I was on the Kevin and Bean show! Update: It looks like "the establishment" is supressing the audio from my ten minute interview on KROQ on the "Kevin and Bean" show, but don't lose hope y'all, I secretly recorded the show! Hear secret recording of censored show
07/25/07 Update: More notes on the Kevin and Bean show: Ted Huntington on the KROQ "Kevin and Bean" show and actual evidence that seeing, hearing and sending thought has been figured out
07/25/07 Update: I was on the Kevin and Bean show! and I got a lot of good info out to the public. That is probably the largest public audience I have ever talked to. I wish I was a little faster thinking, it went so fast I didn't get to talk about my controversial views about science such as how I reject the Big Bang expanding universe theory. My thanks to Bean, Lisa, Ralph, Jay and all the crew there at KROQ.
07/24/07 News flash: Three of my youtube Presidential Candidate debate questions were played on the KROQ Kevin and Bean show in Los Angeles, and they are going to talk to me in a phone interview tomorrow morning 07/25/07.

08/02/07
I went to Santa Cruz, and the University of California in Santa Cruz is very large and beautiful, full of very tall redwood trees. It reminds me of the scene in Return of the Jedi where they race through the tall trees. The beach has an amusement park that is interesting for people watching and creative foods (people sell fried twinkies, and little ice cream balls, for example) and rides. I have never enjoyed rides (too scary, and don't feel good or fun), circuses, county faires (although there are interesting exhibits there), I'm more of a gentle, museum, nature, pleasure, technology and science person. One thing that was hard not to notice was some amount of racism in the form of white superiority, and I wasn't sure how much of a problem it is, because people are beamed on and northern california tends to be more liberal than southern cal. For example, I know there are some white-power/Nazi people in San Diego which is frightening, but it's hard to believe Santa Cruz would have that kind of thing. One person said "white (right) now" as an example. But apparently, this suspicion was confirmed when I saw a brochure for Santa Cruz that has a interracial (african american and caucasian american) couple with a kid, and so the racism must be a significant problem for them and must be hampering tourism. In comparison, it was weird but Irvine actually probably has less racism. Still, 3 days in Santa Cruz is not enough, and there are plenty of uneducated rednecks in Irvine too. I was really surprised by that, maybe it's just a fad, traditionally the so-called hippies have always been intellectuals, pro-democracy, anti-racism, colorful and colorblind, for equal rights for women, the other species, etc. Racism is a phenomenon of the other side, the ultra-conservative, uneducated, spartan, religious. Probably the phenomenon is similar all over the earth, in the universities, there are enlightened people, but in the adjoining towns, people may be less enlightened. Many of the people I encountered in Santa Cruz were friendly, and I might say on average friendlier than people in Irvine, perhaps because the sourpuss murderous conservative view currently en vogue right now has really made nasty many of the people in red states and counties (and of course even those in blue counties too to some extent).

I think a slogan for the Democrats should be "the Republicans aren't the cubscouts, they are a dangerous, reckless, war-loving group with a history of violence and only a casual vision for new States on the Moon and Mars."

People often "heil" me, with a bent or straight right or left arm, and my latest response to this is, right and left doesn't even matter anymore, we know what is good and bad. As people, it's not difficult to understand what is fair, what is evil, that murder is wrong, that theft is wrong, that dishonesty is wrong. It doesn't matter right or left, blue or red, and when people adhere to abstract concepts like "right and left" or "blue and red", it opens the door to many people doing things they don't agree with inside, but do for the sake of the "team". Now we should be moving to a planet and society where people do what they themselves believe in, not necessarily what their party believes in. Stay true to your own beliefs, and we will have a good society.

The interview on KROQ with Bean and the crew really has caused a change inside me. I'm trying to lose weight now, and it feels different. I'm trying the method, or only eating when hungry, and only just enough food to stop the feeling of hunger. I have a thousand comments on this, about how people visualize a large meal, when in reality, a very small meal is all they need to temporarily stop feelings of hunger, how people have set traditions of "breakfast, lunch, dinner" and how that causes eating when not hungry, how eating less actually creates more free time for other projects, and saves money. I could go on for a while, I hope it works. I've gone down from 300 to 285 in two weeks. I'm thinking that hopefully I can quantify some kind of regular weight loss down to some ideal weight. The key is not to make myself suffer, by eating a little something whenever I feel hungry, but stopping quickly once the hunger feeling is gone, eating slowly and really trying to taste the food. This way I can focus more on eating some expensive really fancy food, but only a small amount of it, and enjoying the taste instead of just woofing it down. I'm thinking I would at least like to lose a pound a week. I'm not sure how many pounds I actually need to lose, but obviously we know when we look in the mirror and our body doesn't look fat, and on the other hand doesn't look too thin, scrawny or fragile. At a pound a week, in one month that is only 4 pounds. 3 pounds a week is 12 pounds a month, at that rate I would lose 30 pounds in 3 months. 5 pounds a week is 20 pounds a month, I would be looking in good shape in only 2 months. I'm interested to see how it turns out. Being vegetarian helps, because there are so little mainstream food choices that don't have meat, and I think many vegetarians are more into taste than meat eaters. I'm hopeful, I'm a bad muthafucka, and I have a lot of excitement, energy (or perhaps photon) and focus. I'm a person that runs my life based on my philosophy and my mind, and that controls what I do, and I am powerless to do anything else and wouldn't want to. I have a well-pruned set of many values, and I rarely depart from those values. People are like saying "eat! eat! eat!" and it's a little ridiculous, I feel fine, I'm not hungry, I'm not suffering in any way. It's either people who are into inaccurate pscyhology theories, and/or people who don't want me to gain the popularity that comes with being in good physical shape. I think this new feeling is evidence, that a little love, a little friendship, can work wonders in a person's life.

The key to this diet I think is focusing and paying close attention to what you are putting into your body. When we are putting something into our body, we should be careful about what that is. Food tastes better when a person is hungry. I think another key is stopping and taking the rest as leftovers to store in the refridgerator and hold on to eat when hungry again. People, I think, tend to think they should finish the serving. Then I am also doing a light exercize 3 days/week.

I can see the trailers for the movie "Science" in my mind, and they are cool. Beethoven's 9th Symphony plays, Aristarchus with a drawing of the sun, Archimedes runs naked, Hypatia rides in her chariot, Galileo shows the moon of Jupiter, Bruno or Servetus yell burning on a stake, Newton looks through the prism, Pupin sees eyes, a rocket lifts off for the Moon, Pioneer and voyeger travel past Jupiter...and then simply the word "Science", and "coming soon to a theatre near you". Maybe there could be narration (over Beethoven's 9th in full choir) like "The greatest story ever told....of people who died for their beliefs ... to make the world a better place....to understand the universe around them....with surprising genius....a struggle for truth....at great cost....to fulfill our destiny ....and the dream of the future........Science"

I think I'm going to redo my DOE trailer to include different angles, so you can see the Blue earth ships better, and there are changing angles to give a faster more exciting 2 second clip edit.

Some people think thought has replaced voice, and our voice muscles. But I view the voice as a separate device, still useful, although many functions are duplicated in our thought. I like to hear my voice, and there are still many uses for voice that cannot be duplicated by thought.

When a person thinks about sexual jealousy for awhile, I think they would realize how stupid it is, as I have, because, first, violence is a big deal, consensual sex and pleasure is not a big deal, but perhaps more importantly, I think people need to let other people do what they want to do...they should not try to restrict people from doing what they want...and then to try to stop somebody from having sex with somebody else besides you, or to be angry because they did, in my opinion only makes them not like you more...it increases your chances of not getting sex with them even more. Some people might argue that people are turned on by a jealous person, and maybe some are, but to me, it seems stupid, in particular because people should freely enjoy pleasure, responsibly, planning and/or removing the possibility of pregnancy, and disease. Sting said it well with his song, "If you love somebody, set them free", which is a smart message. I think people may find that with that freedom that they actually prefer monogomy, because there is no pressure, possession, or jealously with that particular person.

08/03/07
I feel like when people are young they are weighted down with all these traditional mistakes and problems. I see like a drawing where a poor kid is weighted down by massive words like 'religion', 'antisexuality', 'psychology', 'drug war', 'Pupin secret', 'tobacco', 'alcohol', 'no science or logic', etc...then as a child ages, they slowly start to throw off these bad traditions placed on them by a vicious and idiotic history. I feel like I threw off religion, antisexuality, the drug war, smoking, recreational drugs, alcohol, antiscience, psychology, the Pupin secret, and now finally poor eating habits and traditions. This is amazing, I feel good, I weighed myself and am at 282 pounds and heading into the 270s, so clearly losing 20 pounds was an underestimate because I still look fat, I am thinking it is going to be more like 40 pounds, but I like this new way of eating, and it will be interesting to see where the equilibrium weight finally stablizes. Plus it is interesting to see the rate of weight loss, because then I can tell other people what to expect from a similar method. This experience has been very unusual for me, and it shows me, I think that, sometimes no amount of talk (although talk can certainly help, it gives the basic raw data people need to make decisions), no amount of tricks are going to work sometimes to get a horse to drink for example, to quit tobacco, or to lose weight, it seems like an internal decision in a person's brain, as if they have suddenly figured something out, and then everything changes...I don't think people can be coaxed, it's something they need to figure out themselves. This is just my own feeling, other people may have different biologies.

An interesting aspect of the antidemocracy movement that is not often mentioned, is the way they generally despise the popular. For example, the way they hated John Lennon, Marilyn Monroe, JFK, MLK, etc. Popular leaders are viewed as dangerous to the anti-democracy movement; those people that don't want the public to have any say over decisions made by those in a representative, monarchical, oligarchical, corporate, or communist government. And so they work against the popular heros and favorites of society, in particular when those popular people don't echo the party line.

I think another key to the weight loss is keeping a close monitoring of your weight on a scale, recording your weight, two or three times a day in a log, and trying to project estimates into the future given your weight loss or gain trend.

perspectives on KROK interview:
-possibly the largest audience? I have ever spoken to. Maybe for outsider audience. Clearly, people are moving forward with some kind of plan. No doubt there will be some kind of testing to see the results of those people who hear what I say. So far, the interview order goes:
Infidel Guy 2003
KROK 2007
next...?
if infidelguy interview is any example, probably nothing will come of this.

Clearly Kevin and Bean have to be out there, in a way that is ... the most out there in the front...probably liberal yes progressive to some extent. perhaps to a large extent, but clearly there are going to be two money pools, both with their beliefs working either for or against whatever I say. Some of my views are actually bipartisan and hopefully, people will, like me, not take political sides, but will instead take sides based only on the particular issue.

There is the possibility of being a political correspondant. Clearly that kind of job would not be enough to survive on, but could open other doors.

Something cool is definitely going on, and it's exciting.

I don't think anything is going to come of this instantly but maybe in a few months, a few years, after the next election...

This appears to be driven by my youtube videos which apparently may have 1) gotten much more attention than other vids or 2) simply were used as an opportunity to interview me and for me to get some issues out.

One thing that is key is to watch the ratings on the show. Maybe they will be nothing, but I have a feeling that they are going to be kind of wild. It's like making history. When I get a message to the public, in this kind of scale, it is going to be remembered as a historical stepping stone, a change in public opinion perhaps. Maybe it's arrogant to say, but I think the show is going to be of historical importance, and so Kevin and Bean will be included in that historical note. It's somewhere in the story of how seeing, hearing and sending thought went public, very early in the story.

this could lead to my own radio show, but that is kind of volitile, or more interestingly a tour with a band, which would be fun and we could take the mammerjammer message to the people.

I think without doubt this is clearly the biggest audience I may have ever had.

07/27/07
Well it's a few days after my appearance on "Kevin and Bean" on KROQ 106.7 and I am starting to calm down. I hope I didn't offend too many people, you have to remember, believe what you want to believe, it's only just talk. You make up your own mind about what you believe in. Whenever I say decriminalize drugs, I think I need to say also that, you know my advice is to stay in good shape, don't get overweight, exercise regularly, and be good to your body, you know be aware that using illegal drugs, alcohol and tobacco can cause lots of problems in your life, and there is a lot to be said for sober science and pleasure both physical and intellectual, the key is just that let's not jail those people who are overweight, who don't exercise regularly, who smoke, drink alcohol, and use drugs, eso long as they are not violent, not driving irratically, stealing, or breaking other laws, etc.

This experience has shown me, that maybe there is more going on in talk radio than meets the eye. Some people might think that since there's no video that it must be more conservative than the more progressive video, after all it's only audio, but for whatever reason, the audio-only people seem to be more progressive than tv (aside from cable access). I don't have time to listen to radio or television, but if I was looking for the newest in new, most progressive, I probably would tune in to Kevin and Bean, because obviously they shattered a major barrier forward by having me on. For example, this is the major first radio or tv station to have me on, without trying to be nasty, George Noory who covers a lot of this controversial material and who Ted Charach loves to listen to wouldn't even return my email, neither will Bean but then they already had me on so what you need foo? And so Howard Stern, Mark and Brian, Leykis, all of whom seem like cool dudes, aren't brave enough to take me on. So anyway, ... that seems like the way things are...when the establishment wants to talk to you they will call you, don't bother calling them...I mean...constantly pestering them has only gotten me in trouble and never any opportunities. Most of the material comes from the top down, not the other way around, but you have to remember I'm an outsider, so make up your own mind.

I would rate my performance as a B minus or C plux. Because I missed the opportunity to say that I think the photon is matter, and the basis of all matter, that the big bang theory is probably false, and I didn't go after psychiatric hospitals, didn't get on my issue of letting people in the military quit (I think the arrest of Korey Rowe might have had to do with people thinking that my statement would definitely get on the air, and then it dikn't). I did get some funny statements in. I did get some good info out. I wish I had defended the idea of seeing, hearing and sending thought more, by saying...'is it so hard to believe that people can see eyes?', and 'in any event it's a valid line of scientific research'. So, I could have done much better, but in a positive light, it leaves a teaser, a reason to go back. It's kind of wild how people behind the scenes arrange this stuff, and I know nothing about it. But that is kind of the interesting thing about morning talk radio: it's kind of a training ground for interesting smart people. Kevin and Bean probably have hundreds of goto people who like me have a message and want to turn on and enlighten the public with it, you know, smart people, with interesting views.
I feel kind of unsure about using the Zepellin 'ramble on' bit, but I basically have to go with the stuff that is on my mind, and much of that comes from people with far more wealth and power than I have, so many times, I simply accept their advice and presume that it is meaningful or useful. Many times, I reject the crap that is beamed into my head, because it is designed to make me look bad, or it's something I don't agree with, etc. although I can't possibly stop all of it, in which case like everybody else I end up backpeddling to explain my actual opinions. There is no deeper meaning or anything, I think I simply enjoy that song, I liked listening to that album when I was young, it's a free speech message, I only found out later the relevent line "mine's a tale that can't be told, my freedom I hold dear", which is relevent to so many of us, and the current events on earth. The 5 seconds of ramblin on, could have been "why can't people quit the military, they can quit Walmart without being jailed", but I had to balance comedy with issue, and it's important to have comedy. Here we have to take these massively terrible issues, and somehow make it funny? How can it be done? Many times, it simply can't be. But in some way, smart people can find the comedy in terrible events.
There is a lot of pressure on me because I want to keep my job, but I don't want to be dull either. So you know, people at the University are listening and have their set of values, people in the audience have a wide variety of values and includes all professions government and civilian, the owners of the radio station have their values, and so it's a tough balancing act for me, and in that case I tend to go conservatively, not reaching or improvising. So that was conservative for me. I think the only improvised line was "I think I'm going above and beyond the call of dookie here", which, like most improve might be beamed there since it's not in my notes. For this talk radio stuff, and probably for all high-pressure big audience interactions, my feeling is to make a number of one-liners that are funny and make the intellectual statement clearly and then go over those statements, and keep them available on paper or on screen if possible (I just realized that many people insiders, must go with the infinitely more convenient teleprompter in front of the eyes, then you can look into the camera and talk like you are not reading, and I am for not deceiving people, I read much of what I said...the time is far to important to be wasted with minor issues). Because you have about 3 seconds to say something when it's your turn, and it's best to make it count, you don't want to be reaching or stumbling for something to say. Each talk of 2 or 3 sentences, should end on a joke-line, with some funny statement. One of mine that didn't get played was an oldy, but still funny, "maybe the reason we don't have a registry of violence offenders is because the Republican ranks would be decimated." which is kind of funny and true, but probably only funny if you are a democrat or liberal.
To me, the question of is there a god, or are there gods, is like asking "is there a blah?", maybe there is or maybe there isn't, but it's a useless question. We should strive to live a good life whether there is a "blah" or not. But beyond that, you've got to look at history chejos. Before Jesus there were all the Roman Gods, the Goddess Venus for the Romans, goes back to the Goddess Aphrodite of the Greeks, and all the way back to the Goddess Inanna of the Sumerians, and the Sumerians are the people that invented writing, and the earliest literature already talks about the Goddess Inanna...and the 200 other Sumerian Gods that controlled various parts of the universe.

This is kind of a cool Simpson's intro:
Simpson's universe theory
and the evolution one:
Simpson's evolution
With the universe one, I don't know that galaxies could be atoms. I think we would need to find similarities. One similarity I can think of is that, perhaps globular galaxies...what appears to be the ultimate evolution of intelligent life could be neutral particles, while spiral galaxies...what appear to be the middle of the galactic cycle (starting with nebula to spiral and ending as globular), spiral galaxies like our own might be charged particles. Other than that, I don't know. But the one question that remains in my mind, is what is the nature of the farthest future of the universe? What is the balance between newly formed gas clouds from stray photons, and the needs of the advanced globular clusters who need a constant supply of matter to replace lost photons?

Here are my web statistics:


Daily Statistics for July 2007

Day	Hits		Files		Pages		Visits		Sites		KBytes

1	1375	2.31%	1120	2.36%	296	2.68%	144	3.45%	220	4.33%	1212292	5.47%
2	1388	2.33%	1168	2.47%	310	2.81%	190	4.56%	271	5.33%	1284507	5.80%
3	1455	2.45%	1288	2.72%	252	2.28%	140	3.36%	179	3.52%	661698	2.99%
4	1481	2.49%	1272	2.68%	323	2.92%	153	3.67%	184	3.62%	626985	2.83%
5	3830	6.44%	1892	3.99%	327	2.96%	166	3.98%	291	5.72%	1135255	5.13%
6	1418	2.38%	1177	2.48%	308	2.79%	139	3.33%	171	3.36%	544294	2.46%
7	1290	2.17%	1047	2.21%	220	1.99%	164	3.93%	290	5.70%	540298	2.44%
8	1330	2.24%	1135	2.40%	231	2.09%	165	3.96%	234	4.60%	1057257	4.77%
9	219	0.37%	148	0.31%	29	0.26%	25	0.60%	48	0.94%	71113	0.32%
10	1501	2.52%	1137	2.40%	340	3.08%	141	3.38%	160	3.15%	484938	2.19%
11	1836	3.09%	1503	3.17%	331	3.00%	161	3.86%	203	3.99%	1194635	5.40%
12	1551	2.61%	1363	2.88%	273	2.47%	122	2.92%	236	4.64%	1470463	6.64%
13	1113	1.87%	942	1.99%	226	2.05%	129	3.09%	191	3.76%	678695	3.07%
14	783	1.32%	687	1.45%	162	1.47%	149	3.57%	223	4.39%	681607	3.08%
15	1304	2.19%	1099	2.32%	336	3.04%	149	3.57%	205	4.03%	699927	3.16%
16	1479	2.49%	1248	2.63%	264	2.39%	152	3.64%	484	9.52%	1343006	6.07%
17	1925	3.24%	1613	3.40%	241	2.18%	145	3.48%	680	13.37%	990728	4.47%
18	1279	2.15%	1033	2.18%	167	1.51%	131	3.14%	450	8.85%	509317	2.30%
19	1412	2.37%	1010	2.13%	192	1.74%	125	3.00%	513	10.09%	704079	3.18%
20	1742	2.93%	1205	2.54%	198	1.79%	118	2.83%	585	11.50%	528627	2.39%
21	1075	1.81%	806	1.70%	213	1.93%	141	3.38%	414	8.14%	646798	2.92%
22	913	1.53%	695	1.47%	135	1.22%	110	2.64%	366	7.20%	716300	3.23%
23	2184	3.67%	1652	3.49%	275	2.49%	138	3.31%	649	12.76%	554122	2.50%
24	2209	3.71%	1634	3.45%	215	1.95%	140	3.36%	574	11.29%	637657	2.88%
25	13021	21.89%	11991	25.31%	2023	18.32%	447	10.72%	812	15.97%	1432472	6.47%
26	9389	15.78%	6663	14.06%	3006	27.22%	300	7.19%	792	15.58%	1293885	5.84%
27	989	1.66%	848	1.79%	151	1.37%	93	2.23%	252	4.96%	442398	2.00%

03/20/07
Here is the summary of what it appears happened to my Mom. To an excluded, outsiders who have little or no knowledge of what has been happening on earth in the last century, it sounds insane and extremely far out, but yet, many insiders have confirmed the basic story.
My Mom was murdered on Sunday night, 03/04/07 around 10PM EST. This is around the time she usually would call me every Sunday, and 12 days before she was to spend an 11 day vacation with me in Southern California. She was killed by a beam. It is not clear how, but insiders suggest that, a beam of photons (or electrons) can stimulate cells (we know this from the truth that images and sounds can be made to appear by stimulating neuron cells in the brain), and in my Mom's case, some insiders have suggested that cells in a gland were stimulated to produce unhealthy amounts of a hormone (which one I don't know, and the entire idea of killing a person by beam that causes a gland to produce too much of a hormone is entirely new to me...I had never thought of that before, but these people, in particular in military...its their job to think of new creative ways to kill people and not be detected, and so they probably found this "hormone" method), and this caused a heart attack (fibrillation) or possible a stroke (loss of blood to brain). Many insiders were saying "hor", one said "scared to (death)"). Such a beam can be sent from below underground in the vast underground secret tunnels, from above by satellite, plane or street lamp, and/or planted inside a house when a person is not there. The person who murdered my Mom is named Steve, and may be a person I went to high school with, an evil bastard and total scum named Steve Collins. This guy followed me around in high school chanting "Ted is gay" all the time and his Dad's nickname is "Satan", just to give you an idea about what kind of a monster this guy is. The character "Nelson" in the Simpsons may be patterned after this guy, but in my memory this guy is just a total violent criminal, nothing pleasant. So in Simpson's terminology it would be like Nelson using a secret police/army laser beam to kill Marge Simpson and then laugh when she falls down while a million Christian people applaud the murder. Many insiders said "Steve", and there were many other hints pointing in this direction. To see how this guy named Steve killed my Mom is tough to imagine for me as an outsider...I mean clearly he had to be included, perhaps in police, military or phone company facilities around Syracuse, New York. He obviously had access to the physical controls of these beams, to see cameras in my Mom's house, etc. My vote is that this person, whoever it is, who all the insiders saw kill my Mom, should be executed. My first vote is for him to be executed, and secondly for life in prison. If these "beam murderers" were public like other murders those murderers would certainly be executed by most juries, but because they are protected by the secrecy of the Pupin camera network, and the criminal insiders in that net, these murderers continue to live free and out of prison, and are not executed as they should be. It's amazing that these murderers are just allowed to live free, they are not being executed or jailed. They may continue to kill using the camera-thought net at&t technology, because I doubt seriously they are locked in jail. For example, we know Sturgis and Cesar have not been locked in jail. So this Steve person pushed a button most likely, I doubt this was done in his mind only. And many of these people were watching the live video of my Mom in their eyes as she was to be murdered. It seems that it was planned days earlier if not months earlier. This was part of a Republican/Nazi mass murder of liberals. For example, it appears that many liberal people were murdered in March 2007, and my Mom was one of the victims in this Nazi "Aunschluss" or "putsch". So this person, Steve, perhaps pushes some button and it causes my Mom to fall down dead, and the sight of this causes many of these vicious people to laugh, and this is followed by the routine clapping of the insider Nazi Republican fascists (remember how Bush jr clapped upon seeing the collision of the second military plane and the WTC building beamed in front of his eyes...they applauded the murder of John Lennon, they applaude all the murders of innocent nonviolent liberals). It's difficult to imagine how people could laugh at the murder of an old lady, and then applaud such an act. They are total fascists, violent criminals, vicious monsters, and that is the status quo among conservatives in the camera network...they are totally upside down sick twisted shit-for-brains. I wish the outsiders would wakeup to this sickening reality, you know. What protects your Mom, or you from being lasered too? My mom was almost 70 and I will be 70 in 32 years. You may be 70 in 10, 20 or 30 years...and in my opinion, you have 10, 20, or 30 years to expose these people before you are the murdered that they laugh and joke about, and then applaud the murder of. This kind of thing has been completely documented and is well known, in particular from the Nazis in the 1940s, how they would routinely walk around in the Jewish ghettos, shoot people and then laugh...just total inhuman monsters.
So then my Mom was there dead on the floor and the Nazi net went into action. One insider told me that the county medical examiner arrived on Tuesday to "fix" the crime scene, but I can only guess. What then appears to have happened, sometime after my Mom was murdered was that a person or people came into her house, and stages the scene to look like death by "hypothermia". They did this by turning down the thermometer to 52 and pulling down my Mom's pants and underwear. The county coroners and police are all insiders and corrupted conservatives. If not conservative, they know they have to obey the republican/nazis out of fear. So causes of death are routinely lied about by coroners. A simple example is the Warren Commission of the 1960s. Only 1 of 10 MD forensic pathologists rejected the single bullet theory, Cyril Wecht, and we know that JFK was shot from the front, so the single bullet theory can be rejected by a person with a 8th grade education. People might be wondering, why would they pull down your Mom's pants and underwear? That is kind of sick. And it is to fake an extremely rare condition of "paradoxical undressing" that happens to people with hypothermia, where they feel very hot and remove their clothes. I am one of the few people asking "how many people have ever died from hypothermia inside a house?". The temperatures for that week in Syracuse were all around the 40s. Both the furnace and hot water heater pilot flame were lit and working. I stayed in my Mom's house for a duration, and I am a person that enjoys a colder climate. To me in a light jacket, the house was actually warm at 52, my nose did not get cold and I felt fine. So, this Nazi crime scene staging is an interesting aspect about these Nazi Republicans that murder by beams. And the entire time, I am thinking...here I am walking above or underneath the same exact beam device that was used to kill my Mom...it is a frightening Nazistic planet that has evolved since 1910. These devices can kill a person with the push of a button and are often used by this violent criminal group that has grown huge since 1910.
It is amazing to me, that some person would murder a 69 year old woman, and risk being murdered or imprisoned for life themselves...for a person that would probably die in 10 or 20 years anyway. But this reflects the stupidity and absolute confidence and arrogance that the murderers in the Pupin AT&T network have. In the same week a 103 year old guy was mugged. It's just monsterous Nazi people that prey on the weak.
Many wonderful people sent their love, too many to name, and this helped very much. I have to remember to echo that love when other people lose somebody close to them, because it does help to ease the sorrow.
I could go on in more detail but I will leave those notes for the camera thought net to archive.
It is mysterious as to why the Bush clan decided to murder all these liberals in March 2007. I guess it is an anniversary of their starting their genocide murders in Iraq (today March 20, in 2003, the Afghanistan invasion was October, 2001). Clearly this set of recent murders has installed more fear in liberals. It's interesting to think that my Mom was murdered as a victim of the 2000 Coup in the US where the 9 people on the Supreme Court put Bush jr into the White House against the vote of the public majority. And so she is in the same group as all the victims of the 9/11 Reichstag Fire which is almost 3000 people, the few thousand US kids killed in Afghanistan and Iraq who did not have the choice to quit, and the perhaps 300,000 humans murdered in Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of that 2000 election. Again, I think we should have a planet where people die, not where they are murdered. I think about the future where this kind of murder will never happen. Around 3000 or 4000 CE murder will be unheard of, any body that murders would be quickly captured...they would know it would be useless, but also, violence will probably be seen as pointless and as a threat to a person's own survival. Even war will probably never occur. They would realize that they could never win with first strike violence and would, like everybody else reject such ideas. But that society is far from the one we have now. Without having life independent of earth, we may not be one of those advanced life forms that move stars together to form globular clusters, we may fizzle out as a failed form, one of millions that must evolve for millions of years, only to go extinct in some apparently uncontrollable mistake or circumstance. And with this kind of people and voting, I think we are bringing on our own extinction...I mean people like Bush jr and this group of neonazi republicans that watch people in their houses and heads are murderers without remorse...they publically murder and nobody does a thing about it. My feeling is to continue to expose them and the camera-thought net. Since we are all going to die eventually anyway, I far prefer to have put up a fight and done what I could to reach the public with the truth as opposed to dying with a whimper in silence, secrecy and fear. Many people told me "whoa!", etc. but I'm not going to stop or slow in any way what I am doing. I think the opposite is true...when the Nazis are at the gate you have to tighted the locks better than ever before, obviously. That is not the time to swing open the doors and allow them to walk all over you, but instead to sink in for the duration and fight back with just as much ferocity if not more ferocity than they. The truth is on our side, they are murderers and liars with everything to lose, and we are the jailers of murderers and want the truth...we have everything to gain. These murderers will get caught some time, they can't commit "perfect murders" forever. Eventually, Sturgis, Cesar, 9/11, Pupin, something will reach the public and the public will finally understand what has been going on for the last century and the web of violent crime that the Nazis, Republicans, CIA, Conservatives have been weaving over the earth will fall apart and collapse resulting in most of them going to prison for their participation in violent crimes.
I hope to some day have the time to recreate the video of how my Mom was murdered; showing the people with video in front of their faces. Like so many other murders, it would go a long way to summarize what is going on right now on earth for those many excluded who are living with 1800s technology and haven't the foggiest idea of what our modern society is comprised of, and how they are living right now.

It's amazing how 9/11 was done just to justify invading Afghanistan and then Iraq...and then all for money and perhaps an enjoyment in murder of the evil Republicans in the cam-thought net.

03/12/07
My Mom appears to have been murdered on Sunday, March 4th around 10pm, around the time she would regularly call me, in what appears to be a Republican/Nazi onslaught (other liberals have been murdered too apparently), she was just about to visit me on March 16th. But being excluded, I don't have all the info. I will have more info later. The camera-thought net insiders staged it to look like hypothermia, and that is even what the doctor who did the autopsy is claiming. But the insiders are clearly saying that she was murdered by a person named Steve, and that something like, a beam of photons was used to stimulate one of her glands which produced a large enough amount of a hormone to cause a heart attack which was probably the actual cause of her death. She was 69 and would be 70 in June. I can't understand, like many other wonderful people, why this can't be a planet where people die without being murdered. I will have more details later, it's a terrible loss for me, and to look back on my memories of her is upseting, I can only describe it as getting the wind knocked out of me, nausia, and sadness. But I'm feeling better. I am voting that if there is any person that murdered Sylvia, they are to be executed as they would be in most courts for a first degree murder. Hopefully, this person is already dead, but if not, my vote first is for the death penalty for them, and secondly for life imprisonment with no parole. I encourage other people who have lost loved ones by beam from the people in the secret camera-thought network to do this too. I see the way this may work as probably that the beam is aligned with only one open switch. A family member or friend of the deceased volunteers to close the switch in their mind (for me, perhaps a thought of a button taped down), and the murderer is then killed remotely by heart attack or some other painless method. This way, the executioner is a close friend of the murder victim and takes the responsibility of murder as a punishment for murder. In other words, that murder of a murderer will always be on their record, but of course, many people feel that this kind of murder is not only justified but necessary. In some way this has taught me to try to feel more love and tolerance, but of course I'm human. I have many more things I will type later.
Ted

02/26/07
I find many people that constantly talk about the past, I mean these people still constantly refer to harmless things I did far in the past, and even just recently past issues. After seeing "The Final Cut" (2004) which I highly recommend excluded people see, I thought: "if I could see any of my past eyeball views, which would I want to see" and I thought..."None...I want to live for the future", I don't want to see the past again. I want all new things, new experiences. Each second I would spend looking at past thoughts is a precious second wasted on a repeat. One of the most constant thoughts in my mind is that I am reach the 40s and the last days of my body being even remotely desirable are coming to a close, and there is only the celibacy that is fated to all people of this time. I won't even be able to enjoy any kind of physical pleasure, but of course I am not alone. The saddest thing is that most people don't even realize this, or bother to change the current system. physical pleasure is only a small part of life, (intellectual pleasure probably consuming the larger part of life, because of physical limitations on orgasm and need for other intellectual activities during touch) but this group cannot even get physical pleasure remotely correct, labeling females who are affectionate as "whores" and "sluts" (I have to say to people who continue those labels: "hey piss off for ruining any remote possibility of physical pleasure for the rest of us" apparently women are already far too affectionate for their liking, but no where near affectionate enough for mine), and keeping paying for pleasure illegal, they are so hyper-anti-pleasure to an unbelievable extreme, while physical pain and violence are tolerated. This is on my mind much of the time. Just the sadness of it, and stupidity of this kind of belief in celibacy and monogamy that ruins life and stops all major pleasure.

