Lords of the Nukes
Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear and Power Revisionism. Fully illustrated >3 hrs |
For all his life he perceived no Jewish connections with any of his interests—a tribute to the intense censorship of the issue. And he had no idea that Jews were extremely competent in getting what they wanted, but were not much interested in theories, and entirely happy with faked, adulterated, and emotionally-shrieked beliefs.
Ivor seems never to have thought that Jews exist as a worldwide bloc, or that spying might be fraudulent, or Jews might want to weaken the power of non-Jews world-wide, with expensive pointless projects, expensive propaganda, frauds, and engineered wars. He was however aware of Freemasonry among judges and the police.
Some of the issues he discussed originated in Jewish behaviour, but Ivor simply had no idea of that, and never found the means to connect the evidential dots.
He discussed the Athanasian Creed, but not the Jewish roots of Christianity, or the financing of churches, or the analogues in Islam. He was a Quaker, ignorant of its genesis by a Jew called Fox. He discussed 'Feminazis', without understanding that American-style 'feminism' was a Jewish plan to weaken families. He discussed homosexuality, but not the reasons Jews promoted it. He described the chaos of American 'hire-and-fire', but didn't understand how paper money was a policy device for those controlling it. He had no grasp of strategic swings, in for example inheritance taxes and income taxes, where specific 'goyim' are selected for destruction.
He knew education was in a mess, but never worked out why some people, in secret, wanted it that way. He knew immigration and housing were manipulated, but got nowhere in analysis. He knew (from experience) that the legal system 'did not exist' (his words, I think) without seeing beyond that. He was aware that a company he worked for, 'English Electric', was run by someone with a foreign name, but never pieced together Jewish finance in industries. Despite family involvement (in the Far East during the Second World War) he had no understanding of that war or the immense media propaganda push behind it. In this of course he was at one with most 'techies' and supposed 'techies'.
He had however picked up the light first defences of modern Jews—loose usage of 'racism', 'anti-semitism', 'Nazi'.
Rae West 28 Oct 2023
To use the science revisionism site searcher (just below), type the personal name(s), topics, or keywords, separated by space(s) and click on the 'button'. You will get extracts from files on this site containing some or all of your topics, in a new tab. |
Some links in my website: Modern Physics | AIDS fraud | Climate fraud | Skrabanek, medical critic | Jew inventions myths | Organophosphates | Jenson on world food | Wallace and evolution | Dyslexis | Salt in food | van Steenis on fine particles | Blood pressure hyddraulics | H G Wells at the end of his tether
IVOR CATT: EARLY LIFE (1935 –) Events 1940s-50s WORKING LIFE (1959 –1971) 1960s Logic Circuits & Computers 1960s books SELF EMPLOYED (1974 –1984) ... Weapons Teaching ... & PROTEST (1976 –2014) Chip design Electromagnetism Science suppression Knowledge and the Real World Finding Other Would-Be Radicals (1991–) Family Law 1970s-1990s Interlude: AIDS (1992–) [Warman, Hiram Caton, Louis Pascal, Neville Hodgkinson] TRYING TO ORGANISE ... Collecting Science Suppressees ... [Halton Arp, Hiram Caton, Chalmers, Cohen, Davidson, Falle, Ferguson, Harold Hillman, Hockenjos, Phil Holland, Lipschutz, Mahoney, Marsh, Brian Martin, Metzer, Miller, Moran, Moss, Pascal, Theocharis, Turin, Wallace, Martin J Walker, Walton] ... And More, Earlier, Suppressees [Aspden, Dingle, Dunn, Essen, Forman, Francksen, Gross, Hawking, Morris, Runcorn, Schmidt, Di Trocchio, Wellard, Williamson, Woodhouse] ... 2016 list of 6,000 Science Dissidents 'ICAF' (1993–1994) [Amnesty International, Harold Hillman, Catt, Schwabe, Brian Martin, Louis Pascal, Caton, Theocharis, Moran, Arp, Chomsky, Conrad Russell, Index on Censorship] Interlude: Conversation in 1995 'Freedom to Care' (1996–) [Chapman, Richard Ennals, Hunt, Ganatria, Lunn, Dick van Steenis, Hillman, Dunne, Jones] 'CAFAS' note ... Yet More Names Found en passant:- [Barbara Banks, H H Bauer (in Dec 2004), Derek Bryce-Smith (in Dec 2019), Bruce G Charlton (in May 2019), Michael T Deans, David Horrobin, Norman Hossack, Jennings, Gilbert Ling, W A P Manser, (July 2019) Harry Rantzen (= Henry Barnato Rantzen), Mike Todd (worked at the BBC), G A Wells, J Wheatley, Winfield | Munro, Laithwaite, de Reuck, Bryce-Smith, Trainor] British Law, notably Family Law; and Developments Imposed on Society 1980s-2000s OFFICIAL SCIENCE: PROF SIR DAVID KING