Welz, who invented the term, ‘orgonite,’ is a legitimate inventor, so I don’t include him in the ‘faker’ category.
~Don
This is not a search engine, more like a wikipedia type of thing. So, since there is not article on orgonite it sends you to the next, closest thing. Nothing strange going on there…
Ale
Thx for clarifying, socio. It’s easy enough to see if something new like this is simply another party organ, like Wikipedia is: just look up subjects like ‘Wilhelm Reich,’ and see what’s written.
Any such service that actually breaks free of the censors and Tavistock overseers is going to be an instant success, like people were hoping Wikipedia would be.
~Don
Wolfram’s work is interesting.
Following is a good comparison of Google vs. WoframAlpha:
[http://trueslant.com/ryansager/2009/05/]
I bought Wolfram’s book, “A New Kind of Science” (NKS) a few years ago right after it came out. He is a brilliant Mathematician that developed a computer program, Mathematica, that can parse symbolic mathematical notation and ‘execute’ them. Wolfram’s main area of interest has been the effects, and ubiquity, of very small ‘programs’ on reality; moreover, his thesis is that the universe arises (solely) from such, where fractal patterns of computation generate reality. I believe he is really on to something but misses the forest for the trees. Tragically, he seems to fall victim to the mythology of scientific materialism, whereby anything that is not apparently instrumentable, and does not comply with the strict protocols of typical, double-blind, experimentation (and thus filters out consciousness and intention) is not only ignored and dismissed, but vehemently ignored and dismissed, as valid areas and vectors for research, by the Orthodox Priesthood of Scientific Materialism (of which he is a Member and Luminary).
Following an inspiration, I just googled “Wolfram Tiller”, seeking to find any mention of William A. Tiller along with Stephen Wolfram. Interestingly, I get the following hit:
http://www.wolframscience.com/reference/books/t.html
Where Wolfram, rightly, acknowledges Tillers “conventional” scientific excellence in Materials Science. However, he does not mention any of Tiller’s extraordinary work, in matters etheric, such as can be found on his site: http://www.tiller.org/
Tiller is the antithesis of wolfram. Wolfram seeks to reduce the universe to computation. Tiller seeks to discover where, and how, consciousness flows into manifestation such that computation arises. However, Wolfram’s work is still highly relevant, and great insight may arise from those such as Tiller seeking to unravel and model the relationship between Matter<–>Energy<–>Information<–>Consciousness rather than to insist, as Wolfram does, that reality arises simply as the corollary of an infinite number of autopoietic small programs.
Pretty cool, Capt. Azti–good to know who these fellows are.
A nice aspect of orgonite’s effects is that some of them are measurable, as Reich showed with his orgone accumulators. All of us, here, sure know that many of the grander effects are visually consistent across the globe–a natural development of his cloudbuster experiments. In Reich’s day geiger counters, thermometers and gaussmeters were used to prove orgone’s existence and effects. Even Einstein acknowledged it before he ‘woke up’ and alarmedly blackballed Dr Reich
I don’t think there were tri-meters in those days but as soon as one of us gets a pricey tri-meter and starts recording data I think Manfred’s science forum is going to get really juiced up.
I think that our psychics can produce consistently measurable effects, too, though we might assume that these are also orgone dynamics. Instead of reinventing the wheel (copying 19th century research and later Russian published research) they’re exploring some new ground, especially with group efforts.
In time all of that will be fixed up with instrument-affirmed data for the record. For now, we’re content to use the collective observations of a handful of reputable energy sensitives as battlefield intel and as an aid to our individual intuitive pursuits.
Robert Graves told about his experience with intuited knowledge but I’m going to quote that in another thread. To know is an individual’s domain; we can’t know anything for someone else, much to cultists’ dismay [Image Can Not Be Found] , but with enough evidence we can put an undisputable truth, such as simple orgonite’s ability to perpetually change bad ambient energy into good energy, into general awareness.
There’s nothing wrong with instruments. Our main instruments, so far, for gaining confirmiing data have been our eyeballs and our guts. those are probably more valuable than even the priciest electronic tools, though those are sure useful, too.