Quick summary of camera-thought net from excluded perspective: (cam-thought net in 30 seconds) [reorder in chronolog: power line, microphone, recording tape]
The telegraph was invented in xxxx, and this meant that a wire has to connect two people that want to telegraph to each other. Soon many buildings with telegraph devices were connected by single lines of wire. In 1876 Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone. Eventually business buildings and people's houses began to have a wire for the telephone installed. And this evolution of wiring together houses with a telephone wire (in addition to a wire for electricity) happened at the same time all around the developed earth. Probably very soon after the the invention of the telephone, with the invention of the magnetic recording tape (date), the telephone company, Bell xxx, started recording all the phone calls that people make. (Since they own the lines, the information on those lines must also be considered their property, although the issue of privacy might conflict with this.) People in the government, in particular police and military, the major media companies, and the wealthy may have forced the Bell company to share these recorded phone calls with them. In addition, since there were wires in many people's houses, devices such as microphone and cameras could be connected to the wires to transmit digital images and sound recordings back to the telephone company stations to be recorded. All these devices use the telephone company wires sending their information to be recorded at the phone company stations. People in government, and business perhaps take for free or may have to pay the phone company for these images and sound recordings which provide them with valuable information about the public. In possible October of 1910, Mihajlo (Michael) Igvorski Pupin, working at Columbia University in New York City, was the first to see what a person sees from behind their head in infrared or microwave wavelengths of light. Pupin may have seen then that there are two screens in the human brain and the brains of many other species: screen one which records what the eyes see, and a second screen, screen 2, which records what the brain thinks as a scratchpad where people draw and remember images (for example visualize in your mind a green triangle, this is drawn on screen 2). This tremendous achievement was not announced to the public, but was kept secret, although many people in other nations would learn about this from the unstoppable freeflow of information, and duplicate it within a year. Intensive research continued secretly on all fronts and it seems clear that in 1911 people unknown to the excluded at this time, figured out how to decode two more screens from the brain. Screen 3 records the sounds a brain hears from external sources in the universe, and screen 4, which records the sounds of thought a brain creates (for example the thought "where did I leave my keys?"), by stimulating neurons or somehow duplicating the natural stimulus in the brain. Probably in 1911 was also the tremendous find that images and sounds can be sent back to those 4 screens in a person's brain. Exactly when and where and by whom this happened is currently unknown to the excluded but all those with information are invited to share this with us. Images sent to screen 1, what the eyes see, make objects appear in front of a person as if they were actually there in a person's view, but the images are simply beamed onto a person's brain. Images sent to screen 2, what the mind sees, appear in a person's mind but not in front of their eyes as if outside in the universe as they do with screen 1, on this screen, screen 2, the image is in a person's mind. For example, beaming an image of a banana may make the brain of a human or many species consider eating a banana. Audio sent to screens 3, what the ears hear, will produce sounds that the brain actually hears, as if they were sounds coming from the external universe outside the body, while in reality, these sounds are only beamed onto a brain. Audio sent to screens 4, what the mind hears, will sound as if they come from an internal source, not from an external source. These sounds will sound the same as when a person remembers a sound such as a song. There are other places in brains where smells can be recorded and beamed back causing smells to be smelled by the brain. The feeling of touch, heat and pain can all be caused with beams. Presumably these beams are made of photons or possibly electrons. These devices will very quickly propagate over the planet connecting with the other devices (cameras and microphones) onto the telephone wire and supervised by the phone company. Once images could be beamed on to screen 1, in front of a person's eyes, and screen 2, in a person's mind, a new interface was created where a person interacts totally from their brain. A person sees video in front of their eyes as if there was a television screen in front of them, but the video is partially transparent, and is an overlay over the image that is entering their eyes. Humans probably select video from various people's houses and their thoughts and get it beamed directly onto their screen 1 where they can see the video in front of them, or on screen 2 where they can enjoy seeing their neighbors thoughts and latest home activities in their mind. To do this, these photon or electron beam transmitters must be placed in every room of every house and must be very small, they are also probably in telephone poles and street lights, on tall buildings, and of course in satellites. The invention of the laser by xxx Townes may enable much of this technology. These devices are probably administered by those in the telephone company, and probably those in government police, and military, under a large influence of those wealthy people who pay them extra to beam certain images or audio onto excluded people's brains. Lasers in people's houses and on street lamps etc are used by these people to make a person itch their skin causing a person to gesture and steer the opinions of those watching that person. Lasers also can be used to cut through people at the speed of light, since the photon is much faster than a bullet propelled by gunpowder. The power of the lasers on the street lights, satellites, and in houses is not known by me excluded, but very well may be able to cut a human in two in a microsecond even inside their own house. This technology may have created a two or more sided stalemate of advanced computer controlled potential massive murder of millions of humans done by computers in microseconds. In addition to all these secret devices, a very important new device was invented that is also secret. This particle beam device allows muscles to be contracted from remote without ever having to physically touch a body. I simply call it a "muscle-mover". Galvani was the first in 1800xxx to find that muscles can be contracted with an electrical current. This technology may have advanced to such a degree that all muscles of any body with a brain may be completely controlled all the time using this particle beam technology. On me, they only contract my eyelid muscle, or occassionally make my leg swing to stub a toe while I am walking, but the possibilities are terrible. Think of people whose muscle might be moved while driving a vehicle, or near a large drop. So much is still unknown and we excluded have many questions about the chronology and all the secret technology that was invented and is now in everybody's homes, and on every street. As time continues and this secret research and development continued, these devices became smaller and smaller because of the fear of being detected. With the invention of wireless communication in xxxx, a new method of sending information is available, however, because of the secret nature of seeing inside people's houses and minds, it may be that the phone company is reluctant to use wireless. The invention of encryption may have caused the phone company to experiment, and this invention also opened watching and listening to people and their thoughts in their houses to people with simply wireless devices without the need for a physical wire. In the 100 years that have passed, this secret has never officially reached the public. In 1937, fully 27 years after Pupin first saw eyes and thought, a book by Andre Maurois "The Thought Reading Machine" is published in France, and in the USA in 1938, which describes the invention of a device that can record screen 4 only (the audio of what people think). Many of those that are included have given many hints to the public. [list others] And when you realize the wonderful and very important history captured in information from people's houses and brains, the public should be very grateful, in my humble opinion, to those people in the phone company that took the time and money to capture and record all these images and sound recordings. The joy and depth of understanding that we all will share once these images and audio recordings are made public will easily show people the great value of this recording process. I can't understate the importance of knowing what people are doing on earth, for one reason, we need to identify and stop violence, and secondly secrecy is wrong. As life of earth continues to grow to other planets and stars, we should embrace this technology and the abililty to communicate with each other through thought.

Quick summary of 9/11 from excluded perspective: (9/11 in 30 seconds)
A military drill is built around the 9/11 events so that all events are included making many of the activities appear to be part of the drill, but most people in the camera-thought net understand that this is going to be an actual false-flag terrorist event (although perhaps the scale of 3000 dead is not planned, using estimates of only a few hundred because of evacuation of the two towers). Perhaps many included think that the president, vice president and generals such as Meyers and Eberhart, are just playing along to make the drills be realistic and will call off or shoot down the military planes at the last minute. The two world trade center buildings 1 and 2, and building 7 are wired up with explosives on the weekend before 9/11 by people employed in Controlled Demolition. Atta and a few other patsy CIA and ISI funded people are flown to Cleavland Ohio to prepare to board flight 95. All 4 planes are directed to land in Clevland Ohio because of a bomb scare (or those planes and people are simply made up by insiders). Two military planes which were painted like American and US Air planes (although they have no windows) take off, and each have a missile attached to their bottom. These two planes are flown by radio control into each of the World Trade Center Buildings. The first reaches WTC 1, the North tower, at 8:46 am (coming from ?). The second military plane reaches WTC 2, the south tower, at 9:03 am. Bush claps and smiles in a Florida classroom when live video is beamed onto his brain of the second military plane colliding with WTC2. A missile is fired from a military plane or helicopter at the Pentagon creating the small hole in the first floor killing a few hundred people in the Pentagon. Cordite (smokeless gunpowder) is then quickly wired around the missile damage to create a larger hole and collapse the entire section of the Pentagon. All the people from the four planes are put onto Flight 93 in Cleveland Ohio and start to fly east. This plane is shot down upon orders from George Bush jr by Major Rick Gibney of the Happy Hooligans in North Dakota. The two WTC buildings are brought down in a controlled demolition. WTC2 the south tower is brought down at 9:59am, just a minute before 10 oclock, and is demolished from the point of impact down. This demolition kills perhaps a thousand people still in the building (and may have been initiated by a person with the initials AO). WTC 1, the north tower will be brought down at 10:28am murdering thousands of people still in this building, (the person that initiates this demolition may have the initials TE). Later at 5:20pm EST, World Trade Center 7 is brought down in a traditional controlled demolition.

It seems to me that people in the camera-thought net could have easily sent some surface to air missile launching people and vehicles out around the WTC on the morning of 9/11, knowing full well about this long developed plan. In particular arrests could have been made of those wiring up the WTC. But the surface to air missiles seems like the weakest and easiest spot in the 9/11 plan. People could have easily shot down those military planes with some ground missiles. Didn't they think of that? It seems clear that somebody messed up the 9/11 plan when they exploded some explosives far down towards the base of one of the WTC buildings. Who ever that was did a good thing.

02/27/07
I am as usual trying to narrow down on seeing eyes and thought. It seems like the wavelength people are showing is in the microwave, large around 10-20cm. It seems logical that the image eyes see would be seen in the thermal, or heat wavelengths of light, since the atoms in neurons like all atoms emit photons in this region. In addition, Pupin was mainly an electronic circuit person, not into photography as much. To see in the thermal region, I think the only easy path available is to use a grid of thermisters (or some kind of surface mount temperature detectors) each connected to a surface mount analog to digital converter. The thermisters will probably need a voltage and maybe even another resistor to create a ratio between the initial voltage and ground. Then, probably the trickiest aspect is how to send the 8 (or whatever, perhaps 4 or even 1) bits to a computer to be drawn as a 2 dimensional image. I think I would use a surface mount USB chip, for example, one from Cypress. But there would also need to be some kind of RAM or some kind of memory to store each of the 8 bits from the thermister analog to digital converters. Then, in my novice view, I thought of something that I have never heard before. If you want to detect a signal of 10 hertz (1 photon every 10 seconds), you can detect a photon every ten seconds starting at time=0,10,20, etc but what if the signal of a beam started at t=5? You would miss that particular signal. Maybe I am wrong, but it seems like, there are thousands of 10 hertz beams that could go undetected simply because they start somewhere between time=0 and 10. An alternative is to create some kind of device that resonates when a 10 hertz beam contacts it, and then use that resonance to record a beam. Pupin talks often about resonance in his two books, in particular in his book "Romance of the Machine". And Pupin is clearly talking about resonance in electrical circuits. It is interesting that there may never have been an actual analog photograph of eyes and thoughts, only digital photographs. In other words no method may ever have been created to capture an image of eyes using anything other than electrical detectors/sensors. Once people had the electrical sensor system, why bother trying to find some way to capture the eye image using analog film?...that must have been less interesting to pursue. But how to harness this natural resonance may or may not be publically documented.

I thought of something cool, that near a star, the photons themselves can be used to heat water to turn a generator to create electricity. But then, the electricity would need to be stored. Perhaps, that electricity could be used to separate H2 and O2 from water. It's just a thought, and shows that nearer to the sun, photons themselves might be in high enough quantities to be used to boil a liquid directly, or be used in some other way to do work.

I forgot to mention that other superbowl commercial of rock, paper, scissors. For some reason I am mystically and wrongfully associated with scissors because I threw scissors at my brother once when very young (prepubescent) in retailation for some physical attack, I have a memory image of the scissors actually sticking into my brothers back and a small trickle of blood running down before I ran to my room and locked the door for the inevitable counter-attack (this was when my mom had stepped out for some time as I remember, but even then, my parents did little to stop fighting, once I overheard my dad say "let them fight it out" as I was getting my head pounded into a wall). It wasn't a smart idea throwing scissors and I don't encourage anybody to do that even in self defense. But anyway, some guy getting hit with a rock is supposed to be funny? That is stupid and brutal. It reminds me of the low-brow neolithic mind of many conservatives as expressed in a Reader's Digest article just in 2000 before the Bush jr stolen election about how JFK was probably a bigger drug addict than womanizer. Just totally low brow, completely one sided Warren Commission type pabalum. They describe how JFK supposedly stabbed a friend with a needle...and said "how do you like it?". I mean I find that very very hard to believe. It was set apart from most literature as being obviously brutal. Then I am reading the unauthorized biography of George Bush Senior by Webster Tarpley and he actually identifies Reader's Digest as being run by...and I don't quite remember...but basically old school Nazi supporters, although now they are probably skin head nazi youth and not bald or short haired liberals. So of all the magazines, of which there are thousands, Tarpley identifies Reader's Digest as being owned by extreme conservatives who propagandize for that extreme view. It came as a surprise to me because my impression before learning about this is probably like most excluded pawns (before knowing that thought has been seen, heard and sent for 100 years), that Reader's Digest was an educational scholastic magazine, not a mouthpiece for the Nazi Kennedy and 9/11 killlers.

Speaking of 9/11, you know it seems that Atta was just a partier pawn spending the ISI and CIA's money on coke and women. They must have felt fine about fattening up Atta because he was their prime patsie for 9/11...kind of a "let him have some fun, he's going to be murdered in a few weeks". Then that Elton John song "Danial my brother" but kind of "Atta my brother..." kind of seems appropriate you know because "I can see Atta waving goodbye" from Flight 95 as it takes off from Clevland's Hopkins International Airport, with Barabara Olsen and all of them, "heading for Pennsylvane", only for Bush to order Gibney to shoot it down. I was thinking "Atta actually sees less than even I". Because Atta was not really I think the villian that he was made out to be. I don't know. But this seems to be what the included are saying.

I think the person who wins the most friends may be the one who endures the most abuse, or turns abuse into a positive message...basically tries to win over the brute who insults them. Unfortunately I find myself sinking to their level many times, to insult back, but lately I have been trying to take a step back and look at the larger picture, and not allow their negativity to make me negative.

One thing I think is inconceivable to many people is the idea of a "heterosexual nonviolent person". This seems to be a type of person many people cannot accept the existence of. Or better yet a heterosexual enforce the laws against violence person. I have to put a nonviolent heterosexual up there with a bisexual person as being not believed possible by most people.

02/28/07
One thing I think people should understand about the arrival of walking robots is that, people really should not be doing unthinking low skill labor, it is stupid for a human to do such simple repeatative tasks as washing dishes, picking fruits, cleaning toilets, people are not robots, they should be free to do more pleasant tasks, or just to relax and not have to clean their dishes, vacuum and do such unthinking repeatative work.

I am glad to see UCI making a hydrogen gas pump available. It seems clear that hydrogen gas is going to replace fossil fuel hydrocarbons. Perhaps some method of removing carbon from the air will be found (and these devices will be useful to remove CO2 from Venus' atmosphere), but clearly hydrogen is what is being used in most rockets, and that is going to be probably the primary fuel on the moon. Hydrogen will probably be produced from electrolysis of water, and maybe eventually through pulling apart larger atoms. I don't understand why there are no hydrogen combustion engines. They are just as clean burning and no where near as complex. One person said that such engines burn too hot, but I can't believe that would be true, people can just use that extra heat in adding steam power if that is true. I tried to build a single cylinder hydrogen combustion engine using electrolysis of water, but I couldn't make the seal tight enough and put it aside. Maybe in the future I will go back to it, because I think even hydrogen combustion engines might be popular in the future. It's interesting that universities would be potentially making income from selling alternative fuel, which perhaps government or other businesses don't feel interested in providing to the public. I see this selling of products as a possible future for universities. Clearly universities teach a trade and they need to buy the latest equipment, so it might be cost effective for them to produce some of those products themselves. And if they produce those products they can easily use them for teaching and training and sell them to the public too. Instead we mostly see universities as consumers of products, instead of using their size and scientific advantage to compete with businesses in selling science-related (and what isn't science-related?) products.

I am tenatively calling off any ban I put in place in 1997 or 1998 against Discover Card (Morgan Stanley), Ben & Jerry's (Unilever), Universal Studios and any other businesses that may have advertised on Arrow 93.1 when I called for this ban, simply because, the justification for such a ban was not very good, and the offense of simply being abusers of the camera-thought technology is not enough to justify a full ban. These people clearly have made bad decisions, but against the background of the 100 year secret camera-thought phone company networks, and the secret unpunished violence that results from such a secret, this kind of unethical behavior is relatively minor. Although I still express some doubt about the ethics of people in those businesses, and people should consult buyblue.org, and other sources to learn what those people believe in, and are involved with.

Republican Ex-judge Ronald Kline, 66 year old man, after 6 years, was sentenced by Consuelo Marshall (a US federal government employee, for which no photo can be found on the Internet, you can be sure that because it's federal, this was initiated by Bush jr or antisexuals in the federal government), to 27 months (2 years 3 months) for child pornography http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_1585206.php. Just to be absolutely clear, I tell people not to be involved with owning child pornography and I am not involved in child pornography. At all times, people should obey all democratic laws. That being said, this seems to me to be a very harsh sentence. First, I think the best argument as to why people should not be punished for owning child pornography is because they should not be punished for owning any image, including images of non-sexual violence done to children, such as those images of exploded children in Iraq. It seems so simple to me. It's just a picture of a child killed by a missile, the person who owns the picture didn't kill the child, and those images are just news. Then looking at the comments on this page are stomach turning. "Put a bullet between his eyes", "having been to prison myself i can gurantee you he wont make it out alive. good riddance", and all about how Kline should be raped in prison...I mean for downloading porn off the Internet... to me, isn't the violence the thing that people are angered about to begin with. One person argues that people who own child pornography create a demand for more to be made, but think of how absurd that argument is for images of violence, such as those of children damaged by US explosives in Iraq. Does owning such images actually create a demand for violence against children? No, I doubt it. But even if yes, I'm sorry, these are just photos. And you know, the Nazistic irony or this is how these sick people like Consuelo Marshall and many others, maybe even Kline himself, all watch people in their houses and see their thoughts...I mean...you know...go with total free information already...anything else is pure hypocricy and elitist nazism. For Marshall to sit up on a bench, and sentence a guy for 2 years for owning pictures of nude children, while she routinely sees nude children inside their houses, even seeing their innermost thoughts....it's pure evil in my opinion, albeit nonviolent evil. I was thinking that I would not even doubt that at at&t they blur out the genitals, buttocks and breasts of any eye-net images (and maybe even thoughts) of people under 18...I wouldn't doubt that they are that bizarre. And excluded people drive this more, because they don't know that there is a large group of insiders who freely watch nude kids in their houses...the excluded wrongly think everybody sees live just like they do! This kind of thing is frightening. It's like in Nazi Germany where Jewish and so-called homosexual people were dragged openly through the streets, movies about lesbians were banned, etc. Maybe it is genetic for some people, the way they turn into a pack of dogs ripping apart some poor weak sheep, which is what is happening with Kline. Then another Orwellian aspect of this is that some person entered Kline's computer from outside and sifted through his files, then ofcourse, in true Nazi-style reported him to gestapo. Forget violent crime, just owning pictures now is enough to be jailed for 2 years. Then think about how Kline has had his career ruined by the major media, isn't that enough punishment? I mean Kline will never be able to find employment, how will he survive when he finally does get out? Like the poor kid who sucked those kids toes who got 100 years in jail, its enough for the public to know that the person is overly, although nonviolently, affectionate with children. It's a frightening nazistic planet. One of the very few comments that I think shows any kind of fairness or wisdom is the one that has: "2 years just for nudie photos? What a country!". Two years for a 60 year old guy who has never hurt anybody and who is no threat to society, unlike those insiders who did 9/11...who are they going to kill next? And this is kill...as is they don't come back...not just owning images of children. And an added frightening aspect of this antisexual ferver that conservatives a harnessing is clear to me. Think about the antisexual hysteria that results in this kind of sentence and these kinds of public comments openly calling for violent crime against nonviolent old people. I mean, it may soon be illegal to talk about child pornography, and to even report about what happened to Kline. Think about the author of this particular article "LARRY WELBORN", now he is associated with child pornography, because he talked about it. Any relation to child porno or molestation may be enough to make a person appear weak, just like those in Nazi Germany, this is a well known phenomenon. Any flaw or mark on a person's record can be blown out of proportion, can be propagandized to stir up the nazi dog pack even when a person is totally innocent, certainly of any violent crime, which is the only crime of real importance. In my opinion it's all part of religion. When you believe that your cult leader rose from the dead, or brought people back to life, etc. you can believe anything. And this is precisely what we see. What ever the party line is, the religious herd will follow, even when it is openly and laughably false, for example, if the religious leadership says, "now 1+1=3", even if obviously false, it will become religious doctrine, and will be absolutely promoted, believed, without question, and any that question brutally punished. Or "ok the grass is not green, the grass is black". Then from that time on, the religious will stand by their fact "the grass is black", the physical evidence matters nothing. Perhaps the best example is how people were punished for defending the freedom of a person who defended the freedom of a person who theorized that the earth went around the sun, and not the other way around. And this support for obviously false ideas is a hallmark of religion and conformity. This antisexual priority that seems to be popular is a mystery of stupidity. Despite a good arguement that identifying those who did the 9/11 inside job, the 3 thousand murders, might be a more productive and pressing issue for democrats and the liberal movement, this antisexual ferver is something like 70%, and takes priority over the identification and punishing of violent crime. The republicans love this kind of thing, anti-sexual ferver, and democrats appear to be heavily involved in this too, and so those republican 9/11 murderers, and plenty of other murderers and assaults go unpunished while moleto antisexual hysteria takes center stage for the vast majority of people. I would not doubt at all that this charge against Kline was initiated by insider republicans in order to focus attention on antisexuality instead of stopping violence...it has a conservatizing effect on people. They want people jailed for sexuality, not violence, and any threat to jail them to violence quickly results in prosecutions for sex-related and drug-related nonviolent powder-puff "crimes". It probably is a constant back and forth of, liberals wanting to expose and jail the murderers in the republicans, and the republicans retaliating by charging nonviolent sex and drug charges against liberals. The saddest part is the poor excluded liberals buy into this myth of nonviolent crimes being important. This is constantly used by conservatives and even liberals...the idea of censorship...for example Reagan inacted a law to make it illegal to show the coffins of those people killed in war....they know that seeing the truth about their murders will make the public oppose the war and so they vote to censor it. The root of this issue to me is, are people going to be able to see images of violence? It's all part of the same idea. Either they can own and see images of disgusting violence or things will go the child porno route and the public will be forbidden from seeing such images, and such images will have to be carefully destroyed by an elite group of people in police, FBI or military, and then they will be required not to actually look at the images, but simply to process them in the incinerator, any image from their minds of even an accidental viewing of such an image will result in prosecution. It raises questions about, how is anybody to actually know that the image is one of violence, when simply even seeing such an image is illegal? I'm against the violence and touching with objection done to children as captured in images of child pornography, and I am also against the violence done to children in non-sexual images of children damaged from missiles in Iraq, but I think all such images must remain legal to own and see. My vote is that Kline should not be punished at all for owning child pornography, nor should any person be punished for downloading, owning, copying, or buying any form of image. 3/2/07 One other truth about the child pornography issue is that, these images of child pornography have historical and criminalistic and other value and should not be burned from the face of the earth. And when I think about it, images are like the book burnings of this century, but they don't rally around and burn child porno, it's done discreetly by people in police. But those researchers looking back from 3000 at 2000 and the historical record, will find very little photographic evidence of child sexual abuse. Those researchers now who want to try and explain what is going on in child abuse certainly can't show actual images of child abuse, at least sex-related abuse, and no doubt the antisexuals want this because it's like violent images, when the public can't see what's going on, they have to draw their own conclusions, and usually inaccurate conclusions that just default to the traditional views. So this destruction of images, of any kind, is really like a medeival book burning, but done with fahrenheit 451, nazistic secrecy and precision.

In my opinion, people walk around in this time like we are living through the times of the Reformation...its just shockingly puritanical and backwards.

03/01/07
Here's another song that fits well over the Elton John song "Norma Jean", which describes what people might be singing the glorious day that seeing, hearing and sending thought becomes public:

Goodbye Nazi swine
Although we never saw you at all
You had the technology to hear our thoughts
While the rest of us had to guess

And even when some of you murdered
The rest didn't seem to mind
All the papers had to say
Was that some firefighters "heard some explosions"

And it seems to me, that you lived your lives
as stupidly as could be
never knowing who to vote for
or what is 7+3

Goodbye Nazi scum
although you forced drugs on all
anybody caught using drugs consensually
you locked up for 1000 years

And when it came to sex
You jailed people for millions of years
Even though you routinely saw
children in the nude

And it seems to me you lived yer life
twitching people's muscles for a laugh
and zapping old ladies
using tax-paid-for lasers

And I would have liked to seen yiz
but I was just an excluded hume (or maybe I wasnt even born, when)
anything resembling your morals burned out long before
the public ever saw

...I'm still working it out, contributions are welcome

03/02/07
One thing it does not take much time to figure out is this. The vast majority of people in the Pupinized AT&T secret camera-thought network will lie about themselves being alive under oath while video evidence to the contrary plays. I don't think any honest person will refute this claim. Just very very dishonest, they lie about everything and anything. Certainly they weren't born that way, but without doubt they end up that way within a few minutes of seeing and hearing thought. That is one major reason why the video, audio, and information increase on the web and on earth is ultimately going to be their downfall in my humble view. We can simply say it is "Rodney King video" phenomenon. Where videos that reach the public expose what AT&T has been secretly recording for a century. But there is a huge difference. When the public sees and hears the problems are addressed and many times those wrong doers are punished. But when only AT&T, the major media, and insiders see, nobody is ever punished, and they continue as if they never saw or heard anything. Those in the Pupinzed AT&T camera network, like those before them in the Pre-pupin Bell Network, are the worst liars I think that have ever lived, and rank down there with the Nazis for the bulk quantity of their lies.

One clear advantage of getting people to vote online in simple systems such as tedhuntington.com/vote is that collecting signatures is made much more easy. All that is needed is to send people to those addresses to collect guarenteed signatures. It would be nice if online voting could count itself towards ballot measures, and maybe that is one of the first ballot measures that should be collected by this method of physically collecting the signatures of those who voted for something online. I am going to add a "somebody can collect a signature from me in person for proposed laws which I have voted yes on" checkbox to people's profiles.

I challange sex and media researchers out there to find out what gets reported more violent crime or nonviolent crime, and then of those two nonsex-related versus sex-related. Because, for example, how does a police report about a non-sexual assault of a child fair against a police-report about a sexual fondling of a child?

Frontline the PBS program addresses the issue of how do News organizations fund themselves when they give their stories away for free on the Internet. And my feeling is that, since most news businesses mainly get their news from government 911 calls, and then many of the stories they post are paid for ads anyway and the actual news content is very little. For example, conservatives pour money into sex-related crime stories in order to keep violent crime off the front page. Because the public becoming stirred up antisexually is far better for them than the public getting stirred up antiviolently. An antiviolently stirred up public might come looking to jail assaulters and murderers...and then ofcourse to 9/11 and investigating who did that violence, and jailing those who did, and the JFK, MLK, RFK murders and so many other murders and apparent accidents (such as Paul Wellstone) and supposed suicides (such as Marilyn Monroe). So I think the future belongs to 911 the phone recording system, and AT&T with their vast camera thought device networks. I ask people to investigate, how many cameras around the planet does the Associated Press have? How many does CNN have? Now compare that with how many AT&T and the police have and you can see where the actual news comes from. Now we need to open up the police and rest of government to full free information. And also go after opening up AT&T and their networks to get at the real news that only a few hundred million elites see at the current time. Look at Google. They do not sell a single piece of physical hardware, but yet are one of the biggest income businesses on earth, and the same for Microsoft whose only actual physical product is a mouse. They do it through advertising (in the case of Google) and copyright (in the case of Microsoft). So probably thats where most of the income will come from for the newspapers and television stations, from advertising on their web stations.

One thing I am definitely and strongly against is ofcourse, violence, but also against secrecy. People should speak openly and publically about anything they want no matter how uncomfortable.

One thing that is really a disappointment about people in this time is that, very few things will change even when the public gets to see, hear and send thought. You have to measure the public majority opinion versus the insiders majority opinion. For example, on the positive side, we probably will not have any more 9/11s because generally the public majority opinion is antihomicide, while the insider majority is strongly tolerant and forgiving of homicide. Many murderers will go to jail and the level of murder on earth will be drastically reduced. But in terms of antisexuality, I doubt there will be much change, people on the outside are just as rabidly antisexual as those on the inside. People will still be punished 1000x more for nonviolent sexual behavior, for example touching against objection or without consent, than violent crime even when the excluded can see. We can count on prositution remaining decriminalized even when millions are exposed with their wallets and purses in the activity, routinely paying and taking money for physical affection in what I would call a natural and harmless system with the quanrantee that there is always consent. However, again a positive effect will be that those current persecuted without any physical evidence may be lowered because of the abundance of video from people's lives. So many innocent jailed for centuries on a person's dishonest testimony may go free or not be jailed to begin with. In addition on the drug issue, while many of those insiders involved in massive quantities of drugs such as the CIA (cocaine importing agency) and DEA(L drugs agency), the Bushs and many others would be probably stopped or exposed for their drug running, many innocent people would probably continue to be jailed, although it probably will depend on the city in question. And this is like the antisexuality a real disappointment that the excluded probably will not learn from the corruption and suffering the drug war creates and decide to decriminalize drugs. So on drugs the majority on the inside is probably the same as on the outside. Information will be an interesting one, the outside is rabidly proprivacy and secrecy when it comes to themselves and much of government, the inside is similar except when it comes to the privacy of others, so I think this really is an interesting issue. Some have hinted that the majority of insiders are for the AT&T camera thought system, this is certainly my vote (although I think the lasers can be removed from houses). Another disappointment will be religion. A majority of insiders and outsiders both love their belief in gods and religion, all the info on earth won't significantly change that, but access to more info will probably educate people and tend to lower belief in dieties and religions. So its a disappointment to me, because as an excluded you want to say..."ok lets banish these bastard insiders for the rest of their lives"...but yet the excluded are just as bad. It really comes down to a person's insides, whether they support many of the same values I do that determines my opinion of if they should be promoted or demoted, supported or rejected. But I do hope, and it is my advice to other excluded, that the included that did nothing for informing the excluded be banned for the length of time they were included. No exclusion for their descendents (yeah if they can find somebody to reproduce with when they are excluded...but for many of them they are too old and have already reproduced). There simply is not going to be any major change other than many murderers going to jail. The terrible problems of earth, the violence, the antisexuality, the religious idiocy will continue on for centuries long after we are all long dead.