FRS One example implicitly showing how vested interests (usually Jewish at present) get their way OFFICIAL SCIENCE: PUBLIC MUSEUMS AND LIBRARIES Examples from London LATER ADDITIONS [Nuclear revisionists, Miles Mathis science writings on charge fields and math, Frank McManus and salt, Psychology: Jews and critique; Jordan Peterson example of naivete; Second World War; 'COVID' and other medical frauds; (in Oct 2022) Raeto West—it occurred to me to add myself!] LOYALTY TO EVIDENCE: a short note on the difficulties DECLINES, FALLS, EXITS failures of would-be critics THE JEWISH QUESTION & SCIENCE only for serious people CONCLUSIONS, LESSONS SINCE 1945 [Alfred Russel Wallace, Lewis Fry Richardson, D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson, Antoine Béchamp & Pasteur, Peter Duesberg, Rudy Stanko, Ezra Pound] |
|
'It is one of the contradictions of our time that science, which is the source of power, and more particularly of governmental power, depends for its advancement upon an essentially anarchic state of mind in the investigator. The scientific state of mind is neither sceptical nor dogmatic. The sceptic holds that truth is undiscoverable, while the dogmatist holds that it is already discovered. ... Absence of finality is of the essence of the scientific spirit. The beliefs of the man of science are therefore tentative and undogmatic. But in so far as they result from his own researches, they are personal, not social. ... This conflict between the scientific spirit and the governmental use of science is likely ultimately to bring scientific progress to a standstill, since scientific technique will be increasingly used to instil orthodoxy and credulity.' – Bertrand Russell c. 1930 'It would carry us too far afield here to discuss how far the consciences of men of science may be able to get the upper hand of a trained and experienced governing class so as to insist upon such collective ideals as they are able to formulate, and how far a trained and experienced governing class may manoeuvre this medley of distressed and protesting intelligences into the position of a roster of mere "experts" available if called upon by the authorities, and otherwise out of consideration. The odds seem to me to be in favour of the latter possibility.' – H G Wells c. 1940 'There is a widespread belief that medical and biological research is very successful ... [M]any new drugs have been discovered and developed empirically, intensive care units...have been set up, new antibiotics have been found empirically and modified, transplantation...has become routine, cardiac surgery has become a major speciality, steroids have been used... [but] all these have been highly successful applications of simple technologies. ... [W]hat has been discovered about the genesis of cancer, multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's disease or schizophrenia[?] ... remarkably little ... a large amount is known about what they do, but remarkably little about how they act ... [B]asic medical, biological and pharmacological research has not been successful because it has not addressed the fundamental problems and assumptions inherent in most of the techniques.' – Harold Hillman c. 1995 — I believe Benedict Hillman, one of his two sons, may be working on a memorial to his life and work. I have no details, but doubt if there will be any discussion of Jewish medical frauds. All these people (and Ivor Catt) are not Jew-aware, and don't understand the parts played by secrecy, and by funding by Jews. - RW |
When a battery is connected to a resistor via two parallel wires, a current flows which depends on the voltage of the battery and the resistance of the resistor. Also, electric charge appears on the surface of the wires, and we concentrate on the electric charge on the bottom wire. In the case of a 12 volt car battery and four ohm car headlight bulb, the electric current is three amps and the resulting power in the lamp is 36 watts.This is nowhere near as straightforward as Ivor seems to imply when he says 'It is an elementary question about classical electrodynamics'. We have a pair of wires 300,000 km long; I think this is total length, not two wires each 300,000 km. The figure is evidently chosen to be the speed of light, in a vacuum, in one second. This parallel wire pair would go about four times round the equator, or halfway to the moon. Could a 12-volt car battery really light the bulb, since there's a huge elongated mass of wire with a huge surface area out there? Wouldn't the wire warm slightly? Another problem was Ivor's insistence on parallel wires: why not have a huge loop? Ivor just said "well, you're rejecting the two wire model which Heaviside used" without addressing the question.