I think that in this new science paradigm that we’re uncovering it’s not going to matter, very much, whether the researcher conditions the results. In the discarded, materialistic science paradigm only sterile ‘lab evidence’ was considered viable by the corporate academics and technocrats but, really, empirical evidence, collected from as many reputable people as possible, is a better way to achieve general knowledge of any truth.
I think that the complacent, harumphing, technobabbling labcoats are starting to be seen merely as institutionalized; cultists, rather than authorities
‘Peer-review THIS, you old farts!’
~DEon
The fundamental process of the scientific method is one where one makes a supposition; ie. raises a hypothesis, and then attempts to refute it; to test that the hypothesis is not valid. To do so, one designs experiments, or a set of injunctions. Therefore, as a basis of the experiments, one has an ‘experience’; I.E. one perceives a datum; an effect, as part of an event, that is relevant to the hypothesis and acts to refute or support it. Subsequently, one shares that experience with a set of peers sufficiently trained, in the disciplines related to the hypothesis, that one can have confidence that the original injunction is faithfully, and competently, duplicated and that the peers have a frame of reference capable of adequately interpreting the resultant experience. When sufficient numbers, then, of a “community of the adequate”, has exhaustively “peer reviewed” the experiments/injunctions, leading to a collective conclusion that the hypothesis is irrefutable, the Hypothesis becomes Theory.
However, there are huge problems with the above paradigm, especially as related to non ‘hard sciences’ (psychology, hermeneutics, mathematics, sociology, anthropology, etc.) or, moreover, to the reconciliation of hard sciences (physics, chemistry, biology, genetics, etc.) with the effects of consciousness and intention. A Materials Scientist might use an instrument such as a Mass Spectrometer, or a highly sensitive Photon Counter, to measure attributes of matter under various conditions. If the instruments are constructed, and maintained, to a sufficiently high standard the interpretation of the results, through the use of these instruments, can be safely considered empirical. However, what if the instrument is the mind itself? What if WE are the instrument to be used to measure reality and/or the effects of consciousness on reality? That Materials scientist could be a narcissistic, sociopath and pedophile; yet, technically brilliant; perfectly competent to practice his or her scientific discipline employing exterior instrumentalities. He, or she, is not the instrument requiring the sublime fidelity and high standard of mind required to maintain mindfulness, and a deep meditative/contemplative state of brain/heart/chakra synchronization required to faithfully interpret and recognize relevant interior phenomena or to, conversely, cause to effect physical, 3rd density, reality through focused intention.
Additionally, the “community of the adequate” so often tragically becomes the community of the orthodox–blinded to experimentally derived data that does not fit their presuppositions–or moreover, concludes that the true experimental results are politically, and economically, inconvenient and would lead to loss of tenure, or worse; and thus either suppress their own findings (leveraging such a betrayal for favors from the powerful) or, more pathetically, they submit to their corrupt master’s censorship in order to retain their wages, benefits, and comforts. Thus the “community of the adequate” become the community of the corrupted; the community of the bought; those who traded their oath to Scientific Integrity with one of personal comfort and an apparent security.
That is why I so respect the rare contemporary Scientists such as William Tiller, and revere the memory of Wilhelm Reich, and Royal Raymond Rife, and Georges Lakhovsky; and Ruth Drown, and so many others… Each of these exemplars could have had all of the wealth and comfort that this corrupt world would have bestowed them had they bowed down and worshiped mammon; yet they chose to open their hearts and live a life of service; that all might be freed from suffering.
I humbly pray that I might, develop the capacity, and courage, to walk in their footsteps.
Good points, Capt., and maybe we’re just riding the tsunami that’s taking down that institutionalized old paradigm. I suppose that if you randomly pick a dozen schmucks out of a crowd, dress them in white coats and add letters after their names they’re going to start behaving like clergy almost instantly.
We tend to idolize the pioneers but when we examine their personal lives it’s obvious that they were not immune from the conditioning of their times. Many of them assumed that they needed to have a following, for instance. The fact that they accomplished what they did without institutional funding may indicate that inspiration and on-target research makes capitalization mostly un-necessary at that stage. They combined good intuitive skills and a desire to improve the world with science training so they produced a lot of results with their fresh ideas.