I think in the future we are going to see devices the size of a credit card that attach to a person to record all video and audio around them into a hard drive. It would be wonderful to be able to refer to some past video to find out where people left their keys, or what really happened in an auto accident, etc. In addition to this robots will be walking around us to record video and audio. And then ofcourse, AT&T and others will be recording what our eyes see and ears hear, but ultimately those devices will be brought out to the consumer market so people can implement their own home thought recording storage.
There's something inspiring about a single victim turning the tables on a group of cruel attackers. The victim of group assault that videotapes their assaulters, a person a group steals from catching them on video, those pack of dogs accusing a person of having an affair get exposed for having an affair, etc. It's like a cinderella-type story; the evil majority gets taught a long-coming lesson by a single person who they all routinely group-abused like a pack of dogs. It's the root and moral of many stories; a lone victim who brings down a vicious criminal empire large or small I certainly celebrate such a thing. I think this is what will eventually happen to those monsters in the Pupin-AT&T camera-thought net.

Imagine an earth so populated that there is no way to be lost at sea any more, because within a quarter mile would be at least one house.

People say that the military industrial complex is something to worry about, but I would like to draw people's attention to the Pupinized AT&T camera-thought network complex. This group is rotten to the bottom, and includes almost all judges, presidents, politicians, business leaders, police, military. They are all in it, and it gives them tremendous power to fully abuse what they learn from watching people's thoughts and people in their houses. And when an excluded figures it out...what could they do? The media is all rotten and in on it. The police, judges...all making backroom...or back-of-the-mind deals...an excluded has no real chance at justice. The camera-thought network complex has created a world of lies, and injustice, and secret murder. Still, I think the light that is still shining is the Internet and in particular Internet videos. Clearly, these videos exposing the camera-thought pupinized at&t net are not being overly censored. In the future, they might be, and that would really signal a closing down of any last chance to reach the excluded public.

02/20/07
As an update on the specific wavelength camera, I am finding that diffraction grating is easier to work with than prisms, and I have read that more wavelengths of light (supposedly to 50um wavelength in the ir) happen with gratings. Then when working with a grating, the spectrum is off to the side at about 45 degrees, so I have made my camera angled (although this is not required, since light comes in at an angel too, but I thought I would try). I find that using this cheap Home Depot .125" wood board is wonderful to work with. It cuts easily and can duct taped and glued into any shape. A person might just as easily use a long PVC tube sealed at both ends. I am finding that the spectrum is stretched out in the length of this camera (2 feet long) but still there are no spectral absorption lines. I think I am going to try using a double convex lens, or maybe a convex mirror to spread out spectrum and see if I can see some spectral absorption lines. It must take a serious amount of magnification to see absorption lines. I just read that one person uses a diffraction grating, and then a second grating to spread the spectrum even further. I haven't tried that too much but am going to next. The second grating must spread out a specific region produced from the first grating, again at a 45 degree angle. This entire process and ULSF has got me thinking that, there must be many molecules and atoms that can filter specific wavelengths of light, because they only absorb certain wavelengths of light. Perhaps such materials can be used to filter out unwanted wavelengths (although the grating is very good for this), or perhaps even to absorb specific wavelengths that are wanted and in absorbing causes some physical change that can be used as a detector (such as change in temperature, or emitting light in a different wavelength).
There is a difference between a grating on plastic and one on glass, the glass being better.
glass diffraction gratings (made from an actual ruled surface) are available at:
ebay.com, edmundoptics.com, surplusshed.com,

Just as an updated note about the CIA/US business owners wars in Central and South America and Iran, etc. where the government nationalized their land. There are many other methods of problem resolution without violence. In particular, a planetary democratic court could rule on such decisions. Fair market value can be paid for the land. There is other land that can be given to citizens. Even simply losing the land, still the owners could try to recover the full value later over time with some kind of planetary democratically determined tax or fine judgement. The brutal, murderous, undemocratic solutions and atrocities committed by those people using US tax money are simply immoral, and illegal for good reason. We need to be stopping violence on the planet, and everything can be worked out nonviolently in my opinion. Then too, there is the truth about moving out on to the unclaimed moon, mars, the moons of Jupiter, planets of other stars. All there is, is nothing but land, and staying here on earth is eventually going to be for masochists or those who enjoy massive overpopulation and backwards beliefs.

02/21/07
Some people have thought that P.E.D. might be a good name for a band, perhaps it could stand for "Photon emission democracy" or something similar. Or perhaps P.E.R.V. (Photon emission reflection visual). In some way they sell short the message of what I am saying. It's like MLK jr touring as "uppidy black guy", or Marie Curie touring as "flat-titted lady", or more accurately the "Curie loves liver and onions tour" (when in fact she does not and that has little or nothing to do with the tour), something that is so far removed from the truth, value and diversity of the message. Hows about "Photon" or "T.E.D.".

Just a comment about the Superbowl commercials, it is interesting how some were so violent. Like that slapping commercial, that was terrible.

I was thinking that Huey Lewis song "happy to be stuck with you" in some way describes the situation on earth. Because people do not openly love many people, for a variety of reasons, people are basically stuck with one sexual partner for life. If people were more open, and info was free, with quick STD tests, we would probably see people pursuing a more natural inclination towards variety in touching and sex, without this massive pressure based system of choosing one human for life at the exclusion of all others until death, even when any sexual excitment usually fades within a few weeks. So there is a trendous amount of pressure on people to only choose one person for life. The view is that the first person you have sex with is supposed to be the only person you ever have sex with for life and so that should be a decision of the highest importance because you are making a decision that will be set in stone for the rest of your life. And to me that is a very narrow, terrible view, but one to a certain extent that we all have to accept and live with because everybody else lives the same way.

We are headed toward a future of walking robots around every corner and where the public may win access to street cameras, and that is going to greatly limit the murderers in the net for many years until they are finally seen and jailed. But this clearly is slow going, but there definitely appears to be a change for the better lately, and I think it is directly related to more people using high-speed internet, and google and mytube video stations, but it may just be a natural periodic swing that will eventually collapse back down to mediocrity. Clearly there will be a swing back, but how low this time (can you imagine a minima lower than those in 2000-2008?).

In particular that many of the people are returning from Iraq. Perhaps the entire 9/11 Reichstag false flag group will continue imploding to some kind of final collapse where they are exposed and prosecuted. Let's hope and certainly allow that to happen.

02/22/07
Here is a good video about the group of people related to the JFK murder, in particular Barry Seal, from Daniel Hopsicker http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7373499632881521687&q=dan+hopsicker&hl=en

Who are the people on the Federal Court that said that people locked in Guantanamo do not have the right to a trial? That is a shocking rejection of the most basic principles of human rights. We need to organize and bring all this info to the public. We need to work on democratizing the court system.

There is some new interesting info about a couple of extra-solar planets, planets of other stars. Where are the images of the extrasolar planets? If people can analyze their spectrum, clearly they have a visual image, but where are they? There must be an endless number of planets around other stars, and our descendents will probably find much pleasure in examining and visiting many of them. In wikipedia it explains that what these people did was to examine the infrared light (heat) emitted from the planet when the planet transited (crossed) the star. So the image may be a dark circle against the star, or perhaps even just a different spectra from the star without anything to actually visually see in the visible spectrum.

Some times religious people call those who don't buy into their religion "evil" and to me it is idiotic. For them I think it almost always relates to abstract, mystical relationships, for example calling somebody evil who routinely lifts 60 pounds 6 times, or who parrots out some coincidental thing that was strategically beamed onto their mind by other religious people for just such a reason, a person who sings Beatles or Rolling Stones songs, etc. I think in a large part it is applied by religious people to those who simply reject their religion. It never seems to relate to actual evil as I define evil, which is just simply violence, theft, dishonesty, and similar things. Calling a nonviolent lawful person evil just because they reject the same religion or all religions is inaccurate, evil people in my view are those who do violence, who lie (and then I describe lying as a "nonviolent evil" or "evil, although nonviolently so") whether they believe the various religious stories are true or do not. But this is just like psychology, witch hunts, and the view that some race of people are inferior, there is no valid reason for punishing a lawful person, but when there is a person that does not echo the party line, many dishonest and unintelligent people make up reasons, or search for reasons to punish such a person, and psychology, heresy, religious myths, etc. all come to the rescue providing excuses as to why lawful people can be punished. Those that make a career out of or even dabble with making use of the inaccurate theories of psychology, antisexuality, and mystic ferver against innocent people are dangerous and nobody to support and I think this should be obvious as we continue into the future. I wonder sometimes if those who did 9/11, the murders of JFK, MLK, RFK, etc. are not in some way worshippers of some kind of demon or devil. Not that there is a devil, but maybe they think there is. Even though there is no devil, there certainly is evil, as humans define evil, such as murder or assault of humans, and at a smaller level, nonviolent activity that is not violent but results in a high probability of violence, wrongful containment, dishonesty, theft, etc.

Many people try to link some idea they don't like with violence, which most people don't like in order to make it appear to be as bad as violence. For example drugs and violence, even though the actual act of using drugs is nonviolent. Psychology and violence, even though, many of the theories of psychology are completely inaccurate or apply to no specific diagnostic problem, and many of those stigmatized with psychiatric labels such as "psychosis", in fact probably the majority all live nonviolent lives, with is in direct opposition to what the majority of people think. People try to relate atheism and violence, and there simply is no such link, religion and violence probably forms a stronger relation. It seems amazing to me how millions of people allow themselves to believe movies about "demons" and "ghosts". For me, these movies seem idiotic because I know there are no such things. It's irresponsible for wealthy people to promote such dishonest messages.

With the Judy Amero case, to me it is shocking that in the USA (this is in Norwich, Connecticut), a woman can be jailed for forty years, I mean four zero years...I mean that is more time than people get for first degree murder...and the crime...some under 18 kids saw some pornography on a computer she was using...I mean saw some pornography....that is the crime...but no, let us never fix any of these unjest sentences and laws, let us never progress forward into the future, common sense, logic, wisdom and fairness at all. People want to blame spyware, but excuse my for life, 40 years for children accidentally seeing porn? Every parent on earth would be doing hard time, that is absolutely absurd and clear evidence of a "puritan problem" in the USA, next we will have sharia laws. Probably the people who enacted such a brutal sentence should be publically listed, but also those who prosecute and sentence Amero should be listed, because the public should know who did such a brutal idiotic thing. It seems clear that there was no intent, but to me, without much thought at all, clearly the issue is what kind of punishment is justified for allowing young people to see pornography. In my opinion none whatsoever. Any such law should be voted down, and I certainly cast my "no" vote for any and all such laws. If a majority of some town want, for example, images of nude human anatomy, of religion, etc to not be allowed in some local school, those people can vote for that. Then simply any body that violates that policy can be let go and others made aware. There is no need for imprisonment or fines, simply de-employing is enough. In my opinion, educating humans under 18 about human anatomy, including showing them images of human anatomy should be completely legal. Also, Lieber perhaps more accurately "Lie"-ber has a law to protect patient records. I think we need people to protect those caught with illegal information, nobody should be jailed for owning information of any kind. I'm for limiting and ultimately ending copyright, and other laws that punish people because of images they own, because here millions of people all are part of the AT&T camera thought net and have been watching our thoughts and us in our houses for years and years...its time for the public to get to see them for a change, and so I speak out for ending restriction of information laws. So I thought there might be a progressive representative who was antiviolence, but I think what we see in Lieber is a typical representative, zealously anti-sexual and pro-secrecy, and this is typical so I can let my hopes down. There are still representatives out there and many not yet elected who might echo my agenda. We need somebody who is going to hand over the government to the people for the first time in history, and totally 100% to the people. How about the public getting to vote publically on the laws? I am still surprised many times, even though I see this every day at how terrible the group of people on earth are now...I mean they let 9/11 happen, they let JFK, MLK, RFK and millions of other get murdered and refuse to do anything about it. They see a million injustices every day, they see and hear thoughts, but they can't possibly stumble into a forward direction. It's a terrible group on earth, just violent and extremely stupid, but somehow people continue to survive.

02/23/07
Sally Lieber ended her proposed law to make spanking a crime. Again, I have to point out that, to my knowledge, spanking is not protected by law. Maybe I am wrong because the AP article has: "Spanking a child on the buttocks � even to the point of injury � will remain legal in California, Lieber said." There is no exception that allows assaulting children in any assault law that I am aware of. And I think it is important to get the message to people under the age of 18 that if somebody has assaulted you or ever does, even if the assaulter is your own parent, you are protected by the assault law like everybody else. It's important to tell children that they can call 911 when they have been assaulted, and they can report that they have been assaulted on the Internet so others may be aware. In addition, to that important information, people under 18 should be encouraged to try and capture evidence of any assault that has happened to them: in particular video of such an assault, a video or audio recorded confession of the assault, video or audio recorded statements of witnesses to the assault. To me that people can stand up publically and defend the assaulting of children shows what a stone age we live in. The AP article states: "Conservative and family-values groups lashed out at her proposal..." Those are some family values, it's ok to assault a child even though the assault law is, next to the homicide law, the second most basic human right in existance. Republicans were against this bill, and it is no surprise. Probably many of these republicans have assaulted children. The violent Republicans don't much like when the medicine is directed at them instead. One good thing about this bill was that it got people to go on record about how they support and defend assaulting children. Chuck Devore, an Irvine Republican is quoted as saying "...loving parents might have their children taken away from them...". So a person that assaults a child should not be punished? I mean that is brutal. I'm not saying that children should be taken away from people who assault them permanently, but just that people that assault children should be punished in accordance with the assault law. Then think of the irony when children are removed from parents and put into foster homes just because the parent had a gram of marijuana or cocaine laying around, or like many people, have pornography laying around. The woman who accidentally allows kids to see porno faces 40 years in jail, the guy who playfully sucked the toes of children gets 100 years in jail, but those who beat children don't serve a day in jail, that's a bizarre system and an idiotic philosophy. And this is what we are seeing, is a planet of just unbelievable stupidity. One reason Republicans and many other peoplep oppose laws that stop violence against children is because many of them are violent themselves and are certainly supporters of violence. If people start to crack down on violence against children, they may very well next start going after Thane Cesar, and the 9/11 killers, which republicans have spent a lifetime protecting. They may very well start to expose the murderers of Bonnie Bakely, Chandra Levy, Jam Jay, and so many others whose murderers are being protected by those in the telephone company-government camera-thought net. I think people will look back at this time, and this will be a prime example of how backwards people were, that they openly defended the assault of children. I mean, if people publically defend assaulting children, why would they stop the assaulting or even murder of adults? This is a good effort by Sally Lieber, and I hope she checks out my tedhuntington.com/vote page for all my latest proposed laws. For example, that law to democratize the FBI director job might go a long way towards justice and seems like a trivial change. It would be wonderful to find a voice in Congress for some of these newer fresh ideas. Lieber also has a law to stop the statue of limitations for rape and molestation, and my opinion is to remove the statute of limitations for assault first before nonviolent laws, or simply a law to remove statute of limitation against any crime. I'm sure many violent assaulters, in particular those that own and operate psychiatric hospitals would not like to see the assault 2 year....yes 2 year....statute of limitation...that is a 2 year statute of limitations on assault....removed, because it would open the door for far more law suits against them for their past violent and cruel and unusual torture crimes. However, those crimes (done to me and millions of other nonviolent lawful people) may still be illegal under the Nuremberg and international law.

This spanking thing reminds me of when I saw this asian lady spank the shit out of this...I swear....this was a baby in diapers...it was gross...and the baby was crying and screaming...and I was so close to calling the police...but then I thought...no they would probably arrest me, and by the time they get there it would have been far too late. Perhaps I should have stepped up and said "lady...stop beating that kid..." maybe even grabbed her hand...but maybe that would have made it worse. It was almost like she was there purposely waiting for me...to show me that...yes...I can beat my child with full impunity because of all I have said against violence in particular against children and for children's rights. To me I think its the adults that act like children...they have to make sure its legal for them to beat children, we have to bend the rules and make special exceptions for them because they can't abide by the laws. As I remember the lady did stop after a few seconds.

But with the spanking, I take issue with long sentences for minor or first time nonviolent or low amount of violence crimes. For example, nobody should be jailed for consensually and playfully spanking each other. And when a person is jailed for a spanking or similar minor assault, I think a day is more than enough time. Perhaps even a few hours is enough to send a message that giving people a minor amount of pain is not to be tolerated. And if there is a second later assault, more time, perhaps more than a day, but then only two days or something. I have set all this out in a guidance in sentencing section if you search through my notes. I concluded that a DURATION=SUM(SENT*2^N) and possibly DURATION=SUM(SENT*2^N)+SUM(REPEATSENT*2^N) equation probably is the most logical guide to sentencing. I said before in 2006 that this does not apply to drugs and prostitution, and I should have stated that that is because I think those should be decriminalized. But of course, this system can be applied to add logic to drug and prostitution while they are still illegal. For those I would make the SENT time per incidence and the REPEATSENT for past incidence very small for example SENT=1 hour, REPEATSENT=15 minutes, and work towards total decriminalization laws. Of course, if people do serious violence I think they should be doing serious time in jail, but that is aside from drugs, prost, etc.

You would think that the arguements consevatives use against anti-spanking laws, they would also apply to a law prohibiting the children of people who use illegal drugs or pornography to be taken away from them and put into foster care as "the government being too much of a nanny", but no! And the reason why is very simple, and the public needs to get this through their minds: conservatives want what they want, and they refuse to have anything they don't want, and that is fine, people just have to remember exactly what they stand for and it is a good guide to how they will vote: they stand for 1) proviolence, 2) antipleasure, 3) antifreethought, 4) antifreeinformation, 5) prosecrecy. So even just using 1 and 2 will guide people as to how conservatives will vote. They vote against spanking laws because they are proviolence, and that's also why they vote for invading nations (the recent examples being Iraq and Afghanistan), any body who wants to put a stop to violence in their eyes is a "pussy". But they are for jailing a woman who accidentally allowed children to see pictures of nude people to 40 years, and a young guy who was caught sucking kids' toes, or kissing children to 100 years because the conservatives are violently and fervently antisexual, and antipleasure. Then ofcourse, because they are antifree thought and antipleasure they are for prohibition (even the beer companies donate mostly to the republicans in some kind of self-immolation suicidal samarai kind of philosophy) of alcohol, tobacco and drugs...generally speaking...I mean they all take money from the illegal drug market, but publically they speak out against drug use in grandiose fashion, far outspending any other cause, including stopping violence. Those who like to use drugs are generally partiers, artists, intellectuals and viewed as "hippies" or "commies" in their eyes. I guess there is one more to add to the list 6) money, money is the only variable that might form their views. I think we can also add, speaking of commies, 7) antifulldemocracy, never supporting an end to the electoral college, never allowing the public majority opinion to even be recorded or listed on a government web page. What we see with conservative republicans is a very large group of violent criminals never punished for the violent crimes they violate. And when there are death threats...its always a conservative making the threats...and when there are assaults ...it's always a conservative doing the assaulting. This is why conservatives stop investigations into murders because they know that any kind of stop violence program is going to be going after them, that stopping violence will be stopping their reign of evil rule, they know that, and as I have said, stopping violence would decimate the ranks of republicans as most would be marched off to prison for participation in violent crimes. But we literally are living in a society where violent people roam free...it is terrifying. On a positive note, latimes.com has started listing homicide reports, and to me this is actual news, they finally are starting to bridge the space between what they all watch and what the public is allowed to see. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/homicidereport/ Now I would like to see a visual map with circles where homicides took place, those solved and unsolved, date and time of crime, and perhaps videos of those murdered and charged with the murder including full violent histories on those who murdered. How about Beatriz Estefany Jimenez, 19 years old, she was pretty, what a loss, and there are 3 murders a day in LA currently or something like that. It would be helpful to see running totals too.

There really seems to be an illogical tradition in the USA to jail people for years and years in overly long sentences. And I hope that people clear this up simply by saying:

1) nonviolent crime: light sentence...a sentence of a few hours, days or weeks.
2) violent crime: harsh sentence...a sentence of months, years, decades, life.

Even in Europe there is an absence of logic. For example the guy who killed Pim Fortuyn...how much jail time do you think he deserves? For me, my vote is clearly, life imprisonment...I mean it is an open and closed first degree murder with full intent, fully pre-planned...just no real difficulties whatsoever in understanding the crime. So how much time do you think Volkert van der Graaf the admitted murderer of Pim Foruyn received? 18 years. 18 years...I mean...that's like a long vacation. No wonder people murder like water, because they must know...I might spend a decade or two in jail then I'll be free as a bird. And speaking of free as a bird, Mark David Chapman, the cold blooded pawn killer of John Lennon is eligable to be released. I mean, hello? life in prison for these murderers, what is wrong with people? There is probably only something wrong with corrupt judges who determine sentences, and this is yet another reason why its time to wipe the sleep out of our eyes and democratize sentencing and the entire judicial process as soon as possible. While on the other end of the spectrum people are getting life sentences for fondling children when there is not a single gunshot wound, not even pain...I mean...this is why I say this is a stone age...it's midievil...and the same for drug use and trafficking, people are legally murdered in nations as advanced as Taiwan for drug trafficking...it is unbelievably upside down. Here in the USA the republicans under Reagan passed laws to jail those who use drugs for 10 years and more. And here these are people who are choosing to use drugs, and not even hurting anybody except maybe themselves if even that. Look how people are jailed for decades for theft when really the main thing is getting back the money, exposing and stopping theft as quickly as possible so that any money stolen may still be avialable. But for people with many many thefts, I can see prison time because major theft is a serious, although nonviolent to humans nuisance. I would put nonconsensual property destruction as a similar crime, although with the aspect of violence and or destruction. Since no person is seriously hurt it is not a huge crime, but the property should be returned or the value of the lost property, and in addition I can see some smaller time in prison, in particular for repeat offenses, because property destruction is dangerous and a nuisance, although again, no generally no human is physically hurt in such crimes and so there is a limit as to how serious such a crime is.

As an update, some people held out their hands possibly to indicate that the wavelength of seeing thought is quite large, perhaps around 10 centimeters, which puts it in the heat range and that seems logical. If this is true, this current emulsion of Abneys which only goes to 2 or 3 um is not going to be enough. If this is true my recommendation is to make an array of thermisters (perhaps 5x5 to start) and use a USB chip, such as one from Cypress, to get the data into a computer.

2/13/07
I don't understand why there are not more television stations, because there are more than enough radio frequencies to transmit FM images and sound. Perhaps the cost of building a transmitting tower or satellite, then the cost of the employees to play the videos that people send them and collect the money from people who want to broadcast their videos. It seems to me, and maybe I am wrong, but that all information transmission businesses, whether it is newpapers, radio, television, internet, cable, etc. basically take money from people who want to send their message to many people. In other words, the owners of the transmitting facilities, printing presses, etc ultimately determine what information they will accept money to transmit, but there is probably an endless source of those people who offer money to play their own produced videos, their own written articles, the usual propaganda. But why is this never told to the public? That basically the major media are equipment owners who are paid to allow people to pipe their messages to the public? And the deceptive aspect is that even so-called "news", to a very large extent, is paid for advertising. I hope the public soon gets to see all the transactions that go on behind the scenes in organizations like the Associated Press, etc.; how they are paid, who pays them. Because ultimately, those people and businesses that survive, survive because they get money. Those companies that, in theory, simply altruistically and unbiasedly report some news do not and can not exist. To transmit a message costs money, and to promote your message, you can only spend money, people don't pay you to hear your message, because there are too many free messages that compete for and occupy their time. It's true that people actually spend money to buy a book, newspaper, or magazine, but I think that time is coming to an end. Definitely there is a price involved in the physical production of paper, etc. but for electronic information, that price is paid once, and then it is forever free. My main point in most of this is that I hope the public gets to see the inner workings of the major media, and how rottenly corrupt it is, how it is basically a major money-for-ad business, which has used the Pupin technology of seeing and hearing thought, the at&t bell network, to abuse the public for a century.

I can see a law to remove all tv and radio station wireless wavelengths altogether and replace those wavelengths with wireless internet to force the public to upgrade to high speed internet and find new sources of news and information, to remove the dishonest lie-filled oligarchy of the major television stations that sold the public on Oswald, Sirhan and 9/11.

On the camera-thought net tip. Clearly any camera-thought net in a person's car has to be wireless. And this is an interesting point. That there cannot possibly be wired information leaving a person's vehicle. Thought detectors may work from streets and surrounding buildings, but probably they need to be placed directly in people's vehicles, because the roof might impede the photons. So I think a valuable device has to be a camera that can detect every wavelength of photon. Probably such devices were invented before 1950 or certainly by 1970, but are kept from the public. One other important point is that I may have to decrease my estimate of 2100 for the making public of seeing, hearing and sending thought, because think about it, there is now a computer in almost every home, and the computer in conjunction with an array of thermisters/heat detectors can easily generate thermal images (a lens can magnify an image to increase detail for a large bulky array). And so, I think given this fact, we should start to see more and more individual wiz-kids assembling these devices, and finding out how to see eyes from behind the head. I don't know for sure, but it seems like the evolution of the computer is moving up the time that the public will see and hear thought, far later than should be though of course. Then of course, let the endless prosecutions begin, in particular of those involved with murder. But it seems clear that, all that is needed is some significant physical evidence, video of muscles being twitched is actually helpful, it's not necessarily enough to convince a outsider, but it may be something. A single photo or video of seeing thought is going to be enough I think to convince most people. It's interesting that if you look at Yan Dan's video of how they see what a cat sees by using electrodes...the public clearly is not seeing the possibility that this can be done from some non-electrode method...I mean they don't see hte significance of what people like Yang Dan have done. But clearly reaching the public through video.google.com and/or youtube.com with some video of seeing "eyes" in the infrared or photos of a checkerboard as seen from behind the head, would be very convincing to those few thousand people who might see it. One thing that shocks me is that there has not been one excluded who has met up with me to work together. It's amazing. I can't possibly be the only excluded who has figured out that people figured out how to see, hear and send thought...I mean so many millions of people are included now...it just is so hard to believe that a person could figure out how to see and hear thought for those who don't already know. It took me years to really fully understand it and even now I am sure there are many parts I don't understand. One other important tip I got from my excluded mom is that just as there is a screen where we see eyes, and clearly different screen where we can draw triangles in our mind (both being able to have images sent to), so there is with sound a place in the brain where we hear external sounds from our eyes, and another where we hear and play sounds in our thoughts. So you can hear your thoughts out loud as my mom explained was done for her for a brief few seconds. What is happening there is that the data recorded in your thought "ear", screen or speaker, is played back onto the neurons that record the external data from your ears. To put it simply:
1) eye screen: beaming an image here will appear in front of your eyes as if it really exists externally in the universe.
2) thought screen: beaming an image here will appear only in the mind, and not out there in the universe (apparently) in front of your eyes.
3) ear screen: beaming sound information here will sound as if it is from an external source, somewhere out there in the universe.
4) ear thought screen: beaming sound here will sound like it is in your thoughts, not from an external source.

Screen 4 is a very interesting screen too...they all are interesting. Because, other species also must have this screen that sounds can be internally created on, but perhaps some are so primitive that they don't. It must have been evolutionarily useful to be able to play sounds back in the brain, and probably evolved quickly in the evolution of the brain, so for example, perhaps molluscs can play back audio in their brain, although I doubt worms can play back sensory info in their ganglion but maybe. Probably fish can play back sounds in their brain. In some way I think it shows the multipurpose use of neurons. They basically record information, whether that information is an image from photons, sounds from air or water molecules, or smells, and then has the ability to also reproduce that same pattern later (many times externally, as much of this secret technology does).

Some people around me in stores say "gay" from time to time, they get money from unseen Cult of Jesus wealthy conservatives in the camera thought net. I am a very large money sink for the Cult of Jesus. As an aside, think about the kind of society these people are building; a society where people are paid to spew rude comments for money...what a wonderful society eh? Yeah that sounds like a good philosophy, a planet filled with secret money-grubbing assholes who are rude for money and the excluded victims who have to suffer their rudeness. But think about people who actually do believe and openly speak out against homo and bisexuality. As I have said before many times, ofcourse, like the woman on a Court TV Forensic Files relates the story of how a guy who murdered his wife asked "for what charge?" he was being arrested for and the person in the police sez "for murder Bill!"...like...duh!...I don't think people understand what is a high priority and what is not a high priority, stopping and punishing people who murder being a high priority, promoting or speaking out against a single gender sexual preference being a very low priority. But as I have said before, think for a second about these "gay" (instead of "ok") people. I think we can accept that they are one of two people. They are either 1) people who are total hypocrates because they certainly have masturbated to same gender touching, or 2) they are shockingly sexually backwards and dull stupid people who have actually never masturbated to thoughts of same gender touching...which...I have to pause for a minute...it's something to be in awe of...that kind of ... person that has never masturbated to same gender thoughts...it's a biological phenomenon, or perhaps the product of a shockingly rigid society. Not that those thoughts are going to dominate most people's minds necessarily, but that they never even once have entertained such thoughts? That is shockingly closed and dull minded. It's amazing how people would restrict their own thoughts in such a way, because in the realm of thought...who cares...it's just a picture..it's just thought...it's not like a person has actually done what they thought or is going to. And then the saddest thing of all is that I love the female body, I love breasts more than the sourpuss puritans who are so obsessed with all things gay. As I have said for much of my life I have lived in desparation trying even to date females, like most males, never even getting so much as a kiss, just a life of total frustration. Add to that the few times a male works up the courage to ask a female out or asks if they want to kiss and then is charged with a harassment suit. Most people know the deal by the time they are 14, nobody ever will get even a hug, and to ask is to risk getting in trouble.

On this 18 year old guy in Salt Lake City, Utah with the trenchcoat that shot people in the mall: a very important aspect of these events is missing from the news and is kept secret. The issue of who was beaming on this kid's head?Who were his "handlers"? ("handlers" is what these people are many times called, but in my limited view, I don't think it is always necessarily one person, but maybe so...many times I think the person needs to change because one person will accumulate too many offenses and the conservatives need to find a fresh beamer). Who beamed on this person's head? Beaming images and sounds can be very powerful. And in my experience, the people that control the image and sound sending technology are very evil, they are not known for sending "happy thoughts" of young people finding possible loves, experimenting in science, building projects, etc. generally these people beam stuff like "hey hows about jumping off that chairlift wouldn't that be fun?", "how about driving head on into traffic...think about it...it might be good for your complexion", "hey how about walk out in the nude...this is god here...yes walk out in the nude", "how about shooting people in the mall? wouldn't that be cool?", etc. very low brow, very vicious and destructive people sending very deceptive violent, destructive reckless images and sounds. And who are these people who send all these bad suggestions? They can only be in the government or at&t in my opinion. Certainly they are using at&t's equipment. But my feeling is that they are mainly people in police and military responding mainly to wealthy conservative people, perhaps for money or for free. Then too, many of these nasty image beaming may simply be the products of their own twisted religious antisexual violent minds. It's kind of interesting, for them it is like fishing...in the police and wealthy conservatives, they try to get some person to do violence using brain images (for example Mark Chapman was a prime example, how they played "do it" in his mind and filled him with ossession and anger directed at John Lennon, but there are millions more, Sirhan probably had a lot of beamed suggestions, the Columbine kids probably were beamed on severely) and then show up to stop it. Many young males are the "pet projects" of those in the camera net. And what about this guy? One question I always have: did they so much as receive a kiss from anybody outside their immediate family? And you know the answer is always no. This is a violent anti-love society hysterically antisexually hyper, and romanticizers of violent behvaior. But back to the beaming, these people in police and military, single out these kids for beaming...the ones most like to bite the worm, and let them win the sick&twisted entertainment lotto of seeing some person murder in the camera-thought net...then show up on the scene and become heros for killing the person who "out-of-nowhere" turned to murder. It's almost like some kind of "hero syndrome" where a person causes a crime so that they can then stop the crime and become the hero. Maybe not. But there are elements of this involved. Certainly people that stop those who are doing violence are ligitimate heros and I don't question that aspect of stopping violence. But we can't deny the beaming aspect either.