Consider the case when the battery and lamp are connected by two very long parallel wires, their length being 300,000 kilometres. When the switch is closed, current will flow immediately into the front end of the wires, but the lamp will not light for the first second. A wave front travels forward between the wires at the speed of light, reaching the lamp after one second. This wave front comprises electric current, magnetic field, electric charge and electric field. Negative charge appears on the surface of the bottom wire. All of this is agreed by all experts.
Traditionally, when a TEM step (i.e. logic transition from low to high) travels through a vacuum from left to right, guided by two conductors (the signal line and the 0v line), there are four factors which make up the wave;
- electric current in the conductors
- magnetic field, or flux, surrounding the conductors
- electric charge on the surface of the conductors
- electric field, or flux, in the vacuum terminating on the charge.
The key to grasping the anomaly is to concentrate on the electric charge on the bottom conductor. The step advances one foot per nanosecond. [The 'one foot' oddity may have come from Grace Hopper: one billionth of 300,000 Km is .3 metres]. Extra negative charge appears on the surface of the bottom conductor to terminate the new lines (tubes) of electric flux which appear between the top (signal) conductor and the bottom conductor.
Since 1982 the question has been: Where does this new charge come from?
Not from the upper conductor, because by definition, displacement current is not the flow of real charge. Not from somewhere to the left, because such charge would have to travel at the speed of light in a vacuum.
'I here [in one of his letters] submit that the Catt Anomaly is the best honed case for testing the current state of the Scientific Reception System. If anyone in the evolving list disagrees, they should say so and 'resign' from the list. The effort is only justified if the case is the best to arise during this quarter-century.'His belief in the importance of his anomaly remained for the rest of his life. He had two colleagues who agreed, or seemed to agree, Davidson and Walton. Ivor used the same wording, diagrams, and phrases, for more than forty years; there are now some online videos. I don't think many people were convinced, but nobody seemed to reply, either. The Natural Philosophy Alliance made some space for him, but that organisation appears simply to be just another 'gatekeeper', and nothing came of all this. (A similar fake 'skeptic' site is metabunk.org, prepared to debunk minor and unimportant matters. Just to amuse myself I posted (Dec 2015) on debunking the atomic bomb myth at Hiroshima, which post of course was disallowed).
'[1993]: Please bear in mind the Catt Anomaly and the broader Theory C. That structure has been honed down for many decades now, and will almost certainly be the best constructed piece of suppressed (or to be more accurate, ignored) scientific information. ... a researcher into suppression ... should keep it up front.'
'... I regard the Catt Anomaly as the best honed quantum of information to attempt to invade the Establishment with, following the ideas in the first column of your jan/feb89 article. Can ostracism succeed in such a case? I feel that this is an important experiment.'