Muller, a true pioneer, complained to me that he had to finance all of his own experiments but, on the other hand, at $20,000 per unit he was making a decent living, quietly sellling his home-made, magnet-powered engines by referral, after having gathered a lot of solid endorsements by travelling around and demonstrating it to groups of accredited scientists and engineers.
The Chinese are selling Brown’s Gas Generators, by the way. One of the implications of the use of Brown’s gas is that one is able to use it to get twice as much gold out of the same ore as one could get with conventional technology. Brown’s gas, which implodes when ignited, is produced in a Joe Cell, though it obviously doesn’t move to the engine’s carburetor. Anyone who buys gold notices that Chinese gold is more readily available than gold from other places and maybe this is one of the factors in China’s recent purchase of the corporate world order and all its assets. Pioneering technology has a lot of advantages.
I don’t think any of the people you mentioned were pedophiles or thieves because they evidently struggled to have personal integrity. Scientists who don’t have or want personal integrity can produce astonishing results, of course, but notice that most of that gets weaponized against humanity and nature by the corporate world order. But the scientists who have integrity end up creating mainly beneficial results that are hard to weaponize. Nor are the latter welcome in any corporation or university, though I think some still get abducted (drafted; disappeared underground) by the CIA and MI6. The KGB obviously did that to thousands of pioneer scientists during the Gulag years.
I say, let the evolutionary tsunami do its work and sweep away all of that oppressive horror. Anyone who tosses a towerbuster at a poisoned target is walking in the footsteps of Dr Reich. The more consciously we do this work, the more honor we bring to that wronged pioneer, too.
Maybe this current revolution is sort of like one of those nuke bombs that remove people but leave all their equipment intact [Image Can Not Be Found] . I don’t think any of us have a problem with technology, after all, and anything that the corporate world order have weaponized against us can be put to use in a positive direction.
Those ugly death towers probably need to go, though after someone has tossed orgonite around them they’re life force generators. We can probably find more elegant ways to produce the same and better results, of course. Carol has the impression, for instance, that the rectangular panels on the death towers have mobius coils in them–a ‘naked’ mobius coil makes you sick and depressed, even with minute current being pulsed through it, so imagine what a dozen, hundred-pound, naked mobius coils on a death tower, powered by megawatts can do to a neighborhood. Stick that big mobius on a bigger crystal and it becomes an orgone-generating dynamo
Manfred’s one of the few among us who has science training. I don’t think any university education is a waste of time because even if the subject matter is questionable the student is being trained to have more mental discipline. That’s something that just isn’t likely to happen if one is self-taught. Reading a lot of good books and experimenting on one’s own can be a substitute for formal education but I think it’s the group dynamic of a classroom and laboratory that really sharpens one’s observation skills. All of the people Capt Azti mentioned were university-educated, by the way. Tesla was, too.
Muller attended a technical college for a couple of years in Germany, after the war, but later studied higher math on his own in order to develop explanations for how magnets work. As Alex in Austria mentioned and as I also observed, Muller was an incredibly prolific inventor who did a lot more than perfect a free energy device.
Nearly every pioneering technology came from something developed in someone’s garage or basement. Tesla was an exception to that rule but when he got cut off by the corporate world order he still managed to finance his own research for a number of years. He was also evidently employed, from time to time, by Roosevelt. A lot of the weapons used against humanity and the atmosphere came out of his foundational research, though he clearly would have been opposed to that if it happened when he was alive. I saw some documented evidence that the US Gov’t even weaponized some of Reich’s technology in the 1950s to produce DOR in the atmosphere and Bielek says that the then-new CIA conned the patriotic Dr Reich into helping them with the basis for MK Ultra but that he figured out the scam and then tried, too late, to sabotage the data. According to the timeline, that’s evidently when the US Gov’t began trying to destroy Reich–took them almost a decade to murder him and poison his reputation.
We don’t need to look at history in a biased way. I try my best to persuade the contributors, here, some of whom will be seen as pioneers, to provide as much personal experience information as possible so that our readers can relate to their work better. The incredible experiences I read about in their email ought to be posted when it’s not too personal or unrelated. The more our readers will resonate with us, the more likely they’ll get busy doing this wonderful work [Image Can Not Be Found] because they’ll understand that we’re not particularly exceptional. Everyone seems to be a genius in some real way.
~Don