McCain sez he's worried about a "Tet offensive", and being called "tet" for liberals named "Ted" is up there with being called "Ped". And ofcourse, I'm not a Communist, and I don't support Communism in any way. I am a Democratist, and have supported full Democracy for as long as I have known about the idea of full democracy where people vote direectly on the laws. Conservative people in the Jesus cult have made great use of the fear of Communism, but when we look at them, are they Democratists like me? No, clearly they are not Democratists. Because if they were they would allow the public to vote on government decisions, even if only to see what the public wants. So people like McCain and those in Congress and the white house are clearly not Democratists...so what are they then? Since they are not Democratists for full democracy? Some argue that they are "Representative Democratists", but I think a strong case can be made for them being "Oligarchists" (power in the hands of a few), "Monarchists" (power being in the hands of one person and passed down to their offspring), and simply "fascists" and "dicatatorship" (in my view, rule by one who uses violence against any who object). Then look at 9/11, it's not a tet offensive, it's clearly a Reichstag fire, and nothing can justify the murder of 3,000 innocent lawful US citizens. And this was my complaint and the item I am trying to draw the public's attention to to begin with: that McCain, supposedly the "liberal" republican, fully and actively supports the lie about 9/11, and the subsequent military build-up, the invasion of Iraq, etc. and this what is a genocide...the murder of something like a reported 600,000 arab people in Iraq and Afghanistan...all who never would be dead had Bush jr not been elected in 2000, and in particular the 3000 US kids who have been killed there, and the 3000 civilians in the World Trade Center, on the planes, and the government employees murdered by a so-called "friendly fire" missile in the Pentagon. That is pure Nazism, and John Buchanan said it so eloquently and accuately..."these people are evil..they are practicing Nazi philosophy...", etc. This kind of Northwoods violent crime and dishonest secret murder to trick the excluded public has got to stop. We can let these 9/11 JFK murders continue to go unpunished because we are risking our own lives and the lives of loved ones if we do not stop them or punish them for their illegal violent crimes. I just can't stress enough how dangerous letting these violent criminals continue to do more JFK, MLK, RFK murders, more Northwoods, 9/11s false-flag operations is. We have to pull up out boot straps and start to clean up this mess some time, and like an oil spill, we can't let this viral mess grow any larger. For example, look at 9/11, those people who killing 3000 people in the blink of an eye are still out there on the earth, free ...doing their grocery shopping, like Thane Cesar...I mean they killed people...but they are not going to be locked in jail? I think the conservative religious justify it by claiming that they are military murders and beyond the jurisdiction of law, they are murders in a war. Which certainly adds confusion to things like the JFK murder and the mass murder of 9/11...if it's all part of a big us versus them war. But think simply and clearly, you know murder is murder...it's just simply wrong. In particular the murder of a person who is not trying to murder the murderer....it's clearly not self-defense, because those people were just sitting in their World Trade Center office, not harming anybody. And the same is true for people like JFK, MLK, and RFK....they were nonviolent people, not even armed when they were murdered. If any murder is cold-blooded first degree murder those were. And to just let those murderers go free? That sounds like a terrible and very dangerous idea, our lives, our society of laws and order are more precious and valuable than that. So let's work to expose and punish those people involved with the 9/11 murders, and those involved with the JFK, MLK, and RFK murders, if we don't we can definitely expect these and even new younger killers, schooled with the evidence of this bloody secret unpunished history, to kill again. And to think about what our future might be...no war, only capturing and trying violent people in full view, living on the moon, mars, moving humans to alpha centauri and other stars...and here we are gambling with the only home we have by electing and allowing violent criminals to go free. Get smart already!

The funny thing about Democracy is how it is popular among the majority of people. Or at least should be, if it is not, since it is the most fair form of government.

I worry when Bush softens his rheteric because eventhing is quiet, its just the mass-murderer in the corner...the mass-murder next door...nothing to be alarmed about...and then boom! another false-flag terrorist attack and the republicans fly into i-told-you-so terror status. It's a typical ploy...not gonna blow it up...not gonna blow it...no need for alarm....like hell i'm not...boom!...sort of ploy. A quiet before the storm technique.

02/14/07
One thing is for sure, and that is that all of us will die some day, and probably die an unpleasant death. The only end to this billion year process in sight is advances in genetics, and religious people are not in any hurry to explore those possibilities.

I saw the photos of Nicole Catsouras, and that is a terrible story. She was such a beautiful girl. I think, ofcourse, that all photos of anything should be freely copied and oppose restrictions of right to privacy, copyright, etc in terms of information. It;s interesting that, I think many people that see graphic images of auto accidents are many times changed, and decide to drive more safely, and so these photos serve a positive purpose in this aspect. In particular, when people see an unpleasant photo, they try to solve the problems that led to the causes of the violence, etc. For example, I have to wonder if the airbag was deployed, and in addition, perhaps for these kinds of accidents which I am sure the auto manufacturers have studied, a simple device, such as an accelerometer connected to the seat release might save more lives, so when a large acceleration is encountered, the seat is allowed to fall backwards protecting the driver and passanger's upper body. Because above the hood, most vehicle bodies cannot endure a 100 mph collision. It's probably like the airplane industry in that they could be exploring parachutes and airbag systems, but choose not to or to delay such experimentation. It helps sometimes, for me, to look diagnostically at such images, and try to understand the anatomy, as if a forensic pathologist like Cyril Wecht was there to explain where everything is. There is the issue of should adults show graphic images to children, and I think this must be a hotly debated issue in the camera-thought net. I think there is some weight in the argument ofcourse, to let young people see any image and that even coaching them with preliminary warning words may cause a negative association where no warning might cause them to view such images as being a natural part of life, but I think many people feel a natural want to introduce some kind of warning before such images are shown. One other point that I think is annoying is how people in this time are so backwards, the way people try to joke about such images, to me is stupid, and there is nothing funny at all about such images. It shows the lack of education the public receives, and after ULSF all that is going to change I predict. Maybe that stupid unfunny joking is a way that helps them to deal with seeing such images. One person had a funny comment saying "I think I will drive 35 mph from now on". My feeling about owning a porshe have changed, it's too small and unprotected, I mean one tire on a semi could flatten those cars. Again there have to be questions about those beaming on this girl's brain. What kind of things did they beam there? Did they suggest she take the porshe? Perhaps by flashing a quick image that matchs one from her memory of the car in her mind. Just thinking about it, that is probably what they do, beaming a newly created image would be too suspicious, they have to capture images from a person's thoughts and use those to send back to the person. Remembering an image you have seen before lowers the suspicion, it feels like it must be a comfortable image from your own mind, and could not possibly be from an external source. This is the kind of stuff that these totally irresponsible people with the camera-thought equipment routinely do to their enemies (which is anybody who will not cower in fear and agree with everything they say no matter how bizarre or illegal). They are constantly pursuing dangerous situations, trying to make a dangerous situation, trying to get a person to embarass themselves, etc.

I think the result of ULSF is going to be a kind of super species, that understands science, that understands the future, that is very smart, and this will change the earth for the better, and perhaps save the earth from the cancer of violence, religion, secrecy, idiocy and superstition.

People, in my view, don't know how to have fun. Religion isn't fun, celibacy isn't fun, sports aren't incredibly fun, alcohol and drugs aren't fun, to me, fun is more like intellectual and physical pleasure, feeling physical pleasure, building robots and rocket planes, doing science, finding and exposing the truth, stopping violence, exposing seeing and hearing thought, etc. First I should say that I think all alcohols and drugs should be completely decriminalized. That being said, I probably am an old fart, but I think alcohol and drugs are all hype and myth, I never liked the taste of alcohol accept maybe a small amount in food. Many times after using LSD or mushrooms I felt like...this is unpleasant, although I admit that it opened my mind. Some of experimenting with drugs and alcohol for young people who feel indestructable is to challange their minds, which I think perhaps may not be completely devoid of positive benefit, but probably most of drug and alcohol use is young people trying to pretend they are grown-up, trying to be cool, with little real pleasure in the actual effect. Plus there is just a large amount of boredom and lack of guidance for young people, and here is where I would advocate science and physical pleasure such as finding dating, kissing, etc. Beyond that, to me the real desire underlying alcohol and drug use is a want for physical pleasure. People use alcohol in the hopes that they will get some love from the opposite gender, and it almost never works out that way. And then too, why not skip the alcohol and just go for the pleasure? Plus it is sad and wrong that if a young person expresses an interest in science they might be dissuaded by being called a geek, dweeb, dork, nerd, square, etc. All those labels are set to stop scientific enjoyment and progress, probably many times in an effort to bring down those who advance in society, to promote one's religion, to stop the truth and the spread of technology, etc.

Most artists and smart people are sexual, they tend to not be as restrained by the social stigmas against physical pleasure inherited from the religions. I think it's possible that there are genetically less sexual people, and maybe they are the majority, because it is hard to understand how they can maintain such stoic celibacy and not even a tiny interest in physical pleasure. They can stave off desire for physical pleasure with monk-like perseverence.

I see the future of the military as being fully democratic. People will be able to be hired, quit, and even disobey orders just like a regular job without any "dishonerable discharge", etc. Then when some people want to invade some nation, people who disagree with it, will vote that none of their tax money paid can be used for such an activity, and those who want the illegal invasion will have to find money themselves if their invasion is not popular. In addition, less people would accept employment for an invasion they don't believe in, and perhaps the wages would have to be raised to hire people, which would consume more money of those who want to wage illegal wars.

It seems logical to only vote to sentence those who flick our eye muscles, or tumor beam us to sentences more like:
1 day (was 1 year): nuisance such as a stupid, dangerous, unpleasant thought image or sound.
1 week (was 10 years): minor annoying muscle move such as eye lid muscle flick, make you itch or gesture.
1 month (was 20 years): tumor beam, painful laser beamimg.
Still I don't know, because they are locking liberals up for decades for nonviolent drugs and nonviolent sexual activity. Plus, these evil scum get out in a month, and we still don't even get to see them or hear any thoughts. Then you are going through all the trouble to arrest and jail one of these scumbags, you might as well lock them away for a long time if going to all the trouble and effort. So I don't know. I'm still thinking about it, and would enjoy your input. In addition, whatever they did to the victim should be done back to them some time before or during their stay in the prison cell.

Here is an excellent video I found when searching "CIA": http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8061307149260436858&q=cia. Notice how it has 5 stars after 46 votes. What the people in the CIA have done is absolutely shocking, completely illegal, and I can't believe the people in the USA have allowed these things to happen. Probably because they did not know about them, is one of the main reasons why the CIA was allowed to continue. In particular the report narrated by Bill Moyers is just scratching the surface of the evils the CIA has done with US taxpayer money. We should be grateful to Moyers and those who summarized what has been made public about these CIA operations over the years in this report.

I was looking at some info about Easy E (Eric Wright) and it seems likely that conservative racists in the FBI probably killed Wright, he mentions "FBI" in his final message to the public and it would not surprise me if Wright was murdered with the HIV virus. The conservatives in the camera-thought net study popular people in great depth, how to murder them and make other people take the focus of the blame. And ofcourse, they have an overwhelming advantage over the excluded public. For example, the camera-thought net is one reason why there has not been a legitimate terrorist attack in the USA since it's invention in 1910. Oklahoma City, the WTC bombing, 9/11 as far as I can see are camera-thought net members inside job, false-flag highly controlled operations, planned far in advance with all insiders knowing. You have to ask yourself, when a simple street camera can solve most murders, how can anybody possibly go unknown when even their thoughts can be seen and there are phone company cameras and microphones inside every house? Poor excluded people can't possibly plan any kind of violence, because generally, they would think about their plans for days and be picked up by smart programs looking for that, and people in the net paid to watch for dangerous violent people. And so what we see are these controlled terrorist acts, done by conservative fascists in the US government and military product corporations, used to scare the public into allowing more money to grow their investments in the defense industry.

So much of the backwards, terribly spiralled-out-of-control nature of the current situation with the camera-thought network system is that we have this system of evil wealthy people that pay poor people to crime for them. And this is a massive massive system. This is basically what the CIA did in central america, they created their own army, that had no popular support, just strictly by using US taxpayer money, a complete mercenary army supporting a corrupt unpopular pro-USA business army. But what is happening is that these sick backward wealthy people constantly pay these poor people to do their dirty work. And when all is exposed, it is probably the poor crime-doing workers who will be the most punished because they are the idiots who actually commit the crimes for money (think: person that actually detonated the WTC explosives, it probably wasn't his master plan). But most people recognize that many of these poor people would never do these illegal crimes if not for the wealthy people that pay them. And I can see voting to jail these wealthy people too, in particular when they pay for violent crimes. It really then is a test of the power of popular opinion and collective financing (tax money) versus the wealth of individual people who are caught paying for other people to do violence.

It is nice to see those people celebrating in Chili, and Nicaraqua when the evil US puppet dictators were overthrown, for all the innocent people those dictators killed as unpopular leaders. And I think there will be a similar celebration when the included are nonviolently overthrown...the excluded have been victimized by them for decades, and no doubt the same for the conservatives who killed JFK, the Warren Commission, etc. I was thinking when watching the above CIA videos that ... this is what they did in East Asia, Central and South America, and the Mediterranian... imagine what they are doing here in the USA? Such is also the way it was when the Nazis were pushed out of France, many celebrations.

02/16/07
When you see some of the violence done in some of these smaller nations with US tax money you can see that these issues have more to do with stopping violence than any kind of political belief. It's not a left or right thing, but a death or life thing.

Here is something somewhat interesting. My view is that there is conservation of energy (which I am refering to as momentum, mainly, and which I view as a collective quantity of two individual components: mass and velocity) but there is no mixing of matter and velocity. In other words matter cannot be converted to velocity, and velocity cannot be converted to matter. In addition, in my opinion, photons of light (nor neutrinos if existing) are not energy as is commonly believed, but are matter. So that made clear, it seems like when we are looking at the phenomenon of two photons orbiting each other (if such events are possible), that the collective velocity of the group (the two photons) is only an average of the actual velocities of the individual particles, and so this velocity cannot be used, and is not "conserved" because the actual velocities of the individual particles is more detailed. So for example, two photons each moving with v=c, may have a collective velocity of 1e8m/s in the x dimension (viewing y and z as zero for now), but it is their c velocity that is conserved, in interactions with other particles. Perhaps their averaged velocity is also conserved. But a simple example is: two photons have an average velocity (over a few seconds) of 1e8m/s in the x dimension. Then they divide, and while their mass is still the same, their average velocity over the next few seconds increases to c. So you can see that p=mv, their m=2, their v(ave)=1e8m/s initially (p=mv=2*1e8=2e8), but then upon going their own separate ways, their m=1 and v(ave)=3e8m/s and so p=m1v1+m2v2=3e8+3e8=6e8. The same is true for 3+ photons. It would appear that they gained momentum, when in reality, their average velocity does not represent their true individual velocities. And the velocity of photons is probably conserved, when they collide with each other (if they do in fact collide with each other, which I think is the more likely theory). The entire idea of photons colliding has not publically been fully explored and there are interesting ideas that arise when this idea is thought about. For example, at what pressure might photons be forced together so densely, that there is very little if any movement between them because of so many collisions? But my main thought in this paragraph is this idea that collective velocity does not appear to be conserved, or maybe better stated the collective or average velocity of a particle made of more than one particle that have velocities of their own, is not an accurate velocity for calculating conservation of velocity (and therefore energy or momentum) in collision, decay, etc events. But when the case is that a particle is made of other particles that all have the same velocity, are connected together (at least by their velocity being the same as the average velocity of the collective particle), then this average velocity is conserved in calculations where those particles separate from the collective particle.

So much of the talk once everybody gets to see will probably be a lot of thoughts similar to: "I would have loved to (fill in blank: kissed, slept with, danced with, etc.) with them...if only I knew they wanted to"

When people are handing out 5150s I want to suggest that next time they 5150 those doing acts such as wiring up the World Trade Centers, Pentagon, etc. But then, ultimately, no matter how insane that may be, they each should really be charged with 10000 counts of attempted homicide and then ofcourse, now in the aftermath, 3000 counts of accessory to 3000 homicides.

I hope that if a democrat wins the 2008 election that they are equally as extremist as Bush jr was in his 2 terms, but in the opposite direction. With one exception being doing this extremism nonviolently. For example, just like Bush and them did 9/11, fully exposing and jailing every last one of those people, fully exposing the hearing, seeing and sending of thought, completely shutting down all planetary violence, exposing it all for the public to see without any censorship, capturing all those involved in murder and even assault, freeing the people in jail for drugs, prostitution all over the earth, moving all those involuntarily locked in hospitals into democratic trials for their freedom, exposing and punishing every last contributor of the JFK, MLK, RFK, John Lennon, etc. murders, those who did the actual murdering, those who planned them, those who beamed on people to make them happen, those who helped to cover up the aftermath, without exception. Now that would be something, finally, some extremism on the opposite side, after all those years of nazi religious extremism, to finally have some antinazi proscience extremism would be very healthy for the planet earth.

Just for the record quickly, Citibank and Vonage use "nerdiness" in an ad, and this is fundamentally an anti-science advertisement and promotion.

02/05/07
More psychology rebuttle (the person never gave me permission to print their portion so that is omitted):
======
I think there is some science that is experimental, and there are many theories that are very dubious.
Yes, and I am weighing in my opinion that psychosis, neurosis, schizophrenia are all inaccurate.
THere is a difference between biology and phrenology because one has an accurate basis the other does not, and so to a certain extent it is with psychology; much of the basis of psychological theory is inaccurate in my view. But my main point is that, as long as psychology is consensual I have no problem with it being legal, but I still tell people to be very skeptical of the claims produced by those in psychology, and I reject probably the entirety of psychology theories as being inaccurate or unimportant.
No I accept that some phenomena can be subjected to scientific analysis, however, I don't see any valid physical evidence for most of the claims of psychological disease, and in addition, many times the perceived "problem" is well within the legal and usual realm of human behavior, and no radical (drug or torture) treatments are necessary.
This is a major point, and it delineates a major split in two branches of science. I am on the branch that thinks that science should be understandable to an average person, should have a logical basis...not abstract or ununderstandable theories are probably going to be accurate. And the other school feels that the true picture of the universe is or should be beyond the comprehension of an average person. I reject a large portion of the current views of physics for example. I think the universe is infinite in size, I reject the big bang and expanding universe, I think that the red shift is from gravitational bending, that all matter is made of photons, etc. logical, something everybody can understand.
I think the most abstract theories will be proven false. I think there are some theories where there are many details to remember, but my experience with science is that all theories that last tend to be more simple, logical and intuitive....understood by a majority, verified by experiments.
I do think that as time continues psychology will undergo a major change, that being one in which psychology is forced by law to be consensual only. And at that point, I think the power of psychology will seriously be lessened. From there, the future is uncertain, but I think psychology will remain in an area of experimental consensual science, as other areas of health are. My own feeling however, is that psychology as a field has been so discredit, and has such a terrible history of abuse that like the republican party, when all is learned and revealed, it may never rise again.
Well this is a good point, and there are no major industries that actively fund physics research...I think particle physics is about the most established form of physics now. Physics as a career may not be a very safe major either. But science is growing more popular, and I think that science will ultimately replace religion, and at that point we will see the vast majority of life, perhaps existing mainly from the labor of two-leg robots, immersed in science.
There are really only a very few exception to those who reject the use of four-point restraints and involuntary drugging...or perhaps more importantly and simply: making psychology consensual only. Thomas Szatz is one. The vast majority either quietly or vocally support involuntary psychology. I think that is a good point that psychology means different things to different people, perhaps technically I am opposed to those who interpret psychology as supporting involuntary treatment. Generally, I don't have much support for psychology even if voluntary, but perhaps there is something to an approach of talking to people and teaching them about science, and some might catagorize that as a method prescribed in psychology. In addition, the experimental consensual drugs for unsolvable perceived problems is a ligitimate area of science.
Still the Nuremberg Laws are violated every minute in many nations. A few years after the Nuremberg laws, Muniz shared a Nobel prize in medicine and physiology for the first lobotomy (and ofcourse the question is: was there consent? if no, that is a completely violation of the Nuremberg laws and only a few years after Auschwitz). I think that people were purposely trying to reassert a person's right to experiment on humans without consent.
This is completely wrong. As I said, many people try to say no to the meds and injections and the brutes in the psychiatric hospitals coerce them, humans rights are completely neglected in the majority of psychiatric hospitals in my opinion, and perhaps if there ever is a series of serious investigations and open examination with video of what is the routine in most psychiatric hospitals this would be shown clearly.
My view is very simple. If a person has violated a law they should be processed through the legal system which has existed for many years. If a person has not violated any law they cannot be held in any kind of prison. Even if a person may be viewed as a danger, they cannot be jailed unless they have violated a law. For such people, more resources should be dedicated to observation. For example, there is a clear difference between females and males. Males tend to commit the vast majority of violent crime. But this doesn't mean we automatically jail all males knowing that we will be stopping violent crime. The best we can do is to spend more time preparing to stop males from doing violence, to quickly jail males that do, and coming up with informational, educational and legal answers to try and stop the cause of violence, etc.
You mean, diagnoses of depression and other disorders. People in psychology know a good snake-oil business needs more diseases and more customers.
I think there is an end is sight and thanks to people like me, the truth about psychology...you don't have to take the meds, ... that there is a way to force psychology to be consensual only and greatly weaken this torturous beast and growing malignant cancer on society.
Of course, I know that, but they are all part of the same phenomenon.
Whether it's a professinal using a high-falutant sounding word, or a common person, it's all wrong. ALso this idea of a "sociopath"...its interesting to me. Some people are going to fit into society, and others will not. That to me seems far from anything called disease or reason for imprisonment or treatment. Many times, in particular at this time, much of society has a very inaccurate and mind numbingly dull method of interaction. For example, many sit in a church for hours every 7 earth rotations, and I have to say that anybody that does not fit into that mind-numbingly dull routine, and finds difficulty in verbally relating to such people, is probably more healthy. Sociopath, by itself, as a person that does not fit in socially, is no crime, it's no disease, and it's completely legal. And this is a perfect example of how psychological diseases, most of the time are not diseases, are not serious. But then the wizards in psychology and society will attach "sociopath" to a murderer...and the murder is explained by the reason that the person did not fit into society, and that is inaccurate in my opinion, in particular when we look at all the brain images. And beyond that, if there is a relationship, it is of little importance. It's like the relationship of most murderers owning a gun. It's something to be aware of, but gun ownership by itself does not guarantee that the person will be a murderer, and so is of very limited use. And so it is for, those who use drugs or alcohol, or one race of people or gender tend to be violent; it convicts an entire group of people for the crimes of a few. To me the main thing is that, "murderer" or "person who killed a human" should be the shocker, not "sociopath", "psycho", "nut", etc.

I seriously doubt aspd is a ligitamate disease with a diagnostic symptom, but beyond that, that it is the real root cause of violence.

DSM-II lists homosexuality as a mental disorder. Beyond this, there is always a large amount of personal opinion in subjective analysis of behavior unlike in analysis of physical objects such as blood, etc. And so, psychology is a very experimental, widely varying field of opinion, and should be treated as such...certainly not given the primacy and importance that it has now. People can consult the DSM, and use it as a source of opinion, but no way should it be viewed with the certainty of a blood test!

Yes, ofcourse. We all get voices in our head, and until a person has done violence they must be allowed to remain free. It is the basis of our innocent until proven guilty law, and freedom until a crime has been committed is a logical natural right in my opinion.

No, of course not, and for example, I don't want religious people indoctrinating any child I make, but since 90% of people believe in a diety, I don't have much choice. But I make use of the few choices that I do have, and support those who share my views, and speak out against those who do not.

Of course, I accept that there are many different views, I just think psychology is going to fall to the past, but as I said, it may hold on as an experimental drug research, consensual-only, in the science of health.

Ted
============

From the article by Abney he mentions gum resins combined with Silver Bromide to get the IR spectrum. In one veersion of his "treastise on photography" abney mentions that there are two forms of silver bromide, the infrared one is green colored. Possibly even just some green food coloring might be enough? Abney mentions that the emulsion looks blue in ordinary light and so concludes that it absorbs red light. Abney states:
"In this condition it was sensitive to the whole spectrum, visible and invisible. There was much uncertainty attaching to the preparation; about one batch of the salt suspended in collodion out of five or six fulfilling the requisite conditions. I am now, however, in a position to prepare it without any risk of failure, my experiments of the last nine months having showed the condisions absolutely necessary for success. The following is the mode of preparation. A normal collodion is first made according to the formula below:-
Pyroxyline 16 grains
ether (725 Sp.) 4oz
Alcohol (820) 2 oz
This is mixed some days before it is required for use, and any undissolved particles allowed to settle, and the top portion is decanted off. 320 grains of pure zinc bromide are dissolved in 1/2 oz. to 1 oz of alcohol (820) together with 1 drachm of nitric acid. This is added to 3 oza of the above normal collodion, which is subsequently filtered. 500 grains of silver nitrate are next dissolved in the smallest quantity of hit distilled water, and 1 oz of boiling alcohol 820 added. This solution is gradually poured into the bromized collodion, stirring briskly whilst the addition is being made. Silver bromide is now suspended in a fine state of division in the collodion, and if a drop of the fluid be examined by transmitted light it will be found to be of an orange colour.
Besides the suspended silver bromid, the collodion contains zinc nitrate, a little silver nitrate, and nitric acid, and these have to be elimitated. The collodion emulsion is turned out into a glass flask, and the solvents caredully distilled over with the aid of a water bath, stopping the operation when the whole solids deposit at the bottom of the flask. Any liquid remaining is carefully drained off, and the flask filled with distilled water. After remaining a quarter-of-an-hour the contents of the flask are poured into a well-washed linen bag, and the solids squeezed as dry as possible, The bag with the solids is again immersed in water, all lumps being crushed previously, and after half-an-hour the squeezing is repeated. This operation is continued till the wash water contains no trace of acid when tested by litmus paper. The squeezed solids are then immersed in alcohol 820 for half-an-hour to eliminate almost every trace of water, when after wringing out as much of the alcohol as possible the contents of the bag are transferred to a bottle, and 2 oza of ether (720) and 2 ozs of alcohol (805) are added. This dissolves the pyroxyline and leaves an emulsion of silver bromide, which when viewed in a film is essentially blue by transmitted light.
All these operations must be conducted in very weak red light- ... if a green light could be obtained it would be better than the faint red light."
My own opinion, is that I am going to try without a collodion and just use a gelatin (dry process), but may go with the collodion (wet process) if that fails.

02/07/07
With this latest "child porn ring" in Austria seeking to charge 2,360 people, I think this is what we need for 9/11, a massive arrest of all involved: controlled demolition, the Bushes, Cheney, securacom, etc. one difference would be that this ring is a "murder-ring" which is a more serious crime, although all violent crime is serious and must be stopped in my opinion, while nonviolent crimes (such as simply owning or viewing images of child pornography, for example as a jury and courtroom observers may in any trials that result from this sting operation) is purely nonviolent at least as viewed outside of the Alice-in-Wonderland society of earth right now. One other difference is that people should not be secretive about letting everybody see the images of those who committed crimes in 9/11. And on this point, while I tell people to absolutely not be involved in the making, owning, buying or selling of child pornography, I think an important point is that images of violence against children, for example, children in Iraq wounded by US missiles, must never be illegal, no matter how grotesque the images may be, because these images are important evidence of potential crimes, and also perhaps more importantly serve as a source of news for the public. And so I add that, like the images of wounded children in Iraq, even adding an element of sexuality, no image of anything should be illegal, and it is interesting and idiotic that only when you add an element of sexuality do the images become illegal. I have been saying this for years, but the public as far as I know has not picked up on this idea. And you know it is kind of ridiculous...for example a person owning a picture of a child hurt in Iraq...I feel like saying "hey I didn't drop the bomb and hurt all these kids...I only own the picture that resulted from those who did...", I mean people are without the tiniest sense of logic on the issue of child pornography.

All waves in the universe are particle in nature. For example, sound itself may be thought of a wave, but in reality it is the movement of particles, molecules in the air (or water, etc.); actual particles make the wave phenomenon. And so it is with water waves; water molecules are the substance of each wave. So I am saying that all waves are made of particles, and that there is no wave that is not made of particles.

I think an interesting idea, and one that maybe wrong but will probably be the source of very large experimentation should life of earth evolve to live around numerous stars, is the idea that in the center of stars and maybe even planets, matter is so compressed that photons are pressed against each other, without any space to move, perhaps having a 0 velocity (due to a constant reflection off the photons around them) or a very low velocity relative to the other photons around them. And the question is: Do protons, neutrons, electrons, (atoms) exist inside stars and planets? Are they held together, or are they compressed into wall to wall photons? If compressed to wall to wall photons, perhaps protons and neutrons may only exist at colder temperatures and pressures where photons have some space to move in. And this idea is similar to the "big bang" theory which I reject, but it is curious that there may be similarities, but at the level of atom creation in stars and even planets. The real mystery is how photons join together to begin with. I don't think people may even know for sure what the nature of the inside of stars is, because the second a star is opened up to be looked at, the condition of jam packed photons is changed. Perhaps supernovas are advanced civilizations experimenting with trying to see what is inside a star by recording and transmitting images of the inside of a star they purposely destroy (although how to make a star unstable is a mystery). This idea is somewhat unlikely, but still, we should flush out even remotely interesting ideas. For example, I think the wall-to-wall photons idea is highly logical, and will remain a point of serious debate for many centuries.

I am proud to be one of the few to publically question the value of psychology and psychiatric theorieis and treatments. And I ask a simple question: "Can you imagine if psychology was made consensual-only and strictly enforced?" The pharmceutical companies would fight it tooth and nail, because such a major source of their money comes from involuntary experimentation on humans in psychiatric hospitals and outpatient programs. And clearly, sales of drugs would plummet to all-time lows as people suddenly would have the choice to just "say no" to drugs and then to have that decision respected for the first time in history.

We are the century where the battle was not over a black person being owned as a slave, having to be returned to a master, or a battle over women who are not allowed to vote. Our battle is for hearing and seeing thought to be made public. That is our yoke in this century, that is what people will look back at when they research the 1900s and 2000s; the injustic and suffering that resulted from the secrecy, the backwards people that supressed the seeing and hearing of thought, the evolution of the entire secret, how people fought it, etc. There are ofcourse, other battles, the constant battle against violence, murder, assault, for full democracy, against religion, against the drug war for decriminalizing prostitution, etc. When all of these struggles will blossum is perhaps a better question. For example in the USA all slavory ended in 1865, and women won the right to vote in 1920. My estimates are roughly that: Marijuana will probably be decriminalized in the USA in 2037. Prostitution will probably be fully decriminalized in most major nations around 2050. Seeing and hearing thought will be made public around 2100. The other drugs decriminalized by 2150. The first major nation to be fully democratic 2250. Religions will probably fall to the minority around 2800.