“ .. We think we'll eventually disclose it; but to whom? All these symposia, meetings, universities, laboratories, publications, but there's nothing there.. all these people, Catt, Hillman, West, perhaps they're missing the point.. there isn't anyone competent.. they're all scribes.. they're copying old texts.. But there are no priests! All there are are teachers.. I thought, well there are people who write the textbooks, but they don't.. they just copy from earlier textbooks.. We've come to the end of the age of enlightenment .. nothing has come from modern physics, no practical results.. science is the new circus to impress the masses.. I did A level calculus.. got very high marks.. but I didn't understand it at all.. You know what universities are like; you pick and choose parts of subjects; well, I said I'll do engineering, I want to do something different, I want to do all of the subject.. I got a two two, I got thrown out.. you get examined in those parts of the subjects that can be tested.. becomes professionalised.. you get people with firsts who think, well, I must understand it.. but they're uneasy about it.. if I'd been a careerist I'd have picked just those subjects I'd have been good at.. Theocharis said to me it's refreshing to meet somebody who knows the difference between a description and a theory.. They're like lorry drivers, it's like the difference between lorry drivers and highway engineers.. they don't know there's a subject there.. so there isn't suppression; how can they suppress anything?.. if you write to a bus driver about new engines, a bus driver won't have a world view about new engines.. If they don't know theories exist, if they don't have the concept of a theory.. they just know a description.. if they don't know there are ideas, how can they talk about them? .. they keep telling me the structure of what you're saying is wrong.. but there isn't a structure.. The world's like say 500 BC, not the Greeks, Vikings or somebody like that. We're like a couple of Vikings talking about theories, wondering why doesn't anyone answer these letters? But there isn't anyone, there are just scribes, there aren't any priests.. You can do things empirically.. like Marconi.. that's how computer chips developed; I was there, I know.. it was just development work.. it's like computer architecture; that's not theory based either.. ”
“ Ivor had considerable contempt for academics, but never developed antennae able to identify subtypes. I haven't been able to relocate quotations from his site; but US universities run by Jews and filled with 'positive discrimination' and fully censored against Jewish attitudes are one type obvious to me. Somewhere in his site he puzzles over Nobel Prize winners: can they even add up? African education shows the same sort of pattern. So does the BBC.
In recent years, Ivor spent time collecting evidence for his own reasonableness, foreseeing a time when he may be dismissed as over-argumentative. But the fact remains that he avoided giving straight answers. ”
4 August 2022
A play by Lilian Helmann, 'Toys in the Attic', is me, he said; I assumed at first he meant Helmann had based it on him, but this wasn't the case. [March 1993:] ... this play is about an inventor who's destroyed by his wife and daughter: he had to be a failure, he had $100,000 in his pockets.. they fixed it so he was robbed.. When he [Ivor] was about to sign a contract with Clive Sinclair for £500,000, he said, they called in a psychologist, who was there till early in the morning. He was mad; people don't sign contracts like that. He had to have ruined everything he touched. Catt couldn't throw him out, since he didn't want to produce evidence of violent tendencies. So they ensured he signed early; if they had waited he'd have got a million, he said.