In my view, the theory of "ego" is a fraud; there is nothing wrong with asserting some belief and feeling good when evidence supports your claim. It's like "id", "psyche", etc. I simply don't see the value or accuracy in such labels. I don't put much value in the diagnoses from psychology. And as I said, and I think this is a pretty clear statement: by all means people should not view a diagnosis of a psychological disorder as being as certain as a blood test for some virus! Plus, I am talking about issues, not about myself, although nothing is wrong with a person talking about themselves. I want to see change on the planet, an end to violence, Those theories of Freud and later people might have a tiny kernel of truth, but in their current form are highly abstract and doubtful in my opinion, they are overly simplistic too.

This astronaught attempted murder event is interesting. I know that many people are going to claim that this woman has or had some kind of psychiatric disorder. I think this is probably a case of a major "beaming", but yet I can't believe that an astronaught would be excluded, but perhaps. People probably beamed and beamed on her brain, and these images beamed on are highly suggestable. But anyway, I don't put much confidence in the theories of psychology. Does the person have inaccurate claims and beliefs? Probably, but then so does 100% of the planet, everybody has some erroneous beliefs, and no one person has a completely accurate interpretation of the universe. Some have very far from accurate theories, about how Jesus will come down from the clouds, others have less inaccurate theories, rejecting such claims. But when a person violates a law, in my opinion they should be democratically judged (and this is a constant process, life is a constant trial by the majority), and if found that they violated the law they should receive some democratically decided jail sentence. And then, if people think they have some kind of answer to rehabilitate a person for when they get out (there is a good argument for not bothering with such treatment for a person who will never get out, but then perhaps there might be value for living within a prison community), for example, showing them movies of those who were beaming on them, explaining where they went wrong, explaining about evolution, society having it wrong about pleasure being bad, that religion is full of lies, etc...and that is shown to help, then perhaps some tax money can be spent on such counciling. If there is some drug that they consensually enjoy to relax and tends to make them less violent, then perhaps tax-payer money can go to providing them free drugs to be taken voluntarily and fully consensually only. As I have said before, I am for making the psychiatric hospitals and all of psychology consensual-only, legalizing it, making it legitimate, and moving any treatments for those who violate the laws into prisons. And there is another important point about prisons I want to make. For nonviolent offenders, there can be serious differences in prisons. For example, for never-violent people, such as many drug, prostitution, molestation, theft, etc. people there is no need to have barred rooms, simply having regular rooms with windows, etc. Because if a person damages or destroys property they can be charged and transfered to a violent prison. I would view nonviolent prisons similar to psychiatric hospitals. People have rooms where the door locks from the outside. The rooms have windows, beds, bathrooms (or community bathroom), etc. Only people jailed on violent charges should be punished with traditional windowless cells and highly controlled because of their potential for violence (although probably, among violent there are those more violent and less violent).

To me the most convincing debaters keep their cool and stay with the facts. Although some times some anger can make a point more memorable. Mostly I am for calm debate based exclusively on truth.

That people have to go through the courts to hear an FAA phone call about the JFK jr death is an example of what's wrong with our government. I am against government secrets and for fully open government where there are no secrets. The JFK jr. death has many mysterious aspects, some of which are details by John Hankey on video.google.com.

We live in a society where most people are like: "what's a laser?", "what's a camera?", "what's a word?", "what's a letter?", ... you know just the basics are far beyond grasp...

02/08/07
Q: EX: What differences are there between neutrons and Hydrogen atoms? Can a neutron go through the same process of losing an electron to a magnetic field and then accelerated as a proton?

I think Hillary has a good chance at being the US president in 2008, I can't stand that she supported the Iraq invasion, has said nothing about 9/11 being an inside job, and is related to a former president (I mean of 250 million people they pick four presidents from two houses? Why did we bother to throw off the shackles of monarchy just to re-enact it again? But the plus would be having the first female President in the USA, even if her values are highly dubious, and she seems to be ultra-religious and not big into science or free info. I don't have much support for Nader either though. Nader is kind of old, which doesn't matter too much, but mainly its the lack of any decent issues that concern me. Nader has said nothing about 9/11 being an inside job so far as I know, even Dean questioned how much Bush knew about 9/11 before hand. Plus Nader is kind of a "diaper-the-public" person, which I see as excessively restrictive. We need to decriminalize drugs and prost, not make more crap illegal, filling the prisons with more nonviolent people. Whoever is the democrat I will vote for to make sure the Nazi Republicans don't win, but I am kind of thinking Kucinich (who is vegan, and for decrim), and Dean in the primary. But any way we look at 2008 and a decade or more after that look dim...its because all of the religious idiocy in the USA...they can't even figure out who killed JFK 40 years later. None of them have said anything about stopping violence, of free info.
update: actually Nader is on record supporting decriminalizing marijuana, according to Norml: http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=5977
Still, it's like the libertarian, there is no way anybody but the democrat can defeat the Nazi Republicans. Here is a nice statement by Ralph Nader: http://www.votenader.org/media_press/index.php?cid=317

02/09/07
Robert Gates is saying they have "pretty good" evidence of serial numbers of weapons that go back to Iran. But where are the serial numbers? I think "pretty good" refers to how I used to dress in women's panties and bra and then masturbate when I was in college. It's amazing to me that sexuality whether in young college kids, or people of any age, makes these conservative puritan people's skin crawl and blood boil, but ironically, they prefer to see young kids body parts strewn throughout the sands of Nicaragua, Iraq, or even the cities streets of the USA; that is more comfy for them than seeing young people feeling sexual. And then they make sure the public never sees these graphic images of people being murdered, the products of the republican's efforts. People in the USA have made a terrible mistake in supporting these murderers. And this is all about invading Iran, which as far as I know is a democratic nation. Then they claim to being surprised at finding Iranian people in Iraq, what's next finding Canadians in the USA? Have they ever found Saudi Arabian people there? gee what a strange finding. I wish people would apply the logic used to arrest the attempted murdering astronaught on the republicans...ok we caught you wiring up the world trade centers....what were you planning to do? Ok we see you with missiles getting ready to murder people in Afghanistan and Iraq....we have you clearly in an attempted murder scheme. Perhaps the republicans were jealous of people embracing people and nonviolence? Who knows, but first degree murder is first degree murder, I hope the public eventually realizes that.

I saw a news story on NBC where people were actually celebrating Ronald Reagan's birthday. I mean the man is dead. And two planes fly overhead. You know even people I think were good people...I don't celebrate the anniversary of their birthday or death. Plus Reagan, if anything...I think open up the investigation on that bastard. Why did he reject Jim Garrison's request for extradition of a suspect with Nazi ties in the JFK murder? What was Reagan's relationship to Vicki Morgan? What did Reagan do in his first days of office that resulted in the murder of John Lennon? What were Reagan's thoughts all those years? Then how about the Reagan mandatory minimums? Where Carter was going to decriminalize marijuana, Reagan turned it around 180 degrees and increased the sentences for nonviolent drug use as they spread all kinds of propaganda about a "crack epidemic", while simultaneously Bush and the CIA were running drugs as far as Tarpley makes it clear in his unauthorized biography of George Bush. I wouldn't doubt that we find that what the drug war was really mainly about was not keeping people from using drugs, but those in the highest parts of government being able to use the shockingly large amounts of money generated from keeping drugs illegal. But maybe I'm wrong. History will show though, and there is more than enough video at at&t to prove whatever the truth is. What about Reagan and the Iran-Contra deal? How could he have not known with all those fascist Republicans seeing and hearing thoughts?

More about a neutron being similar or perhaps even identical to a hydrogen atom. Can neutrons be combusted with oxygen as hydrogen can? That might be evidence. And if no, what is the difference since both are composed of a proton and electron. Perhaps a proton and electron are only formed when a neutron collides with something or decays, while in hydrogen the proton and electron are already formed.

I think there is a belief that the morals of bisexual or homosexual people are somehow compromised, but I think that independent examinations would show that bi and homosexual people are no more likely to view homocide, assault, violent crime, nonviolent crime any differently from heterosexual people. Probably homo and bi sexual people are just as opposed to homicide as heterosexual people, just as opposed to dishonesty, etc. I doubt seriously that there is any relation between sexual preference and willingness to subvert law, in fact we probably would find the opposite, that on average, people that claim they are heterosexual are more likely to break or disregard violent laws.

With Anna Nicole Smith, how many people die at the age of 39? It seems unusual to me. I think perhaps she died without any help, but it is very easy for these nazis in the camera at&t net to kill people. They constantly move my left eye lid muscle, and if the nazis can move eye muscles from remote locations, they certainly can cause a fribullation in heart muscles. What keeps them from doing this? It's the same thing that keeps them from lasering off people's heads. One thing only, the other side, the anti-fascist democrats who have clearly prepared some sort (and no doubt an entire stream) of counter strike(s) in the event of such first degree murdering. But the problem is that, being spineless powder-puff christian democrats (as opposed to the nazistic violent murderer christian republicans), they don't want to start all out war and so allow the republicans to murder a few thousand innocent people a year using "heart attacks", "suicides", "cancers", etc. And Smith was the perfect candidate for such murders because she was sexual, because she was around Texas and Florida, two Nazi filled states (although Florida is close to turning democratic and liberal, there are still the relics of Sturgis, Hunt, the CIA, the Bushes there). So I think Smith was a prime figure to invoke the anger of the antisexual murderer puritans that are consumers of the camera-thought net (again almost all strictly in the Jesus cult, very few if any atheists or even agnostics appear to be included, the Nazis and other conservatives have so pulled one over on the intellectuals when it comes to the camera-thought net) in the police and military portions of the at&t camera net. Speaking of the at&t camera thought net, Wayne Madsen says when interviewed by Hesham Tillawi that shortly after Alexander Gram Bell invented the telephone (1876) there were patents for wire taping devices. And the nature of the devices that are in everybody's home are interesting. How do they connect to the phone wire? Who installs them? When are they installed? Madsen is the person that broke the story about Marvin Bush's maid Bertha Champaign who ended up dead in very unusual circumstances and how the major media failed to report it, and there is no arguing with Madsen's logic on this point, because clearly it's a major story, why was it not reported? I guess we can add that to all the info about 9/11, Sturgis, Thane Cesar, Pupin, and millions of other important news stories that go unreported.

To me it seems obvious that, good advice is: people should not take the diagnosis of a psychiatric disease as seriously and as accurately as they should the diagnosis of cancer or a viral infection as revealed by a blood test. To me this is obvious, the test for a virus is a clear test, with a high probability of accuracy, while the psychiatric diagnosis has a large amount of uncertainty, and a large amount of differing opinions. But do we hear this from professional people from many fields? No. This seems to me a very simple piece of advice, without too much doubt...a blood test should be thought of as very accurate, a psychiatric diagnosis as not as accurate as a test for blood type, for a virus, or for cancer. We simply do not hear any criticism of psychology and psychiatric diagnosis at all. Psychiatric diagnosis are widely believed by average people, and many, perhaps even most people, will go so far as to agree to take drugs to cure psychiatric diseases which are claimed by those in psychology.

01/29/07

I highly recommend to those interested in reading books on the infrared from your public libraries. In particular those that give a brief summary of the history of infrared in the beginning (you can even skip all the complex math and everything beyond the first chapter). The key thing is getting all the names and what they did and then researching those people if you want more details.

After searching for hours I found an article only available to those with a subscription in jstor.org to the Royal Society from William Abney where he talks about how he makes an emulsion that works for the infrared region of light. The paper, at least I think the first paper (many people say that Abney first captured infrared in 1887, but this paper is 1879: http://www.jstor.org/view/02610523/ap000082/00a00170/0
Abney mentions that Vogel used a dyes. One wiki article mentions that Vogel found that a green die lowers the sensativity of the emulsion into the red, but I could not find info to verify that. An interesting note by Abney is that Major Waterhouse used turmeric and finds lines in the solar spectrum less refrangible than A (A is the limit on the visible spectrum of light) but these lines are reversed (in some way than perhaps Waterhouse is technically the first to capture light in the infrared, in addition, actually John Hershel may have been the first when he captured an image using alcohol on paper and seeing where the alcohol dried more quickly to determine the spectral lines too). For an infrared emulsion Abney uses a collodion (which is in my novice view a complicated thing to put together, I probably am not even going to try to make a collodion, instead simply using gelatin (did you know that gelatin is taken from animals? is that gross? all this time eating jello brand gelatin and it is from cow bone or something. bleh!)). As far as I can see, and again I am a total novice, after a large series of complex steps using zinc bromide, alcohol, nitric acid, and silver nitrate (one thing I read describes Silver Nitrate, AgNO3 as the most used molecule in film photography), Abney has basically Silver bromide (which people can now buy on ebay already made, and it is easy to precipitate from mixing Potassium bromide with silver nitrate). See http://www.silverlight.co.uk/tutorials/basicpf/latent.html. So quite possibly, simply using Silver bromide (with associated developer, stopper, fixer, etc) and a prism(s) and/or diffraction grating may be all that is needed to film in the infrared deeper than the film for sale to the public does, and possibly to the depth required to see eyes and thoughts. I will update this when I have tried it. Apparently silver bromide leaves a "latent" image, it cannot be seen until developed even with a microscope, and this may correspond to Pupin using the word "latent" in his books. I am going to build a wooden camera (I'm not sure why these are called pin-hole when really the size I find works for the human eye is a pen-hole camera. Just take a closed box, poke 2 holes in it 6 inches apart and look in one without blocking the other.

It's interesting that this is a somewhat critical time, because it is just when Abney starts to film infrared, and quite quickly after this, it appears that much of this work, and even before this, much of the work goes classified, or secret by a growing secret network of people using the phone company to hear and see inside the public's houses. This is where much of the trail goes somewhat cold, and this is also the case for science on earth around the same time. Clearly there was a large amount of development secretly and there probably exist entire secret markets for tiny cameras that can see thought. Probably much of it is done by AT&T, universities and defense industry corporations in conjunction with government agencies. But this means that sadly those excluded are probably in for a tough road when it comes to seeing and hearing thought, hopefully it is easy to stumble onto, and if I do I will certainly report my findings here. But my point is that, clearly much of the development is done with machinery that is very precise and developed upon layers of secret findings found only through years of high price experimenting, which would remove any chance of stumbling on seeing, hearing and sending thought by an amateur. I'm optomistic though, Asimov strongly hinted towards Abney, and there must be a reason for that. But clearly, others, although not many, do glass plate photography, perhaps they are all already included. There is such a major line between those who are in and those who are out, because it is absolutely inconceivable to those who are out that such a thing as seeing thought in the infrared could remotely be possible...it is extremely far removed from their realm of possibility, as extremely removed as the possibility of an insider talking openly about seeing, hearing and sending thought...it just has never been known to happen. A similar analogy although perhaps not as extreme is the example of the Jewish guards in Auschwitz, even if they wanted to tell the unaware victims of their fate, it would only end in their own prolonged torture and death. I don't think people are killed for talking anymore, but I do think that they might lose their service and for people addicted to this service like air, that is clearly more than they can handle.

For hearing sound I would read about those who made the first "talkies", motion pictures with sound. For this the sound wave is converted to changes in light intensity, and those light intensity marks reconverted back into sound. This in fact may be the exact same effect that the brain does, by converting sound into light. If this is true, then photons would be emitted with exactly the same wavelength and intensity as the sound. For example for a 400htz sound a person would detect a 400htz radio signal (photons with frequency of 400htz and therefore a very long wavelength because photons move with very high velocity) coming from the brain. It seems clear to me that whatever the change in infrared it must reflect the exact sound wave form. In addition to this, possibly hearing thought may be done with ultrasound.

One other thing I read. There is actually a large amount of info on the web if you read and search enough. Some people figured out that you can actually capture infrared on a glass plate emulsion (probably silver bromide), in the thermal region, by exposing the plate to the infrared, and then quickly exposing it to visible light. So there is yet again another possibility. One thing that disgusts me is how simple seeing heat is. I hope to build a low cost thermal imager for the public. But if you want to buy a simple thermal camera, how much does it cost? The lowest cost one available for the public is around $10,000. It's a total scam. By the way "TS" appears to be somebody related to the old time infrared potentially. It's up there with "DP" for mysteries. But clearly "MIP" and "MP" have been figured out at Michael I. Pupin.

ebay, and B&H photo has everything necessary for glass plate photography (you may need to build your own wooden camera and cut your own glass plates or use transparency paper, and also an enlarger can be built from a lamp and some wood, to make a positive print). http://www.photoformulary.com makes some of these products. Beyond that there is edmund scientific for prisms, diffraction grating and lens. I am trying to photo method first and then going to the electronic method, because I think the photo method might produce quicker results. I think this is going to be fun anyway just to get some images of spectra, see the sun in infrared, get some old-time photos of friends and hey! maybe of their thoughts too!, etc.

A 152 years in prison sentence for a 65-year old guy accused of molesting two 14-year boys. To me this sounds a little harsh, because most first degree murderers do not receive more than 40 years in jail, and there the victim is dead and perhaps died a painful disfiguring death, while the 2 14-boys presumably were not even assaulted and are presumably unharmed. As far as I can see the parents of the children did not raise the charges, but the district attorney took it upon himself to charge Schwartzmiller. Then another tactic is to inflate the crimes far beyond those actually being tried and this is reflected in the major media, rather than take the side of a defendent they tend to go along with the inflation saying "prosecutors allege that this person has possibly assaulted, etc... hundreds of other people". Well, maybe that is false or maybe true, but since there is no physical evidence it's just speculation. Maybe people know in the at&t camera-thought net, well if yes, by all means produce that physical evidence to the public. What did the defense claim? That is rarely reported in such cases. It seems illogical to view nonviolent buttock or genital touching of children even with objection as being worse than murder. Nonviolent people like this fill the prisons at taxpayer expense and since people seem to be bent on a major prison society, this leads me to think that we ought to focus on making prisons for nonviolent more livable and like the outside, more like fenced/walled communities similar to some kind of social program since there are millions of harmless people there who have committed trivial crimes like drug addiction, prostitution, and possession of pornography (obviously not those in AT&T etc who systematically store such images for other reasons), etc. When it comes to sentencing people for 3,000 years, I say let it be those shitheads who zap us with the laser beams, now there is a serious nuisance and ofcourse who can forget those who murder such as Thane Cesar, Frank Sturgis, murders of Chandra Levy, Jam Jay, Bonnie Lee Bakely, that 9/11 grad student, Anna Politkovskaya, etc. Here is another case that clearly should send the message to all people: do not own child pornography and by all means do not touch the genitals of people under the age of 18, because people are being sentenced for hundreds of years for even accusations of such activities. Beyond that, ofcourse, do not get involved with illegal drugs of any kind, because there too...the sentences are shockingly and brutally harsh, far beyond the damage caused by using or possessing drugs in your house, and years beyond the few days it takes to break any drug addiciton. While those thinking of doing violence, even if the penalties are light weight and you probably will never be arrested or even do serious time, still I ask you to please not get involved with violence just simply because it is in my view the worst evil and injustice that can be done. But definitely my message to the public is to stay away from anything that might remotely be viewed as sex-related and illegal (even if nonviolent, but ofcourse if violent too, this is one of the few examples where the public's antisexuality totally anhilates the public's tolerance of violence), that combination seems to be the invitation to multiple 100-year prison sentences. One reason these long sentences are so frightening because of the possibility of abuse, for example, drugs can easily be planted and how could a person prove that they were not? And so could pornography, and I can't believe that there is not somewhere out there some parent that will not take a few thousand dollars to have their child testify that they were molested, and for many of these trials, no child is even needed to testify, the accusation is enough and all the people, the prosecutor and judge (and that is usually enough, the judge can rule out a jury trial), the defense attorney (as was the case for Sirhan) are all in the at&t camera-thought network, included, routinely get secret video beamed directly onto their brains, watch people in their houses, generally poop on and abuse the excluded like slaves or property. And so, it is a frightening Nazi camera-thought net combination of possibilities for any excluded, and no doubt even included because who would come to their defense?

It looks like its going to be an Iran invasion. It was that or North Korea probably. And what is the supposed justification? That people in Iran are attacking US citizens in Iraq. It sounds like a tough call because it looks like the public wants everybody in Iraq and Afghanistan to come home, but popular opinion has never changed the minds of republicans before and I doubt it this time or any other time, they are not in the business of democracy, but of philosophy, and a terribly criminal violent philosophy at that. 2/5/07 adding that Mccain has shown himself to be the total 9/11 full steam ahead nazi military industry suck holer, for brutally supporting sending more kids to their death in Iraq. Speaking of 9/11...isn't the molten metal enough? molten metal for 3 weeks...how could it be? There is simply no way that a collapsing building, even with all the force, could possibly heat iron to molten liquid temperatures. Everybody accepts that the jet fuel did not melt the steel. Isn't this simple fact alone, which everybody accepts and for which there is significant physical evidence, enough? And this is why people like Bush, Cheney, Mccain, are all in some kind of nazistic vision...to greedily and brutally continue to support such a murderous lie and all that is based on it. In other political news Edwards talked about raising taxes for health care, and I tell yih what we should do is cut that military budget in half to a measly $250 billion, go in there and audit the Pentagon, end all secret budgets, give a quarter of that money back to the people, and the other quarter use to end violence, starvation and for building moon and mars cities.

I am closing in on the greatest scientists of all of earth's history and I think, in my own view it is probably:
1) Newton: law of gravity, light is a particle, color is a property of light
2) Michael Faraday: electric generator, electric motor, laws of electrolysis
after here it is not clear but:
Galileo: moons of Jupiter, laws of motion
Aristarchus: earth goes around sun
Anaxagoras: sun is a red hot stone, moon is a place like earth
Thomas Edison: electric light, moving pictures
Antoinne Lavoisier
Alexander Graham Bell: telephone

The highest ranking female would be :
Marie Curie

Others of note:
Otto
Heinrich Hertz: radio wavelength light
Joe Henry
Ktesibios: steam powered devices
Volta: first battery
Fraunhoffer
Shapley
William Herschel
Roentgen
Becquerel
Enrico Fermi uranium fission
Michael Pupin: Seeing thought
Fizeau: first to measure speed of light on earth
Foucault
Galvani: makes muscle move with electricity
Pasteur: germ theory of disease
Davy
Mendeleev: periodic table

I don't view Maxwell or Einstein as titans of science because I view there major contributions as probably inaccurate, although Maxwell's contributions I am still deciphering and the photoelectric effect description by einstein may be of value. As time continues I am forming a more clear view of whose accomplishments really will last into the future and are of the most importance.

01/30/07
I view the political situation in the USA as terrible, there will not be wisdom for perhaps more than a century at this rate, people are far too uneducated and stupid. It's a sad truth, it sounds pessimistic, but this lesson has been proven time and time again. This is the group that could not expose Sturgis, Cesar, and now even 9/11...they re-elect the ringleader of 9/11...so you know...in the USA we have major major problems. That being said, it is almost useless for me to give my advice or opinions because the massive group of "sheeple" in the USA is going to fall far below anything remote decent or progressive. But still I do feel motivated to give my hope that no matter who the democratic presidential nominee is in 2008, for the love of the universe, do not elect a republican. What ever happens, who ever may be on that ballot, for sure, without doubt, elect the democrat. And I can tell you that for the murder of JFK, RFK, John Lennon, 7/7, 9/11, no republican should ever be elected. Not that the democrats are the top of ethicalness and wisdom, there is no question that they are not, but still, we know that republicans are a living death, a malignant cancer of earth, where democrats are a controllable cancer enacting their copyright extensions while copying anything they like from people's minds, etc...slowly moving us backwards, not going backwards at the free-fall speed of the republicans. No matter who the democratic nominee, if they win the 2008 election, all of us can breathe a deep sigh or relief and enjoy much more freedom of speech, knowing that much of the risk of being charged with trumped up charges (like happened to Tommy Chong) by federal prosecutors, and being murdered by government agency, military, or police employees is far less under a democratic president. Then you will see people talking more openly about 9/11, Sturgis, Cesar, etc.

It looks like Hillary Clinton has a good chance of winning the 2008 Presidential election and being the first female human to be President of the USA. And that is a serious change from 1908 when women did not even have the right to vote in the USA. I think a female leader would probably be a positive change for the USA, even if I think as a person Hillary Clinton may lack the kind of spine I think is needed in the US government. But Clinton's popularity appears to be very high, so somehow she knows what the majority wants and appears to be loved and supported by many people. So for example, if Clinton is 5% ahead in the polls over the republican nominee, that is still not going to be enough because you need to calculate a certain percentage of republican "fixing" of vote counting. So really, even 10% is not enough, Hillary Cliton will probably need to hold a 15% lead to actually win the election above the voter fraud of the republicans which probably cannot extend over 10% of the vote for the nation or any particular state.

I think perhaps there should be new words to describe the new philosophies of this time, for example, as opposed to being religious, I find myself being sciencious, a believer in science, or perhaps tautolicious, a believer in truth as opposed to a believer in any religion. I don't think "truthology" is going to be accepted. 2/5/7 a verdadist.

One interesting aspect of the history of science is that only until recently have people had computers to model the universe on, and so all theorizing and calculations before the 1950s, this includes relativity and most of quantum mechanics was done on paper. No attempt was or could be made to model the universe on a computer, and I think in some way that, that reality limited the view somewhat. Computers clearly have enhanced our understanding of modeling the universe, and increased the speed with with we can simulate models.

Some people in the at&t cam-thought net often say "I appreciate it", and this is the excuse as to why they protect the secret, and I think some good excluded replies are "I don't!", "I would too!", and "we all would too!". I have a feeling that the majority of people approve of such a camera system, but if they do not, then the democratic majority should prevail even if a great benefit is lost. Just the cameras on the street are enough to stop most murders, and democracy is more important. As a consolation, if the majority opinion is to remove the cameras, and thought senders and receivers, I think enforcing such a decision would be very difficult because it would come down to jailing people simply for owning pictures of inside people's houses which would be a tough sell, and it would be difficult to catch people planting and installing more cameras without an open camera system constantly checking. In addition, those who use drugs in their own homes for example, might be protected. But I think the reality is that we are sailing into a star system of total free information from every angle. All the paths into the future lead to total free info, and why fight it?

I would say that possibly, since there is conservation of matter and velocity that there is conservation of momentum and therefore in some sense conservation of energy, but an important point is that mass and velocity are not interchangable, so while there is conservation of energy (mass and velocity must be conserved in a collision of masses), mass must stay mass and velocity must stay velocity, and that is an important truth, at least in my perhaps minority opinion.

My message to who ever that next US President is in 2008, is that they truly focus on lowering the amount of violence in the USA, as a very high priority, to reduce homicide and assault by at least 10% if not more. There are many ways to lower the amount of violence and let's find the best ways and make use of them.

Lets hope the majority allows murderers to be exposed and jailed, even when they are republicans. That would be a break with tradition, but a healthy one.

01/31/07
I found an interesting article on the JFK murder. Mae Brussell who was one of the few people to actually publically and correctly finger Frank Sturgis as the murderer of JFK, wrote an article in 1984 for "Rebel Magazine", perhaps the only serious effort of any liberals to expose the republican crimes in the USA. http://www.maebrussell.com/Mae%20Brussell%20Articles/Nazi%20Connection%20to%20JFK%20Assass.html
and the magazine cover: http://www.prouty.org/brussell/nazi-1.html
This is an interesting article, which cites many names and facts taken from Jim Garrison's investigation, Garrison being one of the few to actually sift through the voluminous Warren Commission Report, in addition to Brussell's own extensive knowledge about ex-Nazis. Some interesting facts in this article are how Marina and Lee Oswald lived with Michael and Ruth Paine, who were presented to the public by the major media as "nice neighbors" and that Ruth just wanted to learn Russian. But as the article states:
'Michael Paine's occupation at Bell Aircraft is the Defense Department. This job requires security clearances, so what would the unlikely Oswalds be doing in his home? Oswald, the "defector?"
Paine's boss at Bell Aircraft as Director of Research and Development, was none other than the noterious war criminal General Walter Dornberger.
Dornberger was supposed to be hanged at Nuremburg for his war crimes, slave labor and mass murders.
The British warned the U.S. not to let him live because even after the war he was conniving for another one. As stated, "Dornberger is a menace of the first order who is untrustworthy. His attitude will turn ally against ally and he would become a source of irritation and future unrest." (Project Paperclip. Clarence Lasby.)'
I want to comment that this bringing back and hiring Nazis was not a good idea. In particular people like Werner von Braun. As I have said before, I can see maybe using von Braun as a consultant, and even then, I would have simply done a dump of all the information and after a year or something sent them back to Germany. But, there is no way I would have put a person like von Braun at the head of any space program! an ex Nazi officer? What kind of message does that send to US youth? I mean, here this guy's values are clearly corrupted...racist, pro-violence, etc. this is the guy who those in the USA are going to turn to for leadership? It's amazing, but I think it shows how Dulles, and others who had supported Nazis all along or for much of the time, believed in their racist vision of white supremecy and still do, those still alive.
There are all kinds of interesting information in this article, they let quite a few good facts go. Although I wish they had fingered Sturgis, Brussells only uses FFS backwards at the end of the article.
Also in this article is info on Interpol. Interpol has roots as an information gathering source for the Nazi gestapo (according to Wikipedia) in Germany. (see also: http://www.trivia-library.com/a/history-of-interpol-nazi-war-criminals.htm and othe rlinks) Even as late as the 1960s they appointed a President, ex-Nazi Paul Dickopf. Wikipedia states that Interpol mainly is involved in gathering infomation concerning mostly nonviolent activities such as sexual exploitation (read: prostitution, molestation, etc), and drugs. Apparently Interpol does not track murder or assault. Any international police should go through a democratic organization I think, open to public voting. If the United Nations is converted to allow planetary voting on the Internet, I think that might be a good information center for the public to get information about evidence of murder, assault and other violent crime (including the murder of nonviolent people by those in governments of earth such as the execution of nonviolent political prisoners, drug traffikers, molesters, adulterers, homosexuals, etc.).
And in this article, there is accumulating evidence that Ronald Reagan Senior had nazistic white-supremecist murderous leanings. One example is "Before the election of 1960, a group within the Christian Right plotted to kill John Kennedy in Van Nuys, California while he was still a candidate. The group was a meld of anti-Castro Cubans, Minutemen and home-grown nazis. Some were sought by Jim Garrison, following his arrest of Clay Shaw, for testimony before the New Orleans grand jury. When Garrison forwarded extradition papers for Edgar Eugene Bradley, a member of the group, Governor Ronald Reagan refused to sign them.".
This article is just like Mae Brussell's mp3 audio files, many of which are recommended listening, but they are very complex and rambly. She doesn't really fully develop each point, its very fast paced and tough to keep up with. I think Brussells was not always 100% accurate, for example her mistrust of the safety of nutrasweet (asparatame), but she was accurate enough of the time that I think 90% of her material is valuable info for excluded and perhaps even included people.
Commenting on tracing the JFK murder back to the source. Probably the main funding source also included David Rockefeller (still alive at age 90 something). Nelson Rockefeller as vice president stopped the investigation into the JFK murder. In an open letter to David Rockefeller in 1962 JFK commented that he openly shares, which to me implies that, although JFK had the money to pull out the phone company and other cameras, microphones and thought imaging devices, he chose to openly allow those in the net to see and hear his thoughts, but felt uneasy about how David Rockefeller must have been one of the group of wealthy people that pull out the cameras and operate largely in secrecy, and JFK, the man who announced that new science was exploring "the insides of men's minds" clearly was for bringing the secret of hearing thought out to the public as any progressive would naturally feel, and Rockefeller is probably more for continuing the secret because it gives those in the know more power to control the public and circumstances. But this is all speculation from an excluded.

I'm not sure who I will vote for in the democratic primary of 2008. It may come down to the issue of 9/11 "official story" supporters such as Hillary Clinton versus "inside job" supporters like Howard Dean (if he chooses to run). I probably will vote for the most progressive of all major democratic candidates, perhaps Kucinich or Dean, and I encourage others to also in the interest of progress and safety, the possibility of jailing those that did 9/11, but then of course, for who ever wins the democratic primary.

I guess it is time to unveil my new online voting system: http://www.tedhuntington.com/vote/. Here you will see proposed laws that I am voting for. People can register for an account, create and vote on proposed laws. I see this as the future of democratic government, and hope that people in governments around the earth will implement this kind of system for the public if only to record the majority opinion on all issues and decisions.

02/01/07
A person sent me an email saying that psychology is not a pseudoscience and how I am propagating damaging information. And this is my reply:
=====
Thanks for your comments. I have somewhat changed my view of psychology as a pseudoscience. I don't think I ever said sociology is a pseudoscience, but if yes, I don't think that sociology is a pseudoscience, as in a fraudulent endeaver. Just to wrap up my views on sociology, my current opinion is that sociology may have some use, but it seems to me like light-weight science. In addition, I hate to see people get a degree studying sociology, and then have no career, because you know, when you look in the yellow pages there is no listing for "sociologist", perhaps because nobody really deeply needs that kind of analysis.
But with psychology I have somewhat changed my view of it being a 100% pseudoscience. As applies to the consensual portions of psychology only, I think it is basically experimental treatments, mainly drug-related for unsolved or unexplained phenomena of the brain. Where neurology seeks to understand physical phenomena that are clearly the result of anatomy and physiology (the physical process of a body), psychology, I think, and it is open to debate, seeks to understand the more abstract, unexplainable, undiagnostic phenomena. So I think there is still a place for a portion of psychology (that portion that is consensual), in terms of consensual experimentation with drugs, with therapies such as talking and explaining. But I still view the field of psychology, like sociology as a light-weight science, and the day of paying people in psychology consensually I think is coming to a close. For example we see psychiatrists in the yellow pages for those who want to pay somebody to talk to, but no "psychologers". And the truth that I think people should honestly explain to all, is that those who graduate with degrees in psychology are going to have a tough time finding employment in their major, and will potentially be involved in illegal activity such as drugging people, restraining people in illegal ways in psychiatric hospitals.
My main point in making my "Psychology" video, and in my informing the public about psychology is to raise awareness about what is going on. There are so many evils associated with psychology, for example, learn about the history of psychology. People were involuntarily strapped into bathtubs for hours, their teeth were pulled, there were many blood-lettings, all this without a hint of consent and many times against screaming objection. People have been electrocuted, again against objection, holes drilled into their skulls, etc. Even now people are routinely tied for hours to hospital beds with less room to move than an animal in a cage, routinely injected with drugs without clear consent, even if they have not violated any law. Then look at the illegal psychiatric system, people are taken to psychiatric hospitals, many who have not violated one law, they do not have any opportunity to prove their innocense, no defense attonry, no trial, no sentence...the most basic hard-won principles of human rights are removed for the psychological system. The psychiatric system needs to be completely rehauled by making it consensual only. People violating the law must be processed through the legal system, and if consensual-only treatment is wanted, then perhaps, the tax-payers can provide some consensual-only psychological treatments from within a prison building.
Some of the theories of psychoogy are just out-right fraudulent, such as psychosis, neurosis, and schizophrenia. There is no known valid diagnostic test for any of these 3 "diseases" because they are so abstract as to apply to anybody, and can be reduced to simply "delusional" or "inaccurate beliefs".
Beyond this, the stigma that results from the mistaken beliefs of psychology is terrible destructive to life on earth. When people are told that a human is a "psycho" (has psychosis), they quickly believe that the person is violent, but this is far from true. There are simply violent people and nonviolent people, and many millions of people are labeled "psychotic" who have never been violent. And it's ironic that people care less about violence than they do with psychiatric theory. For example, the first thing people talk about when they talk about people like Adolf Hitler, is not how they were violent and murdered or ordered the murder of millions of innocent people, but how they were insane, and that their mental view was the problem, not the simple truth that they were violent criminals...it's their thinking process that is more important...understanding the reasons why they murdered so many people, which for me matters much less than the simple truth that these are violent murderers and why matters much less. People labeled psychotic, neurotic, schitzophrenic, and these labels litter the human language...for example "nutter", "bonkers", "crank", "loopy", "insane", etc. and I have to call people's attention time and time again, to the simple idea that...if a person has an inaccurate claim, that is nothing new. According to our current understanding of science, which is far from perfect and absolute truth, their view is simply inaccurate...they are simply wrong. And being wrong is no crime. For example those millions of people who believe their is a heaven, that Jesus rose people from the dead, that Muhommed had a special connection to a diety, ... all can be viewed as being most-likely inaccurate, but it is their natural right to hold those erroneous beliefs. Just like those who think the sun goes around the earth, they have a right to be wrong, and no amount of drugs I think will make them see the light about the earth going around the sun. And speaking of drugs, what we see happening now is really a disgusting thing. Here much of psychology is non-consentual. People are forced to submit to the treatments and tortures of psychiatric doctors. By court order now, many people are forced to take drugs, and the drug companies must be paid, many times by the victim, by the insurance company, and by taxpayers. So here we see these drug companies, with a guaranteed business in involuntary purchasing, required by law, for far from proven pseudoscience diseases such as "psychosis", "neurosis" and "schizophrenia" or trivial and questionable diseases like "depression", "ahds", etc. But what about the actual health and human right to say no to these drugs by the individual human? Apparently, these PhD doctors and owners of the big pharm companies care more about the money than the individual rights of a person to say no to drugs and or treatment.

So, you know, I think you and many other people ought to think about a human's right to say no to drugs, to treatment, their right to a trial, to a defense attorney, to a finite sentence to an actual violated law. There is nothing but cleaning up in the psychology industry, and anybody who does not see that, I think is either stupid or morally corrupt.

I think it is shocking that you claim that I am propagating damaging information. That is so absolutely backwards. Keeping secret the truth about how people are being drugged and restrained in psychiatric hospitals is what is damaging, damaging many people young and old alike. Reaching the public with the truth about what is going on in these secretive buildings is going to help end this secret torturing and human rights violation. Hiding the history of psychology (I suggest you read one of the very few books that reveal this grotesque history "Mad in America" to learn a tiny fraction of the truth about pscyhology) is not helpful to society and that is what you and others are doing in your silence. Drugging people without their choice is far more damaging than anything I am doing. And these are no stereotypes about psychology....because there is no criticism of psychology to speak of outside of my endeavers and maybe a few other people. The vast majority of the public embraces the theories of insanity and relish in persecuting people they view as "nut-jobs", "psychos"...movies and people that promote that erroneous view that psychosis is a real diagnostic disease, and relate labels of psychosis to violence suggesting that anybody labeled as insane will probably murder or assault without provocation are far more damaging than anything I am doing. It's amazing to me that the public more readily accepts and makes use of psychology than any other fields such as neurology, biology, astronomy, chemistry, ... they accept psychology, but care little for the history of science and science itself. Basically religion, sports, antisexuality, and psychology forms the main focus of most people, not astronomy, health science, optics, sexuality, propulsion, engineering, etc. In addition, psychology, to add one more of many negative properties, continues, like a modern-day witch trial phenomenon, to stop science, and in particular truth. For example, those who criticize the theory of the expanding universe are labeled as insane and their claims ignored, the same is true for those telling the truth about 9/11, the JFK murder, the RFK murder, and I can only imagine how many other murders. Psychology is one major reason seeing and hearing thought has been secret for going on 100 years...because anybody that says "hay! people can hear my thoughts!" is quickly labeled insane and probably drugged until they sheddup. So I am for full free information and full free speech for all so long as it is at a nonviolent level.

Ted
=========
It's interesting the way Nixon and others rode their way into power labeling their opponents "communists" and how their democratic opponents never called them, "Nazis" but should have, and rightfully so in my opinion, the republicans have numerous nazi connections, and their racist philosophy is nazistic, etc. Or also, why didn't they defend themselves as "democratists"? and accuse the republicans of being anti-democracy for rejecting appeals to end the electoral college, direct public voting, etc. It's interesting that when we look at the history of the USA, we see that Nazistic people, such as the Dulles', Bushes, and others rode up to the top without ever seriously being exposed or criticized for their Nazi connections. And why was their no Nazi-scare? Why only a communist scare? The communists under Stalin and Mao were trecherous and violent murdering many, but the Nazis were worse, murdering millions systematically based on race, sexual preference, political beliefs, etc. Even as bad as Stalin, Mao and the worst of communism was and is they never systematically killed people based on their race, sexual preference, etc. Many of the Nazis found new homes in America or were already here (in the form of eugenicists, the klan, abusers of psychology as a form of persecution, etc). Is the Nazi threat not a real threat? Maybe it just goes under a different title now. Ultimately it's the threat of violence, in particular secret violence, and unpunished violence that ought to be the big fear among people on earth and in particular in the USA. Ofcourse I am against communism, and I am fully for full and constant democracy where the people subjected to the laws use the Internet to vote on the laws they must live under, and of course it should never be illegal to support any form of nonviolent government, so let's not forget the evils of racism, violence, etc of nazism because racism and violence is nothing new to America, in the USA the civil war was fought over racism among other beliefs, so the racism and violence that fueled nazism is certainly not a foreign concept to the USA.

2/2/07
This is interesting what is happening to MTV's Margera. Anti-pleasure ferver has swept him up on assaulting a minor charges for alledgedly fondling two 12 and 1 14 year old female. First, I have to ask what the nature of the "fondling" is. Is this a buttock? If yes, I can't believe people would seek charges that can result in 6 years in jail for a butt touch or something like that. Again this goes to show that the antisexual ferver is nothing to play around with and people should never, even joking around, touch the buttocks (tits, crotch, etc) of any human under the age of 18. This guy will probably be called "ped" for the rest of his life and who among the excluded knows if the claim of fondling is even true? That is the power of antisexuality. Murderers can go free, assaulters are never jailed, people openly admit to assaulting minors with spanking, but touching a butt is punishable by up to 6 years in jail (and much more in other states including life inprisonment). But one thing that may be a recent trend for the antisexual prosecutor is to charge people who gently and nonviolently fondle minors with "sexual assault on a child"....hold on a minute....wait up butty....assault? Isn't that stretching the truth? We should refer to every major dictionary, and if they now include "fondling" as assault I would be highly disappointed. I understand "assault" to refer to a physical attack which at least causes pain, anything else falls under "touching without consent", and "touching against objection" etc. So I am introducing a new law:
"a person accused of a nonviolent crime (such as molestation, fondling, drug use, etc) cannot be charged with assault or other violent charges nor sentenced or a violent crime for that particular nonviolent crime." (I am naming this law "nonviolent crime cannot receive violent crime charge" with nick-name "the 1+1=2 law")
in addition, as an aside I am introducing a "no presidential pardon" law. A presidential pardon is an absurd violation of basic principles of law (certainly a majority can vote to free an unfairly jailed human over a minority who seek to jail such a person).

With the Newsome affair, I am just glad and somewhat surprised that two people can find a moment of love in this mixed up violent antisexual world. Maybe they mistook the place for the Kinsey building. With all the camera thought net, how did people not know? Then the puritanical conservatives only ask "iz you going to resign?" never "was it oral, or other?" and other more important questions.

I wrote "We're All Sane", and I swear this shit is coming true. In particular when you look at Bush's so-called "New Freedom Initiative". Read up on this shit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Freedom_Initiative it is unbelievable. Bush created a New Freedom Commission on Mental Health which made a report: "The commission reported that "despite their prevalence, mental disorders often go undiagnosed," so it recommended comprehensive mental health screening for "consumers of all ages," including preschool children". why do they say "consumers"? Clearly this is geared for all "people". There is no mention about these screenings being consensual. And I am not going to go into all the arguements against this kind of thing which are nicely listed on the wikipedia page, but some points that are missed are important. Beyond just being a unethical money-making scheme for drug companies (who like tobacco, alcohol, and food companies want to put their products in every house), is the more important issue in my mind of jailing people indefinitely and/or discrediting their reputation with psychiatric imprisonment. And think about this: If a person wants to jail their political opponent, for example, for the republicans it would be the 9/11 truth people, the Sturgis and Cesar exposers, the evolutionists, atheists, agnostics, democrats, etc. there is no better system than the psychiatric system. A psychiatric arrest is different than most other arrests. Psychiatric arrests are much easier than any other kinds of arrests to permanently remove opponents. Think about it: there is no trial, people are presumed guilty, there is no jury, no judge, no messy defense attorney to worry about, and no sentence...a person can easily be jailed for their entire lives in psychiatric hospitals and often are. All that is needed is a few corrupted doctors, and these people proliferate psychology and psychiatric hospitals. A republican in the camera-thought net can probably just pay a doctor a few thousand for a rubber stamp diagnosis of psychosis or scizophrenia, and the ruling of a person as a danger to themselves or others. Somebody objects or tries to defend the victim? Why rubber stamp them into the psychiatric system for a few thousand. For example, there is no need to plant drugs on a person: then they get a trial, then they have a defense attorney, then they have bail, then they have parole, they might get out of the building in 10 years. There is no need to frame a person for murder: no need to produce a dead body, no need to fabricate evidence, etc, and again, they might get out after 30 years. But another point is the shocking irony of how the "just say no" groups are silent on this issue...they scream and violently oppose a person taking drugs consensually, but permit drugs being injected into or forced onto a person, in particular a child, without choice?! And when we are talking about injecting people with drugs and shoving drugs in people's mouths, this is basically like a rape but without the sexual aspect. Here, people are poking a needle into a person's body and injecting a liquid against clear objection. Interesting enough, one of the heros against this effort is a republican congressman in Texas, Dr. Ron Paul MD, whose "Parental Consent Act of 2005" requires that "any mental health screening of students without the express, written, voluntary, informed consent of parents." in addition to that, I would add that "all mental health screening of adults and children cannot be done without written consent of the subject." And many people think that this kind of thing would never happen, even democrats pass laws allowing forced drugging and psychiatric imprisonment. There are some good articles on wikipedia describing involuntary treatment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_treatment. All of this leads me to raise the question again and again, with this kind of a loop-hole around to easily lock up innocent lawful people for life, why don't people close it up? I think it's because of the fear of being labeled with a psychiatric disorder, and fear of those who have been locked in psychiatric hospitals (which is a very mixed and diverse group of people; some are violent while others have never been violent, some have violated known laws, others have not). But in any event, nazistic people (and the Nazi's made serious use of psychiatric stigma, in their eugenic and racial "purification" activities), are going to make use of that loop-hole if it is not closed, and that is what is happening. Beyond this another important point is that, beyond the human rights violation of forced treatment, is the issue of the diagnostic accuracy of psychiatric diseases. For example, I think it is somewhat clear that there is no known legitimate diagnostic test for psychosis, neurosis, and schizophrenia. These four "diseases" have no clear diagnostic characteristics. Then the issue of how serious are such diseases (accepting for a moment that they apply to some specific physical condition) is relevent, because through all the abstraction, I think much of these labels are used to label people who are inaccurate in their views, and holding inaccurate views about the nature of the universe, people around a person, etc. is not illegal; it is not illegal to be wrong, and delusion is not yet and hopefully will never be illegal. This is relevent in particular when we are talking about people of various religions, because in my view all religions hold inaccurate views, but holding such erroneous views must remain legal. update: now in Texas school girls are required to be injected with a vaccine, and I was just talking about how this psychiatric crap could be used in a similar fashion: as a public health issue. The theories of psychology are pure fraud and do not describe actual diseases, and the so-called diseases described are trivial and involve purely legal behavior, or illegal activities that should be punished through the legal system, not a psychiatric system. Even so, many people either believe them, and find them useful in eliminating their enemies. The conservatives will probably describe forced treatment and permanent incarceration for "psychiatric" disorders, using the exact same language that people use to justify forced innoculations: as a public health requirement. And honestly, seeing this, makes me confront the idea of forced innoculations, and I am against them. I think you can lead a horse to water but you should not force it to drink and so it is with humans too. I think being innoculated is good advice and encourage people to innoculate themselves and explain to offspring made from them the value and try to get their permission for them to be innoculated. I think, just as a recording and information gathering procedure, that the consent or denial of any person innoculated or given a mental screening be recorded and shared with the public just to record how many people say no.

We should see clearly that there is a battle between two clear sides here, those who support 9/11 and those who do not, and it's shocking to see that life on earth has evolved so many people who support 9/11.

We can't let this camera-thought network elitist system continue into the future for many reasons. Look at what they are doing to earth: the JFK killing, MLK, RFK, John Lennon, 9/11, 7/7, we can only imagine how many other murders they have done. My feeling is that these people murder many elderly people by giving them tumors, possibly even just for fun, but mainly to kill liberals. I don't want to be given a tumor when I am age 75 or later when I will probably be less popular and less protected. One of the amazing things about that involuntary "freedom initiative" is that the wikipedia article has that it is first being used for homeless, foster children and the elderly...ofcourse...three groups of people who are the weakest members of society, cannot defend themselves and are powerless to put up any resistance. Think of those people these unseen pithecines in the laser camera thought net send off of cliffs and into traffic, out of building windows and bridges in suicides that never would have been if not for the powerful suggestions they beamed there. And these victims are in the great majority the most liberal and intellectual of the planet, because those that own the net in AT&T are very conservative and seek to protect their undemocratic illegal system. Think of those who are assaulted with lasers on a daily basis in their homes. We can't let this system continue unexposed, because ofcourse, then we can expect more murders and even more injustice (I know that is hard to imagine, but Nazi Germany will always stand as the more recent example of secret systems and conservatism having absolute power). We need to see who these people are, and they need to be punished. It's a basic principle of

Why is there never any abusive abrasive liberal who tells people like Bush and O'Reilly to "shudd-up", etc? Now that would be a funny act. Kind of the anti-O'Reilly, just rude, and abrasive, but in the other direction. Probably much of the rude low-brow acts will eventually fall to the past as a more evolved sapien evolves.

This trial of William Anderson, where he was sentenced to 14 years, which is, just as a reminder, more time given than most of those convicted of violent crimes against minors, seems to me an interesting story to see summarized in the pupin camera thought net. For example are all people involved included? As always the "damage" claimed is always of a psychological nature. I can't believe a person would want to kill themselves just because an old guy touched their vagina...why? It doesn't add up. Perhaps because sexual purity is so highly valued and those in the camera-thought network (which perhaps all involved, clearly the girl's parents must not have been in, which is rare for southern california, most people are included) may have constantly said "lest we" to her as a "joke" (you have to understand included humor which tends to be backwards, invasive, and vicious). But always, it's psychology that makes touching of minor crimes seem worse than violent crime. Always the damage is "emotional", but you know we all face emotional suffering, every time some people put a person down with an insult, and I think overcoming emotional suffering is not a big deal. It's the violent stuff and the unseen people sending images to excluded people's heads that are the real crimes...like 9/11...we should not let those who did the controlled demolition that killed 3000 innocent adults remain free and on the loose. I think one answer to unwanted instruction or touching, etc of children is to watch and listen with cameras and microphones to offpring you make as often as possible. Personal assistant walking robots are going to make it possible to see the child a person made half of, anytime of the day. It's like religion...some parents don't want that crap being taught to their child, or violence, etc. And it's good to have a public database of those who have done violence, who teach religion, etc. Talking to a young person about sexuality from an early age is a good idea in my opinion and talking to children to find out what is going on in their lives is good. I wonder what sentence the public voting would generate for Anderson, but oh well, I guess democracy will have to wait, perhaps it would have been more severe, which I think would be illogical in that those that commit violent crime which is far worse in my view, get less lengthly sentences but then this data is not made public. Again I tell the public, here is yet another example which says: do not touch people under the age of 18 in a sexual way, do not touch their genitals, do not take photos of them in the nude, or ask them to be nude, etc. Because their is a very large majority of people that view such activity as the worst of all crimes, and that is not an exaggeration, even worse than murder. In addition the requirement of physical evidence is almost none, simply a person's say so is probably enough to convict a person in particular an adult male, and the penalties are very very severe, much more severe than even beating a child, which I of course do not recommend or advocate either. 2/6/07 Beyond even the sentences usually handed out to people for violent crime being less, and the question about the seriousness of simply touching a genital relative to acts of violence, another good defense argument probably never used is the first offense nature, and the fact that people like this appearing on the front page of the LATimes, etc, greatly reduces the chance of people not knowing that they touched the buttock of a young person, and that has a strong effect and serves as a deterant should the person decide to touch a young person's genital again. After a first offense, and in instances where a person's reputation is ruined as a result, most people, in particular in the camera-thought at&t net know and the person is marked for life, the majority of people would then never let their children around them even if they never recommitted a genital touching of a minor crime. And as time continues this free-flow of information is opening the door on the criminal records, in particular for those who have done violence, so we the public can all know who is a butt-toucher, but who is a stomach-puncher, a butt-slapper, person-murderer, etc. and then act accordingly.

This is funny: http://video.google.com/url?vidurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D1dmVU08zVpA&docid=-3037232288641100144&ev=v&esrc=sr1&usg=AL29H23z-gvc7auTew14Q1-tVEg5-lkriw. This vide gave me a good laugh or two...I still occassionaly laugh about it...check it out. But also, there is something interesting about...step 1) put a hole in the box...that is in fact the first instruction in how to capture a picture of one's own eyes from behind their head in the infrared potentially.

02/05/07
Here's another vid that made me laugh: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVFQDWK_wMs

Another interesting point, is that it seems possible that photons from inside the earth are constantly emitted and this is mainly what makes the molten mantle of the earth red hot (although the photons from the sun are another source). There is a really interesting phenomenon in the way atoms absorb and emit certain wavelengths of photons. The sun is another example of a molten red hot group of atoms. I think an experiment should be done. A lump of metal (or perhaps gas, or oxygen free liquid iodine, bromine or mercury) should be weighed in a space free of other atoms (a vacuum), and heated (to incandescence: emitting photons) for a long period of time (in some way this is similar to leaving an iron stove on for years). Do the photons of the heating ever cause the atoms to decay faster than the usual rate of decay? In my view, the sun is losing mass in the form of photons (not energy as most people claim, although if we view energy as a combination of mass and velocity, and that mass and velocity cannot be exchanged, then perhaps. Still the clearer view is the losing of mass in the form of photons). And these photons have to come from somewhere. I doubt they are from hydrogen to helium fusion in the center because it is doubtful that an atom as light as hydrogen would be found in the center, which is probably made of dense atoms. I doubt they are the combination of combustion with oxygen (although perhaps some are). I think the photons must be coming from atoms that are separated into their source photons. How the atoms are separated is the main issue. What ever that process it seems to me likely that it is the basic process in all stars and even in planets (since the mantle of earth is very similar to a sun in being red hot molten metal). Then the question is where do the photons come from within an atom? Do they come from the electrons, protons, neutrons? Do they come from those particles completely destroyed at the same time? If the photons came from a proton or electron then the lump of metal would have an electric charge or emit the extra neutrons. I would also look for any kind of emitted protons, neutrons and electrons. Are more photons emitted than absorbed? It seems likely to me that photons can be used to separate atoms into photons and probably will eventually be added to the particles that can do this (neutrons, protons, alpha particles, probably some ions, electrical opposite matter, perhaps electrons, etc). For all of these atom unwindings, the question remains: where do the photons come from? For fission, the claim is that they come from left over matter, but is that in missing electrons, neutrons...? Even in simple combustion the mass lost in the form of photons must be accounted for in mass within the atom (atomic mass), since electron velocity cannot be converted to matter. One other interesting idea is that. In my novice opinion, in an mass spectrometer, when a person sees that a proton and electron beam are deflected by greatly different electric field voltage, and conclude that a proton is 1000 times of whatever more massive than an electron, can it also not be interpreted, since there are two unknowns, mass and charge, that the electron is the same size as a proton, but much with a 1000 times weaker electric charge? Could there not be any combination of mass and charge in between? And in a beam, could electrons having a smaller wavelength than a proton beam effect the electric field deflection? It just seems unlikely to me that a particle 1000x more massive than another particle would have the same electrical charge. In addition, when gravity is considered, a particle 1000x the mass of another might have an effect on the phenomenon of electric charge. I think the atoms, the indivisible objects of the early atomists (Leukippos and Demokritos) has been realized in the photon.

01/22/07
I have to ask, what is this Soviet China under Hitler that we can't publically question the official 9/11 story, or Warren Commission without being fired, threatened and all other kinds of intimidation? Why aren't people more tolerant of different views, just saying, "you have your opinions, and are entitled to them, I think yer wrong, but that's ok, you have a right to be wrong", instead they come down like a goon squad to fire Kevin Ryan, intimidate all the witness who might talk freely, make professors retire early or be fired, demand that professors who question the 9/11, JFK or RFK official claims, be let go. This is no nazi planet, and no nazi USA, contrary to the wishes of the republicans and rabid religious and we need to reclaim this nation and planet for truth, free and open beliefs of every and any kind, and full-ass democracy where we get to vote on them laws we have to live unda.

These people find nuance in nuisance.

Who would have guessed that life in 2007 mainly involves insiders watching skin heads bombard popular excluded people with photons all day and night? I doubt many people would have guessed that would be what life in the USA and on earth would be like in 2007.

One thing I have said over and over again is that one of the most frightening aspects of religion is how truth matters nothing to the religious...it's amazing, logic, truth...just simply mean nothing...physical evidence...basically nothing. These are people who can watch the 9/11 video on the Internet, all the obvious evidence, and simply refuse to believe the truth, and it's because they are willing to believe obviously false stories, like Jesus brought people back to life, in heaven there are nymphs, Moses brought tablets a diety had written on, and on and on, all obviously false...if they believe those stories they will believe anything, and the sad truth is that, yes, they do believe anything. And that is a frightening invitation to more 9/11's, more 7/7's, more Iraqs, etc.

With Bush and the republican's popularity at an all time low, expect more terrorism in the USA. The CIA, FBI or US military, all at least 50% criminal and rogue, will probably do another 9/11, and then watch the stupid people raise up their support for Bush jr and the republicans. It will never cease to amaze me how the public changes back and forth, as if somehow Bush jr suddenly changed as a person in the last year or two...it's completely idiotic. People in the USA and no doubt on much of earth are similar to chickens or cows in a slaughter house never asking 'gee where did the JFK chicken go?' 'where did the MLK chicken go?' ... and 'i guess those 9/11 chickens all just disappeared then....well thank goodness we are safe!'.

01/23/07
Can you imagine having to entertain for the Bush or Blair families? Probably the first question is: "What does a mass-murderer eat?" Perhaps they might respond by saying "I assure you that a mass-murder eats the very same food a non-mass-murderer does". And how does one entertain a mass-murderer? Perhaps some small animals could be made to be executed or euthanized as a form of entertainment for the mass-murderer guest? Are there special arrangements that need to be made in the privy for a guest that is also a mass-murderer? And what gifts can you give the mass-murderer who already has it all?

01/24/06
We see that there are two sides clearly, those who support violence, 9/11, sturgis, cesar, chapman, and likeminded people, and those on the opposite side, and it is sometimes unpleasant, but we should not support those on the other side if at all possible. They tend to be pro-violence, anti-pleasure, pro-religion, anti-science, dishonest, uneducated, believers in involuntary psychology and psychiatric arrests. There are many that claim to be in the middle, but anybody that works for the republicans, the protectors of the 9/11 killers, sturgis, cesar, etc. should not be supported in any way, not hired, not promoted, nothing, let go, never hired. Because we can't let the 9/11-sturgis-cesar-chapman people continue to murder innocent people and political nonviolent opponents. By now we should know their views and propaganda.

In addition to my statement on how sane is murder, how about how sane is religion? and the claims of the religions? you remember, that Jesus rose people from the dead, made 10 loaves from one, moses brought down some stone tablets a god had burned hebrew writing into, and so on...

With the death of E. Howard Hunt, the last of the 3 people on the grassy knoll, Frank Sturgis, Gordan Arnold and E. Howard Hunt is dead. It is interesting, as an excluded, to try and figure out how the JFK murder was hatched. For example, was the plan to kill JFK in Dallas done in a meeting where people were in some "safe room", or was it done through a meeting where people just thought to each other but used wired or wireless encryption that the other side had not figured out yet? Because a few things are clear: 1) the protector's of JFK, mainly the democrats, clearly were unaware of the murder JFK in the Dallas parade plan. They were caught completely unaware or else why would they allow an open top car? if not cancel or delay for more security? Clearly security democrats must have been piecing together some suspicions from thought videos and high level video analysis. 2) Sturgis killed JFK, Oswald probably also shot, Hunt was on the grassy knoll as a look out dressed in railword worker clothes and hat, ... the story by now is a piece of americana to those who know it, in particular in the included...every aspect of every second of that day of murder has rippled through US history since then, and Gordon Arnold, proof that there was US army involvement...that people in the US army knew about the plan to murder JFK.
Tracing back the original meeting is what I think is interesting. My guess is that it was done by thought with secure connections between various people...perhaps they all met, but that might had fueled suspicions among democratic security. There are some key players:
(the knoll 3):
Sturgis (killer of JFK) (CIA, Florida-anti-castro-bay-of-pigs)
E. Howard Hunt (lookout for Sturgis, ushers people away from knoll) (CIA, Florida-anti-castro-bay-of-pigs)
Gordon Arnold (filmer for US army) (US army)
(another shooter in book depository)
Lee Oswald (CIA [or possibly FBI], New Orleans, anti-castro-bay-of-pigs, David Ferry [CIA], possibly connected to Marcello)
(tracing these people back leads to:)
George Bush (supervisor of Hunt and Sturgis) (CIA, possibly following orders of his Nazi father Prescott Bush and friend Allen Dulles through their like-minded superiors)
Allen Dulles (supervisor of Bush?) (CIA)
Richard Bissel (supervisor of Dulles?) (CIA)
(tracing these people back to their supervisors:)
Nelson Rockefeller (funder, initiator, and organizer of JFK murder?) (and possibly David Rockefeller?) (josiah thompson hints with "he and some of his 'fellows'")
Prescott Bush (josiah thompson hints "under some 'bushes'")
(was the old nazi E Roland Harrriman [the name is similar to E. Howard Hunt, to smart people name means nothing, but to dumb people it can be meaningful] involved? nobody has ever mentioned him in connoection to the JFK murder so maybe no)

Probably the Rockefellers are the only people rich enough to remove the survallience from their property, that takes serious and constant cash. Clearly there must be rooms where all survallence, even the phone company and wireless cameras and microphones are removed, but going there must raise suspicion, but without knowing what happened, and not seeing any memories of what happened, it must be next to impossible to know what happened. But clearly, people that do that tend toward the evil side, most people have nothing to hide, no secrets to keep, and keeping secrets is probably not easy to do when thoughts can be routinely seen. It's possible that a small group just above Hunt could have killed JFK, which would basically include Bush, maybe Dulles. Nixon is another person that might have been involved, although it's hard to imagine how such a watched person could go undetected, but perhaps in one of these unmonitered rooms. In addition, there may be a certain amount of background murder plans that never happen, like the "drills" on 9/11. Many murders are designed as drills, for example, some people pretend they are going to kill the president, and the other team tries to stop them. Then one or two tiny changes and the drill turns into an actual murder.

To the people that constantly complain because I talk out loud and repeat parts of my thoughts aloud, I say, hey why don't you get with it too? why don't you drop religion already? get with the times, religion is stupid and full of false stories, hey stop violence already...maybe 9/11...maybe thane cesar...damn something!... cmon now, get with the program, you can do it! how about more democracy...cmon now...a little more democracy you can do it... decriminalize drugs...so many of you do or did them...plus...it is inevitable why not now?....how about clean up psychology...no more forced treatments and drugging, introduce sentencing...trials...something... damn! no...they seem to be incapable of improvement...why not address the antisexuality? isn't sex healthy and necessary for survival? isn't it ok with consent? how about a history of science for the public? how about believing evolution already? how about telling the story of the future? why wait? why not improve yourself too? no...they never will improve....because they view themselves, ofcourse, as perfection itself, completely perfect...why...there is no room for improvement!

There is a huge group of insiders in the camera-thought net that feel the camera net is just fine the way it is, selectively including a few people a year...keeping it an insider club. Their thoughts are "let it grow until...why...gee...everybody seems to be included now!" (2 millenia later...) The problem is that...look at sturgis, cesar, chapman, 9/11...it simply is not working...like my parents, and many other fine people...all excluded for most of their lives while murderers routinely see everything. Beyond that, it seems in my novice opinion that all the insiders are far right wing extreme christians and little education, with rare exception (which would reflect police/military requirements perhaps not coincidentally). The current system is terrible and think of the poor people who have not even heard that images can be sent to brains...these are highly suggestible (I know from experience!) victims of the worst people humanity is composed of. A better answer is going with democracy and free info, telling the truth and letting the images be seen. At least tell people that such technology exists, explain how it works, that should have happened in 1910, at least by 1920, 1930, 1940, 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000....I mean there is a clear trend here...and it ain't good!

I would like to know what my genetic markers are, I think that is amazing that ancient migrations can be determined from a few genetic markers. See: https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html All this stuff would be fun, if only people woke up from their religious stupor and found the light of science.

One important point that I think is true, which I have said before is that velocity cannot be converted to mass in my opinion, and so there is no conservation of energy, only conservation of mass. For example when particles collide or decay, their momentum is determined by their mass times their velocity (p=mv), and I think mometnum is thought to be a form of "energy", so people try to match up the mv of the resulting particles with the mv of the original particle, and they must add together so that there is conservation of energy. I think both m and v are preserved, in fact, in some sense, there is a conservation of velocity (and in some sense a conservation of momentum then), a velocity will be dispersed throughout the resulting matter, but I reject the idea that velocity can be converted into matter. One thing people are missing is that, it seems clear that photons are matter, and so, that mass although very small, must be considered as lost mass in every particle decay and collision. It seems very logical, very simple, and I don't see any good argument to disprove this idea. And do you know something? When somebody even just simply beams something unpleasant or unwanted on my brain, I simply vote to sentence them to a year and I find that helps, for one thing because the person doing the beaming, you know is CIA, extreme right wing criminal scum to begin with so no loss there and certainly by now they deserve it, and at the other victim end of the bad beaming, the other victim of the bad beaming...they may see..."hey the other victim sentenced the bad vibe sender to a year so clearly they don't honestly support or believe the bad beam sent to their mind, and well...that makes me feel better too". I find that, much of life now for me is just sentencing people day and night. I sentence people all day and night, in an effort to clean up this terrible mess on earth, and I encourage you to vote with me too, to clean up this planet of all the scoundrals, despots, violent assaulters, and even simply those who intrusively annoy innocent people by beaming on them with nasty shit. Just all day and all night...in my mind..."jail 10 years"..."jail 1 year"..."1 1 1 1"...."jail 20 years"..."20".."10".."20"....etc and that goes on week after week as each vote is meticulously recorded by cam-thought net administration programs.

01/25/07
It never ceases to annoy me that celibacy, monogomy, and denial of sensuality are viewed as the height of nobility and honor.

A California Assembly woman is putting forward a law against spanking, and to me, it is amazing that we are even debating such a law. It seems obvious to me that ofcourse, assaulting a child, or person of any age is wrong and should be punished, in particular a nonviolent child or adult. Of course, a person defending themselves from assault is fine and should be legal, and maybe even returning the first strike assault given by a child to some other nonviolent person (although in my view nonviolence is always the best answer, some form of imprisonment for first strike violence is enough in my view). Here is a shocking artcile in my view where the author condones assaulting children and views laws against such activity as government intrusion: http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20070125/cm_usatoday/tospankornottospank
Can you imagine substituting the word "molesting" or "genital touching" for "spanking", holy shit, this person would be fired, and probably jailed for 300 years. A tiny substitution from slapping a genital to caressing one, and 300 years in jail. It just shows the ironic paradoxical view most people in society have about sexuality and violence: violence is condoned and tolerated, sexuality is forbidden and brutally punished, in an obvious illogical thinking. Physical pain is viewed as less offensive and less of a crime than physical pleasure. This view, that violence is honorable and sexuality is deplorable is, in my view, inherited from religion. Here is kind of a funny quote from this article: "a mild slap to focus the attention of a child about to run into oncoming traffic."...a mild slap of a child who was about to run into traffic? How harsh is that? I am telling people now for those who do not already know, my advice is to never assault a child or adult. There is no reason or need for violence on earth among humans, and violence has been illegal for a long time and for good reason. Assaulting a nonviolent child in particular is wrong, the punishment outweighs whatever the crime could have been if nonviolent. The author (who goes unnamed) goes on to state: "The advice of the American Academy of Pediatrics - that spanking should be used only in selective, infrequent situations, if at all - seems about right."...let me get this straight, the American Academy of Pediatrics condones assaulting children? Yes, I think that is the only way to interpret this statement. The American Academy of Pediatrics actually thinks spanking should be used...that physically assaulting a minor is ok. This shows so obviously, the shocking duality... you see a person who caresses the genitals of a child get a sentence of 100 years in jail and think "well...clearly people must be worried about the safety of a child...even though there is no physical damage, somehow a child has such a high value that even touching certain parts of a child must be given harsh punishments", but then you listen to these people who all endorse spanking, child assault...and of the few people I have talked to, the vast majority (including myself) were all spanked/non-sexually assaulted...I only found 1 exception of around 10 people. Clearly, the view is that assault a child, a child being lightly beaten is ok...so how can a person square this myth that the genital touching is people's hysteria to protect a child from harm? And as I concluded earlier, the viciously brutal punishments for genital touching of humans under age 18 has more to do with a child's sexual purity than with their physical safety, because obviously beating the child is viewed by a large number of adults as not even a minor crime. "Abusive violence against children, whether in the home or elsewhere, is intolerable. But so is an intrusive government that would make criminals of parents trying to do their best to raise their kids." Assaulting a child is "trying their best"? I think it's more like, succumbing to their worst. Another article http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20070125/cm_usatoday/sparetherodsavethechild reveals that only a few nations explicitly outlaw spanking. The first article also reveals that "about half of American parents sometimes spank their children", and to me this is openly admiting that 50% of adults with children have assaulted a child. And most likely, in my own estimation, the activity the child was assaulted for was nonviolent. And this assaulting of children is common throughout the violent planet. Many children are allowed to be hit with a wooden stick in school (I can't believe there are not nonviolent alternatives to discipline). But we have to remember that this is the planet where many nations murder people for nonviolent crimes such as drugs, treason, nonviolent sexual crimes, etc. This is a society where people openly pay people to consensually beat each other many times until dead, but cannot legally pay to consentually touch the penis, breasts, vaginas, or butts of other people.

I'm amazed at people's hysteria around drugs and sexuality but apathy about violence, in particular when you realize that sex never killed JFK, smoking never killed MLK or John Lennon, or all those people on 9/11/01, in Afghanistan and Iraq, but still people feel violence is not a big deal, and drugs and sex are the big fear. Tobacco, alcohol and drugs might not be healthy and people are probably better off not becoming addicted to those items, but violence is far worse as is jailing nonviolent people who are only hurting themselves.

Wouldn't that be fun to take a class on sex, for example how to do oral sex on a female or male? Even though it's simple, still, it might be useful to learn from experts. For example, they might say "now you may hear a fart and don't worry, that is just the natural digestive system of the human body working as usual. Now you farting may even want to flex your buttock muscles to create a higher pitched sound if you like. Now lets focus on the clitoris, ... now with your fingers push back the surrounding hair around the vagina...ok a question? Should you use both hands?...you may...practice using one hand with two fingers...then experiment with using both hands and see which is more comfortable for you..." etc. There are small pieces of advice and extra tips that a person might find useful. I guess it might begin by choosing a partner, clearly there would not always be a match...but perhaps people can match up ahead of time using some online enrollment image system before taking the class. Possibly attractive people might match with more than one person, and so perhaps they could opt to take turns.

01/26/07
I think Bush and them made a "deal with the devil", so to speak, I mean there really isn't any devil, no red bodied black beared man with horns and a red suit, but certainly there is evil as defined by humans. And when the payment comes due they will have to pay, and look what they gained for the taking of 3000 innocent lives...a few billion dollars...that's about it. Was it worth it? Just for a few billion? It's amazing to me that people could make such an agreement to murder innocent people all for a few million dollars and a temporary high.

I think people should not take violence lightly. Violence, in particular murder, should not be excused or dismissed away, because that invites a Nazistic society, a choatic society, where violence is tolerated and dismissed as one-of-them-things, or just-the-way-it-is, or somehow people just simply forget about it and those innocent people murdered or assaulted. I think the future is going to be one where the public wakes up to the most important evil of violence, and we will see less and less murders go "unsolved", less murders happening altogether, and less murderers being released from prisons. I don't think that time has happened yet, clearly, and so this is still a very dangerous time for people of earth, in particular in the top most violent nations of earth. One aspect of moving the stopping of violence to the top is moving the other "crimes" lower. In particular I think the planet would do well to stop its war on consensual drug use and trade and focus more on illegal weapon use and trade, another area I have identified is the war on consensual sex, unconsensual sex is clearly violence, but let's not confuse that with consensual sex, which in my view includes consensual sex for money, which is like any other nonviolent consensual job. Those are at least 2 areas I think present obvious room for improvement, but probably there are others. We can continue to enforce stopping theft (or start to in my view), trespassing and other nonviolent but nuisance-to-others crimes, but let's change the laws to allow people to do whatever they want to their own bodies, so long as no body else is physically hurt and there is clear consent. A perfect example is this graduate student from Stanford who appears to be murdered, Mengyao "May" Zhou. All the insiders have to know what happened to May, and here May was in electrical engineering...clearly no dummy. They all know, because of seeing thoughts, street cameras, the phone company cameras and microphones in every house, etc. Even from street cameras alone...did May's car just drive itself on those camera-filled streets? I wish I could wire up the streets myself, because I could then single-handedly solve 70% of all "unsolved" murders on the California Coast. And then beyond that, probably stop 30% of murders, because the murder may not happen immediately before computer programs or humans recognize the person is missing, or some image shows an abduction, etc. If this murder of May Zhou goes unsolved, and it looks like it probably will, all of us can be sure that the insiders let it happen and are letting the murderer go free, probably because the murderer is in police, the US military, CIA or FBI (this has to be the case for Jam Jay, Chandra Levy, Bonnie Bakely, and others that could not be labeled suicide and for which street cameras alone, beyond thought images would solve them), and to jail them would open up the public's suspicions of those government agencies and the employees we fund there. And this is what I am talking about, where is the public outrage? Where are the headlines? Nowhere to be found, I guess the murder of a Stanford graduate student is not important to society, the mainstream media, businesses, and the politicians. I remember a few days ago, an overweight asian female walked over to her opened car trunk and as usual I thought...'probably the cam net with a usual warning about murdering me and stuffing me in a trunk...ahhh fuck you...(my usual response, you know I'm here to live, not to tremble in silence)'. I think they are going to claim that this was a suicide, but it doesn't sound likely. Why would somebody lock themselves in their own trunk and then end their life, in particular such a smart person in a good career? Then the Santa Rosa and Stanford police are not releasing any information, which sounds suspicious. I think this policy of police and any government secrecy needs to be stopped completely, voted out, maybe then a price will be paid in someway, but the price is well worth it in my estimation. For example, some suspect who knows information not released to the press...well with the camera thought net...they could have easily gotten it there, and beyond that...so what...testimony is nearly worthless, physical evidence is what is most important. Then, people in the camera network could have tried to talk her out of it. The autopsy/police report fixers have to consider this: Who would want to wait to die from a drug overdose in a small cramped trunk? The father sounds suspicious and they are probably all included. May's father says "organized" which usually implies "organized crime", but this story appears to be buried and so it will be interesting to hear what kind of spin the insiders do.

This idea of voting to jail those people who make our eye muscles twitch, and make us itch, etc using lasers I think makes a lot of sense and I will tell you why. First, for at least 50 years it has been violent criminals locking up intellectuals, scientists and artists for years and years of time in prisons, and now I think the roles should reverse, and intellectuals, scientists and artists should lock up the violent criminals for long durations of time. Maybe later when everybody can see, there are no more lasers in every room, people are not being zapped and twitched, and the public all know about Pupin we can reduce the sentences. In addition, isn't it always the case that the victim of a crime always seems to vote for a longer sentence for the perpetrator of the crime done to them that other uninvolved people? Perhaps the votes of other people will create a curve where the direct victim gives a 10 year sentence, but others feel inclined only to give a 5 year or less sentence.

I think the people in the USA, in particular the spineless democrats and liberals should try to reach farther into the future, farther into a progressive president. Because in my experience we are seeing the difference between republicans and democrats as being one of religious extremists (republicans) and the other as religious zelots (democrats). Maybe "zelot" is not the correct word, but "extremist light", they hold the line on the religious extremists, they keep the religious extremists that are the republicans in check, barely though, not making any improvements or advances, but simply keeping the extremists from starting a war, building up a huge credit card bill, ... the democrats appear to be incapable of actual leadership, actual progress, they can only hold the line until another violent uneducated extremist wins the presidency for the republicans and the 9/11s, Vietnams happen all over again. Even though it is impossible, and I realize it will not happen for a few more decades, I still encourage the people out there, in particular the democrats to vote further into the future, for more progressive presidents. For example, less of God's, Jesus', Muhommed's, and Yahweh's people, and more of Nature's and the Universe's people, less of the religious, more of the sciencious, less uneducated, more educated, less creationists, more evolutionists, less a religious preacher and more a sciencious teacher, etc. I hope those who vote in 2008 and 2012 will be able to tell me in 2016..."I told you so", but somehow I think in 2016 I will be the person saying "I told you so" because by 2016 my feeling is that there will still be:
1) the electoral college
2) the official 9/11 story in history textbooks and major media videos
3) the official Oswald story in history textbooks and major media videos
4) the official Sirhan Sirhan story in history textbooks and major media videos
5) the Reagan mandatory minimum drug sentences still in place, drugs as illegal as ever
6) the Sonny "nobody gets Bono'd" copyright extension act still 100% in tact, no reduction of copyright duration whatsoever.
7) seeing, hearing, and sending images, sounds and smells to/from brains still a secret, Pupin and the AT&T camera-microphone-thought-net, still unknown to the public, not public info, hearing and seeing thought still a secret.
8) people routinely unconsensually drugged and jailed without trial of sentence in the psychiatric hospitals. People required by law to take meds, with insurance companies forced by law to pay a portion of the cost to the big pharma companies for the meds, the rest being required from the victim.
9) Not one NSF free evolution, science, or description of the future video
10) prostitution still as illegal as ever, no change whatsoever even though people will still be routinely paid to beat themselves to death in a boxing ring and clear toilets for money.
11) people still jailed for owning images of child pornography and talking about sex to minors on the Internet.
12) tobacco made completely illegal.
13) Still no major effort to stop or even identify violence by any nation on earth including the united nations, not one ad against nonsexual, nondomestic violence such as simple assault or homicide. Still as many homicides and assaults as 2008 or just a few less, but certainly under 10%.

I probably commented on this befo, but just in case I didn't, I think we need to express some doubt about relativity more accurately predicting the orbit of Mercury than Newton's equations, for a few reasons: 1) we cannot even predict the weather on earth for next week, there are so many particles, even the most ardent relativist must admit that both relativity and Newtonity cannot correctly predict where planet Mercury will be on 01/01/2010 00:00:00 relative to the earth, they will be off by at least 1 meter. 2) there are many uncertainties in using Newton's equation, first of all the masses and distances of the other planets have to be very accurate, and modeled forward in time from some initial starting position...why is this never stated?

There are some cool things people should get to do some time like glass blowing, making a vacuum tube, metal plating, welding, pin-hole camera (yes two holes in a closed box, still until you do it, you will never see the cool image inside with yer own eyes), its all part of a basic science education. For example, all basic major experiments should be taught and performed by a student interested in learning science.

01/05/07
I had this new idea for controlling how much I eat, and it is waiting until I hear my stomach make a noise before eating a meal. One thing that kind of ruins it is that I need to take regular lunch and eat when I have the chance whether my stomach is grumbling or not. Another thing is that my stomach does not growl in the morning but I usually eat something anyway because I am hungry.

On the death of Gerald Ford, my first opinion, and it's negative but it happens to be the truth, is how transparent the violent crime that Ford stood for is, in particular that he openly sat on the Warren Commission with Allen Dulles (who JFK had fired, and for good reason, and who was clearly linked to Hitler and the Nazi leaders), to openly cover up the truth about Frank Fiorini and the murder of JFK, and that says it all, there is no mystery, little left to the imagination there. So, it is always a surprise and disgust to me to see people worshipping people like Gerald Ford, or honoring people like Gerald Ford in any way. Because he was a common criminal who did terrible things to the USA, covered up the murder of a democratically elected president, and simply the murder of an innocent human, and we in the excluded can only guess how many other murders Ford helped to cover up. What the people on earth have to figure out is that the republican party has been one of the most successful violent criminal organizations in the history of the USA, they murder and get away with it, and it extends into the conservative group everywhere.

One thing I've noticed is how dull the majority of humans are. And maybe it's genetic. Maybe the dull are more evolutionarily successful than those who are more demanding in terms of what they want. It is a case of "attention surplus", but also an example of those who do not need much to be entertained. How else could religion be endured? and monogamy? the endless windbaggery of psychology? total antisexuality...to the point of rejection even on simple physical pleasure? How could it be, that the majority are already overwhelmed with the apparently too-shocking images provided by the major media when nudity and actual violence never actually are shown? It's a mystery, but sadly I find myself on the other side and so I'm like a fat person in a thin colony, a Jewish human in a Nazi community, a democratist in communist lands, a black person in klan town, etc. People going to organized religious services I think is the prime example of this shocking endurance of dullness. There is one theory, that inside these people actually are not attention-surplus, but are like others, but because of the pressure to conform they endure, and this would fit like a puzzle piece into the explanation as to why they are usually crabby.

I definitely support the MIT free course videos project, that is awesome.

01/08/07
I like to watch the latest updates on the 9/11 truth scene and there are videos from a DC conference with Tarpley and others. In one of these videos is an interesting guy who mentioned the death of Bertha Champagne a person who was a house keeper for Marvin Bush and how the story was completely buried in the main stream media, the only newspaper reporting it being the Washington Post and then in section 3 or something. But looking at the story, it seems a very unusual death. This person in the video comments that had this been Roger Clinton, Bill Clinton's brother, the press, clearly mainly funded by republicans, would have certainly run the story for weeks on the front page. (reading news in the USA is like reading a comic book in my opinion...what kind of ridiculously unimportant and 100% paid-for messages do they have today?) Anyway, when you look at this death, it is very unusual. The police report indicates that Champagne went to get a video of her and Bush jr from her car, and the car was in gear (clearly, they mean the car is "out of gear", in other words, the vehicle was in neutral...not in any gear such as 1st, 2nd gear for standard, or "D" or "O" for an automatic). One of the first questions people might ask is, how often does a person leave a vehicle in neutral? Then, why would the vehicle suddenly start to move when it had not moved for hours before? Then there is the suspicious nature of Champagne being a house cleaner: did she find something? a video? some evidence? did she see something, that the nature of it alone, might be enough to bring down the Bush family administration? Many people might wonder why anybody might believe a house cleaning person, but then in court testifying, even if one person's account, it could be influential. I don't doubt that Champagne was murdered. The republicans murder people all the time. Listen to the stories told about LBJ by his mistress Madeleine Duncan Brown and how LBJ had Malcolm Wallace kill dozens of people, including her nanny. Knowing that Marvin Bush was one of the Securacom people who ran the security for the WTC in 9/11 should show how involved in the 9/11 murders he was, and that clearly is unethical, immoral and ofcourse illegal.

Speaking of 9/11, you know that, the 9/11 report might actually be accurate in saying that fire brought down the World Trade Center buildings? Yes, the fire from the thermate and explosives. I was thinking more about the 9/11 version as told by the Southpark creators, and, it seems really interesting, that...the part of the switched planes is clearly correct...maybe the rest is accurate too...in particular the part about all the witness (which can only be the people on the 4 planes) are boarded onto united flight 93, and shot down with a missile. This shot down aspect seems to be confirmed by a number of people. Bob Bowman says "shot down" clearly in his DC talk. Jim Fetzer makes a big to do about the Leon Pinetta testimony of the Cheney aid asking if the orders still stand, and Cheney whipping around and saying "have yiz heard anything to the contrary?". Maybe that was an order to shoot down 93, or perhaps more likely to shoot down a plane that may have fired a missile at the Pentagon. It seems clear now, that one major aspect of 9/11 was the drills, and these drills are how the murderers in the republicans and conservativesly generally in the military establishment can plot a mass murder...as a drill...and then change a tiny component...and the drill actually happens (Webster Tarpley expands this view more than any other people). So the neocon plotters will make a drill where two military planes simulate a hijacking being flown into the WTC buildings, and they add a tiny element of...the planes pull out at the last second if they are not laser tagged or intercepted or whatever. And no doubt that even to the very WTC impact, people in the cam-thought net must have thought...."no they will pull out...they are not going to actually hit the WTC building...that is ridiculous..."...but then what a shock they must have had...although probably many were aware of the plan and the wafer thin celophane mask of a "drill" (it is difficult if not impossible to hide a person's true thoughts and intentions when all thought can be seen). If they shot down all the plane people in UA93, they probably used them first to make, for example the Ong recording. They probably told Ong..."read this script as if the plane was hijacked...it will help our drill".

Here is an interesting talk given by Richard Stallman of Free Software Foundation:
http://www.archive.org/download/punkcast905a/905a_stallman_128k_audio.ogg

from http://www.archive.org/details/punkcast905a

01/09/07
Ejin hinted at something nice: "we want a pan-full not a painful!"

Most people in this time on earth are antisexuals, and being antisexuals, most people pretend that they have no genitals, like the many dolls a person might buy. But the fact is that they do have genitals, and so their sexuality manifests itself in a very perverted and evil way. Their "kink" as it were, takes a sado-masochistic form. And this sado-masochism takes a very interesting specific form, that of forcing sensory deprivation in particular as applies to the touch sensation, with a focus on the genitals and sexual pleasure. Their sado-masochistic morphed sexuality seeks to impose celibacy, asexuality, abstinence on all other people, basically to stop all people from feeling physical pleasure, in particular sexual pleasure, even if consensual. It's like a love of watching a person who is drying of dehydration being unable to reach a cup of water just beyond their reach...this is the "kink" of the majority of antisexuals; the concerted effort and enjoyment towards denying those who want physical pleasure (of both genders and all ages, including the other species) from ever obtaining it. As I have said before, in some way it is a force, shockingly popular, that runs as a counter force against survival of life. And this sado-masochistic form of sexuality is embraced by maybe as many as 70% of the people of earth right now. Antisexuality is much more popular than antiviolence. It's a celebration of the eperience of physical denial. Who knows what this sado-masochistic group will do next? Perhaps sterilizations, castrations, genital mutilations? For years "nymphomania" was viewed as a psychiatric disorder, and probably still is by many. This sado-masochistic view of denial is inflicted upon young people. For example, in most nations, it is illegal to talk to a person under the age of 18 about sex, even though, although there are no hard figures, I estimate that 70% of people 11-17 deliberately search for pornography, probably 90% among males in this age group. In addition there are the overly harsh punishments, far surpassing in duration those for violent crime, for activities that amount to simply touching body parts nonviolently. This sado-masochistic view is shown in particular as applies to children, in particular young males, who experience the height of their sexual urges from age 11 to 30, a third of which they must remain celibate, because having even oral sex with a human over age 17 is illegal, and with a female under 18 is nearly impossible. The sado-masochistic adults force these young people to suffer, and deny them any kind of physical pleasure, and this is a form of child abuse in my opinion, because it's neglect, and it is legally denying young people the right to physical pleasure, forcing them to experience sensory deprivation, making them hostile, insensitive. By the time these young people reach age 18, probably their parents breathe a sigh of relief because now there is no possibility of being punished as parents for the overly antisexual child laws, for example, by showing minors pornography. But by the time young people reach age 18, already their views of sexuality are terribly scewed, sex has by this time become something shocking, a very emotional topic. Males by this time have learned that getting sex is going to be next to impossible and most have resigned themselves to masturbation, but ofcourse, they continue to try, and many times, in desperation, they force themselves on unwilling females who feel that to be labeled permiscuous or a slut is to become socially ostracized.

Laws that restrict the rights of "children", those humans under the age of 21, are typical of totalitarian regimes, in that the opinions of those whose freedoms the laws restrict are never consulted, and their opinion means nothing in creating the law, the restricted tend to be a powerless minority (such as black people in the USA under slavory, or women before they won the right to vote). What would we find if 20 year old people were asked "should 20 year old people be allowed to buy alcohol?", I don't know, but I think the vote would be: 83% yes 17% no. How about asking 16 year olds: "Should 16 year olds be allowed to vote?", again 80% yes, 20% no. Ask 17 year olds: "Should people 17 years old be allowed to have sex with people over age 18?" here perhaps only 70% yes, 30% no (shockingly there might be 30% who agree that they should have their rights restricted in a way that others do not). Let's ask those under 18: "Should people under age 18 be allowed to see R rated movies?", let's ask 14 year olds "Should people age 14 be allowed to work and earn income?" Ask 11-17 year olds "should you be allowed to legally look at and own pornography?" Shouldn't those people whose freedoms are restricted by a law, be asked their opinions about such laws?

I am submitting a proposed law that the following government positions be determined strictly by democratic election:
1) Supreme Court Justice
2) Director of the FBI
3) Director of the CIA
4) US Military Generals
5) Federal Court Justice

I thought of another interesting potential problem with time-dilation: If for example, a particle (other than a photon, since photons apparently do not experience time-dilation) is moving away from us at so-called relativistic velocity (near the speed of light), for example an electron in an accelerator, does that not mean that in some sense we are moving away from the electron at the exact opposite velocity relative to the electron and our body? But yet, if that is true, and it seems logical that it is, why do we not also experience time-dilation and/or space-dilation? Perhaps the time-dilation is split equally between the two, the electron and us? Perhaps a person might say that we experience time-dilation relative to the electron, since time moves more slowly for it relative to us. In terms of space-dilation, it appears that only the electron becomes infinitely massive, while our mass relative to the electron remains unchanged although our mass is far less than the supposed mass of the electron. But since we and the electron are both moving at relativistic speeds relative to each other, should not our mass also become squashed? I think the dilation of space (although perhaps not for time) for the observer of a high speed non-photon particle appears to be a difficult phenomenon to explain. But I don't doubt that there would be a variety of creative explanations were this an open and public discussion. My current view on relativity is: relativity is a creative idea, but it is inaccurate because time is probably the same throughout the universe. Space and time dilation is probably inaccurate. Beyond that, the universe is probably not expanding, but is infinitely large in size and infinitely old in age; the red-shift of distance galaxies is probably due more to red-shifting from gravity of the many masses between here and there (the Mossbauer effect) and less from Doppler shift. The thing that to me is such an interesting aspect of the relativity myth and popular belief, are the "experiments" that confirm relativity. I think that is absolutely one of the most interesting things about the story of relativity. Because it seems clear that time and space dilation, the basis for relativity, is false. So how can there be so many experiments that verify the accurateness of relativity? In some way I feel like a creationist trying to debunk evolution, it is that obscure and unusual to hear somebody question relativity. I want to reassure everybody that I fully accept and believe evolution as a complete fact, and that evolution is a settled issue for me: yes I accept evolution, I reject any theory of religious creation (and currently any creation theory at all as being unlikely, even those from science), and ofcourse I reject the so-called "intelligent design" theory. I think the universe is an awesome phenomenon (for lack of a better word), I am in awe of the size and simply the reality of our existence, but I reject any kind of god or gods idea as unlikely. So continuing on with relativity, maybe I am wrong, but it almost seems, the Mossbauer experiments in particular to be people who set out to disprove that the red-shift of distant galaxies is from Doppler shift and is due to stretching from gravity...and then...they say..."so this confirms the theory of relativity"...as if to calm those in the relativity paradigm...even though...as far as I know...there was no math done, there was no equation to relate the effect to relativity...I don't know I have to check. If there are equations to relate the Mossbauer to relativity, then perhaps there is a dual equivalence with the Newton "corpuscular" (particle) theory, but I doubt it. So, what can explain these experiments that confirm relativity? Is it an example of corrupt scientists? I need to do more research, but my initial feeling is that it is less corrupt scientists, (although perhaps scientists who fail to show any amount of uncertainty, and in particular failing to recognize when there measurements are within the realm of error), and more like scientists using miniscule measurements with large possibilty for error. One of the experiments confirms that photons are matter that red shift because of gravity (although a non-Newton interpretation is given). The one experiment where the bending of light is one where there is a difference of a tiny quantity, and here they are estimating the mass of the sun, the distance of the light beam from the center of the sun, ... I mean...how could they possibly feel certain with so many uncertainties...and then for a difference of a micro arc second or something. The relativistic electron, I think is complex, but I think this is an effect of momentum...the faster an object moves, the more fuel must go into accelerating it further...it is not that the mass of the electron is growing larger. It's just the nature of limits on accelerating charged particles with an electric field, but we can certainly argue all sides of the issue and try to reach the truth about this. With the perihelion of Mercury, I think this is possibly that Newton's equation is being applied incorrectly. The proof I have seen is a geometrical proof, where I view modeling objects with Newton's equation as requiring a simulation, a model which works from some initial starting point and moves into the future. It seems unusual to think that Newton's law applies to all matter...except the motion of Mercury. I think any error that may exist, exists in the imperfection of estimating how much matter there is in the sun, how the matter is distributed, we simply cannot model every atom in the sun, we have to generalize. And for an orbit we can observe, and that changes so quickly, the error adds up quickly. The same is true for the position of the moon of earth (so I have heard), the oceans of earth make accurately predicting the precise position of the moon very difficult into the future. Our estimates of the moon's location 100 years from now, will certainly be wrong, again because we cannot model every molecule of water on the earth, and the chaotic movement of water on earth changes the distribution of matter. In some way these movements will probably always remain the universe's "little secret", we can't possibly do anything other than estimate, and through trial and error, constantly adjust and correct our models. So how on earth could Einstein's equation perfectly fit the orbit of Mercury? There is just no way it can. It is like predicting the weather on July 12, 3005 over Gdansk, the average number of trees on the moon for the year 4387, etc. They won't even be able to agree about when the actual years starts and ends. So there is no way that Einstein's equations accurate describe Mercury's motion (although is there one human who has definitely stated this beside me?), but perhaps the claim is simply that as a generalized form, relativity explains the perihelion where Newton's equation does not, and even here I doubt it. But I still have yet to model both. In my modeling of masses using Newtonian gravity, I see rotating orbits all the time.

1/10/07
Here's a hopeful article where a person actually reveals that people are trying to see thought:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0612310318dec31,1,5863490.story?coll=chi-technology-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

I hope people clean up psychology. Why not insist on treatment being voluntary only? Why not drop the idea of hospitalizing people and move the psychiatric hospitals into the prisons and guarantee people the right to trial, sentence, etc? Why not insist on stopping fastening nonviolent people to beds? Why not insist that people must not be coerced to take meds with threats such as "we won't let you go unless you take your meds", and "you won't be fed unless you take your meds", etc? Why not openly reject the labels and theory behind the "psychosis", "neurosis" and "schizophrenia" diagnoses? Why not create new more accurate and simple labels such as "inaccurate claims relative to the majority belief", and other more specific identification of what is believed to be a problem? If all of psychology was consensual, I think people like me would have far fewer complaints. Currently, the system is relatively clear, the drug companies and doctors all ride the money train on the backs of those poor people who are forced by law (no less!) to buy the drugs and services, even when those people have not violated one known legitimate law, and in particular no violent law.

01/11/07
I think many people, liberals in particular, need to ask themselves: "Do I have video in my eyes and hear thoughts in my ears like the nazi fascists around me?" and then "no, no I do not". And so what does that say about the current leaders of earth? The question really answers itself. If they were good people, wouldn't we be hearing and seeing thought by now? So I think the public needs to start electing and promoting those who have at least publically commented that they are for full free information, and absolutely not one secret when it comes to the government, the electricity and telephone companies. Anything else is only to continue the cheating of yourself and other decent people.

01/16/07
There is always a "New World". Just as Europe was exploring the New World of America after 1492, we find that there will always be a New World. In our time, the New World is the moon of earth and planet Mars. People will settle the rough and rugged inhospitable features of those spherical bodies, and they will eventually become "Old World". The new world then will be the moons of the gas giant planets, and then Alpha Centauri. Once the planets of Alpha Centauri are bustling with life of earth, even that society will be viewed as part of the Old World, and other stars will be the "New World". So, it is a disappointment that most people don't recognize the potential of the New World. For example, look at how Spain dominated South America, and as a result all of South America and Central America speak Spanish, and are believers in the Catholic religion. Had England been more interested in exploration, perhaps English would be the language that dominates South America, or France, Italy, Germany, Russia, Japan or China could have been more interested in the New World, but they were more interested in internal issues perhaps. And so it is with the USA and much of the developed nations now. Currently the US is spending 2 trillion dollars to conquer Iraq and Afghanistan, and I think if we are going to charge 2 trillion dollars of debt, a better use of that money is to conquer the moon and Mars and forget about the problematic backward nations of earth. And probably the companies that would be producing those systems would be the defense industry, haliburton would be serving meals on the moon instead of in Iraq, how much more glamorous that would be and a better leverage into the future. Probably private smaller and leaner people will colonize the moons and planets, private industry. Jeff Bezos is off to a quick start, as are those using the Rutan design which Paul Allen funded for a measely 3 million. They probably will clearly put the government effort to shame. I think government is shaping up to be a people controlled system that just handles the most basic of services, stopping starvation, stopping violence, phone service, waste processing, etc. the bigger goals might be left to private investors at the current rate.

With the Saddam execution, I think, in Bush's colony of Iraq, can't they use lethal injection like the other unincorporated territories of the US? Then the double lynching on Martin Luther King Jr day, seems to me to be a deliberate racist message.

One species of beetle actually has a diffraction grating as part of its anatomical design, and that would be cool to have clothing with diffraction gratings.

I think one typical example of what is going wrong in the USA and probably on earth as a whole is exemplified in the way $100 million dollars was spent to investigate a blow-job, but less than $20 million was spent to investigate the murder of 3,000 people and counting as a result of 9/11. And this to me exemplifies all that is wrong with a large part of the public. It reminds me of a kind of Nazi and victim relationship, the Nazis get away with shockingly violent criminal actions without so much as a fine, while the other side, the victims, are brutally and harshly punished for breathing. But I think slowly this will change, as the public becomes more educated and logical. We will eventually see $50 million to investigate the blow-job and $50 million to investigate 3000 murders. Then years after that, $1 million to investigate a blow-job and $100 million to investigate 3000 murders. Then perhaps as a final future 0 dollars to investigate a blow-job, and $100 million dollars to actually stop 3000 murders. So I think we can expect that slowly the people of earth will come to a better understanding, a better view on priorities, a more logical approach to life.

As hobbies for wealthy people, I would like to throw out some suggestions for how to spend their time and money:
1) rockets, moon stations, basically what Bezos is doing. Otherwise why wait around stuck on the earth? Wouldn't it be much more fun to vacation safely in orbit, on the moon?
2) walking robots, we know they are coming, we know they are going to replace all low-skill labor, now why not be a part of the fun of seeing robots shopping, driving, and cleaning?
3) history of science movie. Wouldn't this be fun? Wouldn't it? We would learn about science, and start to educate these vicious uneducated people on earth. Why let the anti-science continue to walk all over the innocent? This is not controversial and so who could possibly be angry about it?
4) history of evolution movie. and free. now that would be a good focus for money and time. And it's not very controversial. We can reach people with the greatest story of earth.
5) a story about the future, a movie...again and free. Now wouldn't this be grand? We would show those close minded people how life will grow to the other stars, open their eyes up then eh?
6) Stop violence, let's do something against violence, hm? Why not give it a try? We don't have to openly take on the 9/11 killers, Sturgis, or Cesar...why not just some bland messages against violence? Who could be angry then?
7) More democracy. For those less brave, maybe just a push for more democracy, why a ballot measure! Let us vote on the laws, at least let the public's vote be counted even if it doesn't count.
8) More freedom of info...it's a good use of time and money. No real bravery needed here unless you want to expose Pupin and seeing, hearing and sending thought. I think a good initial approach is the "stop all government secrets act".
9) Decriminalize drugs...it's a good cause, sure drug addiction is bad, but locking drug addicted people in jail for years is worse. Probably for the braver of the wealthy.
10) make psychology volutary only. This is probably for the braver of the wealthy, but the torture and drugging of people against their choice has to stop sometime.
11) Decriminalize prostitution. Now this really seems logical. Being wealthy, we could be paying for really fantastic sex, and even just fantastic physical affection...but the ridiculously backward puritan laws are stopping wealthy people from doing just that. We should take on the battle at all fronts, making kissing for money legal, stopping the jailing for those in prostitution, show how touching a genital for money is the same as cleaning a toilet for money, etc. We should have this licked in no time!
12) Promote criticism of religion. Why not stop the source of all woes? Why not clear up people's minds with the terrible truth about religion? Since we all have to suffer under their rule, why not chip away at their powerbase by telling the good honest truth about those sour-puss backwards bastards?

Otherwise, I know you will just buy land and antiques, drink alcohol, have social parties, go out to dinner, make schloky foo-foo movies, watch camera-thought net or sports, and/or other trivial pursuits.

One thing that is interesting is the issue of what might happen if the public finds out that the phone company has cameras, microphones, thought seeing, hearing and sending machines, and lasers in everybody's house. Many feel that the public would demand that the cameras be removed, and that seems perhaps logical and likely. For myself, I vote to have the lasers removed...I mean...what do we need lasers in our houses for? They are very annoying and more importantly potentially murderous. But I vote in favor of the cameras and microphones, as long as everybody gets to see. But probably the public would vote against that. The other side of that arguement if what to do with people who violate the majority opinion, because it is a nonviolent crime, and probably eventually the people could not be jailed for very long (at least hopefully when the public eventually comes to a logical sense of priority, which may very well happen). But beyond this, there is the main concern that seeing and hearing thought should be available for people to use consensually, in particular, it seems clear that cameras, microphones, thought hearing, seeing, and sending will probably win majority support on the streets, (my vote is for the public to see the street cameras, hear the microphone data, too, which appears not to be a concern of the public currently). Then I have to remind people that, there are thousands of murderers running free that need to be captured and jailed...I mean this is frightening...these people did 9/11, there are thousands of known murders all those insiders know all about and do nothing to stop and clearly that should form a high priority if ever the images were made public. Even without cameras and thought hearing in everybody's houses, still with them only on the streets, on business property, and individuals who chose to either consent of have their own system, many things can be learned, in particular who has done violence. The added benefit to society as a whole far outweighs the value of keeping the technology secret and the loss of lasers and cameras inside houses if that even happens. In addition, it seem inevitable to me that all secrets eventually come out, and people need to start accepting the popular opinion and democracy despite their own desires and sense of fairness (which for those in the camera-thought net, I can tell is monsterously decrepid, the current level of abuse...read 9/11...read laser zaps...read million of murderers allowed to run free...has to be a strong incentive to many to show the public the truth).

01/17/07
One major theme of science through the 1700,1800,1900 and even now in the 2000s is the debate between light (and then matter) as a particle or a wave, and the debate still continues. Currently, the view is that both are correct, but I think that eventually, the view of light as a particle most commonly found in a beam where wavelength is the distance between particles will be accepted, and any view of light as a wave (other than a point wave of particles) will fall to the past. But first the phenomenon of interference and refraction need to be explained as a particle phenomenon, and I want to model this on a computer. I can't believe that I have never seen a particle theory of light modeled on a computer. It shows how little effort has gone into exploring both models (or perhaps how this was only done secretly and not reported to the public).

When it comes to beaming on and externally taking control of the central focus of a brain I think that everybody should drive their own car (or brain and body as it were), and one driver per car please.

I encourage people to try to take pictures behind their own or a friend's head while they hold a flashlight or a book in front of their eyes. Use infrared film and develop your own photos (I have only developed pcbs before, but it can't be difficult). It's a good skill to learn anyway. I have a feeling that the infrared film available is not going to develop the necessary range. Probably 8000nm-12000nm (7-12um) is necessary. You may have to use a glass plate and methods used by Abney and others. I can almost guarantee that the film available (700-900nm) is not going to work, and isn't that nice of them? Possibly a person could use one or two prisms to capture light from one small wavelength. Possibly like a worm gear that slowly turns a prism by a miniscule angle. And then it would probably need to be like a wood box, perhaps shaped like a 3D triangle, with the light entering at one point going through the prisms (enclosed inside), and then a place where a camera or person could see the result (perhaps directly or from light reflected off the screen). I would try to isolate the wavelengths where heat is 8-12 um (8,000-12,000nm).

01/19/07
I can't believe that people can actually enjoy watching a person suffer, that is really a bizarre brutalistic nature of the majority of people. For example, this thing where the female in Sacramento died from a contest where people were supposed to drink large amounts of water. I can't understand how people could enjoy somebody suffering like that, or hurting themselves. It's the sado-masochism of religion and antisexuality probably. It's easy to figure out people, mainly most at this time are violently antisexual outside but sex obsessed inside. It's hypocrisy that people parade around pretending that they are not sexual, because for sure it's a lie. Think of the things people at a major media station could do, they could have people compete to collect signatures for ending or limiting copyright to 10 years, to promoting legal nudity, kissing for money, masturbating for money, see who has the nicest body, see who is the smartest, ask them what their favorite spectral line is. You know the dirty bastards in the phone&electric-company-thought beaming-pupin-camera net have their favorite wavelength of the spectrum, the one they are addicted to like a cocay-eene, I think it must be around 8-12um. For a person to capture an image from behind a brain is probably not incredibly easy, it seems clear that the people in power have seen to it that very few products (if any!) can be bought by a consumer to reproduce this simple experiment. A person may need to go back to the experiments of Abney and use glass plate photography where a person smears on an emulsion (a goopy mix of oil and some other compound), since it is doubful the so-called "infrared film" of kodak and other complicitous companies is going to capture the necessary wavelength although by now like "The President's Analyst" movie describes this network of people has nanometer sized devices to see, hear and send thought images and sounds. It would be wonderful if there are some infrared light detectors, maybe themocouples that can be used in a grid to detect an image from various frequencies with a computer using a USB port or something. The amazing thing is that, one photo is all anybody needs. One photo with definitive proof of seeing what the eyes see. In fact, already Yang Dan on UC Berkeley has provided this via so-called electrodes on a cat's brain. Many of the people in the camera thought net want people to sheddup about telling the public about how the phone company has cameras, microphones, lasers, etc in everybody's house, but what can they do? Since it is only free speech and free information they can't justify murder or assault. Hopefully there is a sizeable group who is ready to stop any people from the shedup group that try to use violence. It's interesting that they are definitely subverting democracy and democratic opinion in their own interests. Although perhaps a majority might actually approve the system of cameras and thought sensors in their houses, that majority opinion, whatever it is, is being rejected in favor of personal greed, personal interests of those in the phone company, major media, government, wealthy. They ought to go with democracy already. It seems clear that they can't stop the freeflow of info by using violence, and halleluja for that, the violent criminals do not have a very large majority. Can you imagine how many phone "thought" calls we all have backed up in the system? But the phone company has not bothered to let us answer those calls. Why do people never ask "What is your favorite spectral line?"? Because in trying to keep their secret advantages over the public, this group of phone-pupin-cam-net people must actively surpress the public's science education. They don't teach the full story of spectroscopy and photography, they leave out major portions of technological advances. A tiny part of this secret history is available at: http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC37972944&id=qVUoHbyKbDsC&pg=PP7&dq=coblentz,+william+weber in a 1905 book by Coblentz. It's amazing that Coblentz used a radiometer (the little weathervane device that spins in a partial vaccum) to make time consuming measurements of various lines of ir spectra. There are some interesting things like he uses the words "made possible" in thanking people on page 4, could be coincidence, but one thing that seems like a hint is on page 6 "To my mind". Probably some kind of microphone and camera network was already in place by 1905, and maybe Coblentz at Cornell could see that Pupin at Columbia was trying to see thought with infrared detection and maybe getting partial results, although maybe there were no even partial results until the big year 1910.

So much of the feeling I get is that "these people ain't never seen them no atheist before". It truly is an amazing find for many. But yet, how ridiculous is religion? Here for centuries there were a multiplicity of gods, Zeus, Bal, Horus, ... I saw a funny quote that is bounced around from time to time, a person said "I'm like you in rejecting the dieties of the past and other religions, such as Allah, Bal, Zeus, etc... but I just add your god to that list as one more god I reject as existing."

9/11 has disgraced so many people. That old guy who has thrown away his career in science and education, the head of ASCE, the NIST people...if the truth about 9/11 comes out, and I don't see how it can not, because any fool with a computer can see how obvious the lie is. I can't imagine people who would just throw away whatever reputation they have, their entire career, to help people get away with mass murder. Most people would not hire a supporter of mass murder, I guess on planet X that might be true, but then this is planet earth where mass murderers get elected and those that oppose them rejected.

Any murder, be in en masse or otherwise, that happened, clearly was allowed to happen by those in the phone company major media camera thought edison pupin bell network. In particular you can known this is true when no murderer is ever charged, because for sure, without question, they know who does all the murders, simple street cameras can answer that, they don't even need to refer to the cameras that record people's thought images and sounds, but that would easily verify in seconds. Anna Politskovaya is a perfect example...ofcourse Putin knew all about that, and the same is clearly true for this latest murder in Turkey, Erdogan had to know. Probably the real murderer will not be captured, or it could be somebody like Mark Chapman who the camera net people beam images and sounds onto and literally use them as a human weapon by the immense power of suggestions that sending a constant stream of images and sounds can have, in particular on those unaware that such technology is possible.

One classic example of how the US government and many other governments operate is when Kean of the 9/11 commission said "we have over 2 million documents" or something like that...and all for something that they knew all about in 3 seconds of video. Probably that will be enough paper to snow the public though...2 million papers!

1/20/06
Recently Arnold Swartzenegger shows openly that he supports the 9/11 mass murder and the fraudulent Iraq genocide by supporting the addition of more children to kill and be killed in Iraq. Swartzenegger stood up and supported Bush jr in NY City at the site of the Reichstag fire of this century to say how Bush jr is "a leader who doesn't flinch", and "leader who doesn't falter or backdown". Swartaenegger's wife is a cross wearing Jesus cult fanatic without a particle of science to her name who publically thinks only her nazi elitist friends in the AT&T Bell Pupin camera thought network should get to see thought. And I have to tell you people, many thousands of US children died to bring down the brutal violent Nazi machine of the 1940s, they didn't elect them! Now it's time for Nazis like the Bushs and Swartzeneggers to be put down to the bottom, fined for their abuse of privacy, exposed for their support of the mass murder of 3000 US citizens in NY City on 09/11/2001, and possibly jailed for their fore knowledge of 9/11 as accessories to murder on a large scale. We can do this in a democracy, and they definitely deserve it. Part of the reason that their crimes are so shocking and extreme is because of the slow accumulation of crimes and way of life for those in the camera-thought net where murder and dishonesty, routine law breaking has become an accepted way of life, even thought the public if they ever see would clearly vote to jail all those people breaking the most important laws. When a Nazi like Swartzenegger, Bush, Waldheim, Hitler, Goering, Cheney, O'Reilly, Rumsfeld, Gates, whoever, is wealthy and in power, as advocates of murder and assault, of course, society collapses into a chaotic mess, because with murderers at the top, obviously things like murders, assaults, thefts, and other crimes go unstopped. You can see that violent crime has actually gone up by 2% under Bush jr, that does not even count the routine assaults inside people houses with lasers (why do we need to have lasers inside people's houses again?), and it's no surprise, violent crime always goes up under republicans because they are the Nazi party in the USA. They will cry that those who oppose them are perverts and insane, but how evil is sex, and how sane is murder? David Ray Griffen makes a nice point of saying that the Nazi leaders were all the highest members of society, they had families, and that is what is so shocking about Bush, Swartzenegger and similar Nazi people. They all dodged the draft in their time, but arrogantly care nothing about sending more of other people's children to kill and be killed in a pointless fraudulent war.

That's nice that Hillary Clinton has the theme "I'm in to win". Somebody being "in" means they are part of the phone and electric company's 100 year old secret camera thought network and routinely get video in their eyes. It's nice to see somebody openly acknowledging that. Remember Verizon's ad "are you in?". Most of us are "out", and of those "out"siders, I think .0001% know that they are "out". It's too unbelievable that people could have evolved a massive secret network based on the phone company wires that puts a camera and microphone in every room of every house in the USA and much of earth. I don't think Clinton would do anything really good as President, accept not start war, and that is no small achievement, but it would be nice to have the first female president in the USA. Because Clinton voted to support the fraudulent Iraq invasion, its clear that she is not going to do anything really decent as President, we can forget even the tiniest addition of democracy, not even an end to the electoral college, no reversal of the Reagan mandatory minimum drug sentences, still people using drugs would be looking at 10+ years in jail while violent criminals get a few days in jail if some consumer happens to have a video tape rolling that the FBI and police don't confiscate, not one of the laws I advocate on my laws.htm page would be remotely entertained, in short, we would see only progress in my estimation on national healthcare insurance, again no new wars, perhaps working to paying off Bush jr massive debt, and that is about it, no science, no exposing of thane cesar or frank sturgis, nothing like that, just holding the line kind of government. In fact, this is what I expect of all 2008 popular Democrats, the public will not elect anybody with a solidly progressive program, the closest there will be will be Dean who openly questioned Bush jr's foreknowledge of 9/11, and Kucinich who questioned the value of the drug war, and that is about it, and even there, Dean and Kucinich are married white men in business suits who are of course conservative on most other views.
I want to make clear that I think Hillary Clinton is a bad choice for President, mainly because she supported the reichstag murder of 9/11 and has never since questioned the cause of 9/11, so we can trust her to continue this secret endorsement of republican mass murder, why not elect David Ray Griffen? Why not elect Cynthia McKinney? Hillary Clinton will not be getting my vote in the primary, and I have to vomit if she (or the likewise war loving spineless Kerry) is the choice for the Democratic party in having to vote for Clinton as nazi-light to oppose the neonazi republicans from ruling (such as Guiliani who ought to be jailed for his direct part in the 9/11 mass murder), that is going to be a gross 4 to 8 years of do-nothing Jesus cult republicanism and powder-puff big government not one Sturgis, Pupin revealed. Bill Clinton was a violent secretive bastard who did nothing for those like him that smoked marijuana in the booming jail system of the USA, extended the copyright by 95 years oh...except for him and the camera at&t cameras-in-yer-homes net elite, advocated violence against a person that criticised him, never questioned the Jesus cult, is a member of the Jesus "school", how about a science evolution believer? No more idiot Jesus cult antisexual violent hypocrites. How about how Bill Clinton sat back and perhaps encouraged the FBI to do the first WTC bombing? How about the Controlled Demolition of Oklahoma city that Bill Clinton certainly watched the thoughts of. Does that sound like a lawful person? And then, can we as a people, think outside of dynasty? Can we pick the best, without picking the son of the last king? I can't possibly support Hillary Clinton as somebody who supported the 9/11 reichstag fire, at least Dean openly expressed doubts...but how can a Jesus church going cult member...like Clinton be expected to see anything wrong with 3 steel-framed buildings that fall into their own footprints at freefall speed....? I guess they don't be teaching that physics in the Jesus schools...which is what the Bushes and Clintons continue to make the US school-system into not endorsing a history of science, evolution, or the future course. The Clintons are supporters and tolerators of violence, of 9/11, of the Oklahoma City bombing, of the Jesus cult, of jailing people for drug use and prostitution for decades while the violent run free. Hillary Clinton gives the left arm heil to trick "right wing" imbeciles, and excuse me for life...but "down, down, down with the Nazis!"...they have reigned since the killing of JFK...they killed RFK...enough with these evil fuck free murderous piece-of-shit killers...fuckin wake the fuck up you piece of shit planet. enough may the republican burn in hell for fuck free ever..those fuck free pieces of nazi shit. Never let those killers be elected, nor their fuck-free axis power Quisling-Vichi-Francos in the democrats. And of course, never let any secretive dishonest murderous lawless anti-democratic communism Castro-Stalin-Maos ever rise from the left either. We want full, absolute and constant democracy with no representatives (only those who are elected to enact the public majority opinion), where we get to vote on the laws we have to live under, an end to violence, an end to secrecy, the full truth about Sturgis, Cesar, 9/11, Pupin, an end to the drug and prostitution arrests, psychology only with consent. We want science and evolution, no more religion. We want total free speech and information. This is simple, now what are people waiting for? Why continue with this murderous dishonest direction?
I don't doubt for a second that the CIA, FBI, US military, Bushes, etc. did this most recent helicopter blow-up in Iraq killing a dozen US kids. You have to understand their mind...they kill 3000 in 9/11...why? to invade Iraq and limit freedoms in the USA...those 3000 lives...they see it as worth it...it is 100% public perception...law...life...means nothing to these nazis. Everything is public perception. My song "We need a lot of love" is popular....sounds like a rescue helicopter....well...then they need to stop that...they need a bad relation to that song...they need people to relate it to the murder of their friends... Just like, in 9/11 millions of excluded suddenly hated the arab people...but wait...it was white republicans that did 9/11...Controlled Demolition who are all white men, Bush, Cheney, Meyers, ... all caucasian males...US citizens who the anger should rightfully be directed at. So, i think this is an example of the CIA, which is a rogue criminal organization who has been told before that they are not allowed to murder, ignoring that advisory, and simply murdering more US citizens in order to steer the public in some bizarre way. Maybe its a stretch, but clearly they did 9/11...what is a few dozen kids?

I would like to see some anti-military ads..."hey want to be killed for no good reason? the army needs you! Want to be moved like a pawn by wealthy Christian murderers? (picture of Bush and Cheney with video game console controllers) join the army! Want to be enslaved in a job you can't quit? Then the US army is for you!" Why don't we see these ads? It is truth in advertising. As usual, the pussified democrat defacto republican nazis. Speaking of Nazis start to vote for those that make us itch, that move our muscles, change our letters on our computers (computer wire fraud), etc to get "jail for 10 years" (add a statement that this means at all times also "jail up to 10 years" so your vote can be counted for all those who vote for lesser sentences). Why not throw the book at these bastards? Maybe later when everybody gets to see (...ahaha...) we can reduce the sentences to be more in line with the crime. And "jail for 20 years" for those who make people choke, or where pain is involved. The drug war has shown us that bulk jailing of millions of people for many years is possible. If we free the nonviolent drug users we will have more than enough space for all the 9/11, JFK murderers and the millions of cover-up accomplices before and after the fact.

While we continue to elect people who keep the camera-thought net a secret, we risk more and more secret murders, and even public murders that go "unsolved" by those who see them and plan them in the at&t camera thought network. The sooner we expose these secret images and technology, the safer we will be. If we don't expose them anytime soon, we are all continue the immense risk for more secret homicides covered up by those complicitous in the insider military, fbi, cia, police, at&t, ge and main stream media.

The republicans are composed of 2 kinds of people, those (included) who support their secret murders, protecting Sturgis, Thane Cesar, the 9/11 Controlled Demolition killers, and then a great many, (excluded) perhaps as many as half or more, who simply believe all the lies from the mouths of republican leaders. It is this 50% of republicans that I think is ultimately going to be shocked by the violent murders and lies the republican party have done over the years and will at that instant turn against those murderers as any average person would. This does not even include all the murders and suicides done because of the powerful suggestive images and audio that are beamed onto excluded people's heads while they do not have the faintest idea that millions of people are routinely sending images and sounds to their brain.

One thing that is amazing that when you think about how the republicans and their nazi allies in the democrats pay for included people to insult me, imagine that they get...on the low end $20 an insult...I mean it's probably more like $50. But let's imagine they get the measily $20/insult. For some of those people that routinely see me everyday, they lodge thousands of insults, literally, and they are never puniushed, because insiders run the earth, there are no outsiders who are wealthy, at the top of any ladder, and no insiders who are honest or decent. So imagine even a small sum of $20/insult * 1000, these people will lodge 1000 insults a year, and this is tax-free at&t camera-thought-net money (ultimately I certainly vote that all that money...gained by copyright, gained from the camera net, not paid taxes on...must all go to the excluded.). So 1000 insults a years for those who are physically close to me in the "uber zone of insense popularity and scrutiny", that is x$20 $20,000 tax free dollars a year...I mean they could add a new addition to their house with that kind of cash. That would make a fine down-payment on a new house. And ofcourse, they never have to worry about being punished...the sky is the limit..because they are all nazi at&t camera-net insiders and are banded together in a vow of secrecy, dishonesty and corruption. And then imagine an excluded talking back to them, the excluded is always at great risk just for breathing, like in the days of slavory, where the freed slave was expected to be greatful just to be allowed to live. That money must be like a drop in the bucket for the insiders who just print more, or steal more, or simply collect more interest.
The jailing of those who assault us and make us scratch with lasers is a good solution, because it's not violent. We are not firing lasers back at them (although by all means I see nothing wrong with that too), we are simply removing them, nonviolently from the playing field, instead of escalating a shoot each other with lasers global conflict, we can simply lock them away for 10 and 20 years and see how the playing field develops without them. Is there less violent laser and gun assaults as a result? I think the answer will probably be yes. It is the slow nonviolent removal of violent people from free society. This is the approach used in the drug and sex war, people are sent away for 10-20 years just for owning drugs, and then 100s of years for touching butts. Why not show the violent that 2 can play at this nonviolent game by sending away those laser assaulters for 10-20 years?

01-01-07
01/01/07
A happy time to you, since all times are new in the universe. And happy space to you too. I hope 2007 will bring everybody more happiness. Now is as good a time as any to stop violence and teach science.

There are many things on my mind, but one is that there may be much more iron and silicon in the universe than previously thought because of a simple mistake. People observe that the light from stars is mostly hydrogen, however, light we see from stars, as any chemist knows, can only come from the burning of some element. So if we see light from a star, it means that any spectral lines that relates to an element, only relate to those elements that are burned/destroyed. We do not see light from those elements in the center of stars, in the same way that reflected star light on a planet only can tell us about absorbed spectral lines from the surface of the planet...it tells us absolutely nothing about what is inside the planet. And so, although the spectrum of all stars is mainly hydrogen, it seems logical to presume that the center of all stars is mostly atoms such as iron and silicon (similar to the process that built the earth, which people strongly suspect has red hot liquid iron in the center people see from volcanos), the spectrum of these atoms is seen in novas (or novae), where a star has blown up and the inside is visible. So, although the surface of the star is mostly hydrogen, clearly a large portion of the inside are heavier atoms, nitrogen, oxygen, silicon, iron, and so multiply this quantity of iron times all the stars in the universe, and that is a sizable quantity of iron. So I think this is a basic mistake. If we add in the hydrogen and helium of nebulae there is probably more, but think of how many stars there are, and stars are the main matter in the universe, so clearly there is a large amount of matter in the form of silicon, aluminum, iron, etc. Just because we do not see the spectral lines from these elements, obviously, does not mean they are not there under the outer layers of hydrogen. Probably the ratio is more like 30% hydrogen, 10% helium, 8% carbon, 8% nitrogen, 8% carbon, 7% neon, 8% sodium, 7% aluminum, 7% silicon, 7% iron, etc. Clearly the inside of stars is not hydrogen, but heavier elements, in fact we can in some way simply say that the ratio of elements in any given star is probably relatively close to the ratio of elements naturally occuring in the universe. And so therefore, there is 20% hydrogen, 10% helium, 8% nitrogen, 6% oxygen, 5% iron, etc. not 99.9% hydrogen...that is clearly wrong (although ultimately all atoms contain hydrogen, in some sense all matter in the universe is 99% proton and neutron and ofcourse 100% photon).

One other quick note that it appears that there is an experiment, (of the Mossbauer effect), the Pound-Rebka experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound-Rebka_experiment shows that gravity red shifts light, and to me, this is a clear explanation that the reason light is red shifted from gaxalies is because of their relative velocity to the observer, but also can be from stretching from gravity. And I think this is a strong piece of evidence among others that the universe is probably infinitely large and old, far larger and older than the current estimate, and that the background radiation are simply photons from distant galaxies too far to see.

Yet another interesting truth. I was reading Asimov when one of his sentences seemed to me to resonate. Asimov had typed that because of privacy, the wireless communication made popular by Marconi and first demonstrated by Hertz would not replace wired communication through the phone line. And it got me thinking that, although there is encryption/encoding/scambling which makes wireless communication secrecy possible, still initially, people had to have preferred wired communication. And this is a very powerful truth. Because if the only way to send images from inside people's houses and heads is through wires, that really limits the choices of who could be behind the camera thought net. Since the only wires that connect everybody's house are electrical, telephone (and much later cable), clearly it has to be the electric and telephone companies that basically run the secret camera thought net at it's most basic level. There are only 2 wires that run through everybody's house, and with both...there is no way to tap into the lines without the company knowing, or ultimately, it seems clear that the company would have to know if somebody else is using their wire. It had to be Edison and Bell, GE and AT&T basically, and still is that own and run much of the camera thought net. And maybe how it works is that attached to the phone lines are cameras, microphones, infrared though sensors that send images on the phone lines (or maybe ever power lines although I doubt this), this image data is sent to the main telephone company stations where they archive it. So I think the public shouild start to enact laws to require public inspections of the telephone and electric companies, to require the electric and telephone companies to provide the public accessible copies of all these images. Clearly the major media pays AT&T for all the images, thoughts, and other data from inside people's homes. Even the lasers in everybody's house...although perhaps these are developed and built by Raytheon, Lockheed, and installed by GE and/or AT&T employees, either drawing power from the electric lines, or from light. Clearly the police and military have to be included in this secret camera net, because AT&T needs to make sure they are not going to be prosecuted for privacy violation, and perversion laws, etc. but the nature of this relationship is unknown to me as an excluded. Does the military and police have to pay for the images like the media and individual consumers do?

Privacy