In his own words: An extremely vicious divorce was only one of a number of catastrophes which hit me all at once, and was by no means the worst of them. ... However, the three people who were attacking me the most (perjured affidavits making different false criminal charges against me) failed to unite, which is one of the reasons why I survived. They continually warred with each other as well, although I was by far the major target. All the most serious criminal and civil charges except three were made against me in sworn affidavit, all false, by three separate people. The reason why seven people, independently of each other ... launched different attacks on me was that not only had I rapidly become very wealthy, but it was also very glamorous. Clive Sinclair hyped me above even himself. This, including my ownership of two adjacent houses, each worth £250,000, made me a sitting duck. The resentment and viciousness was without limit and without ethical, legal or other restraint, on the part of every one of those nearest to me except one. With a corrupt and destructive legal fabric, it is difficult to understand why I survived ... without emotional scar. ... It was a terrifying time, lasting some years. The most frightening was the mad shrink, Bryan Robinson, who kept getting invited into my home by my then wife. He kept after me for years, desperate to drug me. Down at Greenham Common, where I was technical adviser to the women demonstrators; when I told the top woman there that there was a crazy shrink in St. Albans who was desperate to drug me, she said, "Is it Bryan Robinson?" He was notorious. However, my wife had a posse of three shrinks after me, including Anthony Clare; not just Robinson. At the same time, a number of other disasters befel me ... |
Ivor Catt's list of collected names of suppressees in about 1995 and commentators; these were people whom Ivor thought might become allies. (This is a bit of a jumble, accurately resembling the reality of the mixture of people. NB: My summaries may be only approximately right):–
Halton 'Chip' Arp The 'red shift' skeptic, an astronomer who found stars with the wrong shift for their supposed distances. He was sacked, or at least not allowed back into his observatory. 1983 was the 'first non-cosmological red shift discovery' by Arp I could find, in New Scientist. More or less by chance I saw a lecture by Arp in London, in 2000, and recorded comments by him: this is a tape recording I made.. Arp published e.g. A Catalogue of Southern Peculiar Galaxies and Associations - Volume I Positions and Descriptions, Volume II Selected Photographs. Ivor Catt did not have much to do with Arp, partly because he didn't know if Arp was trying to rejoin the 'mainstream' or was a genuine rebel.
Hiram Caton In 1983 Derek Freeman had published Margaret Mead and Samoa: The Making and Unmaking of an Anthropological Myth which (in effect) said Mead (1901-1978) was a fraud, her South Sea Island free love paradise being invented or passed off; she for example didn't know the language, and spent only six weeks there. This ought to have caused a huge shock throughout anthropology. In fact, even as late as 2006 Hiram Caton was reviewing books on Amazon and muffling this point. Mead was part of the immense fraud of Boas and his Jewish pseudo-science, with many others, including the self-renamed 'Ashley Montagu' (Israel Ehrenberg). Caton appears to be a Jewish apologist, who omits secret Jewish activity. For example, he described the USSR as 'socialist', something impossible to anyone with a grasp of the issues. I recall he mentioned Sidney Hook, a New York Jewish 'thinker'. Caton, judging by Amazon review comments, seems to have no idea about the claims of Alfred Russel Wallace to have originated the theory of evolution; he seemed not to realise that the long infancy of human beings made some sort of anti-infanticide mechanism essential.
He took a view on AIDS taken from Duesberg, reasonably enough, but his own book, The AIDS Mirage, was not much above the level of gossip: By 1988 I had concluded that AIDS was not a disease entity, that the CDC definition of AIDS was diagnostic codswallop, and that there was no compelling evidence that HIV causes immunosuppression. Peter Duesberg sent a bucket of papers that I closely studied. In a letter of December 8, 1992, I wrote him of a view I formed four years previous: "Your initial article on the HIV model seemed to me one of the finest scientific criticisms I have read... ever. The 1991 article in Proceedings and the use of drugs article are of the same quality."
Some of my notes on Hiram Caton on AIDS
Caton wrote two articles in 1988 which impressed Catt, but no permanent regard developed, as was perhaps predictable. Harold Hillman visited Caton, and remarked (in effect) that the South Sea islands as a sex paradise for males seemed to have been adopted in practice by Caton, who he said (I think) was living with some young non-white woman. Caton was exquisitely superficial; his attempts to explain world histories, and characters such as Machiavelli and Leonardo da Vinci, Pascal and E O Wilson (selected at random) are perfect examples of failure to deepen and enrich knowledge; instead he repeated others' works with added verbal packaging. He was 'Head of the School of Applied Ethics at Griffith University' in Australia, which 'ranks in the top 3 percent of universities globally', or so some people seem to believe.
Later I pieced together that Caton liked Sidney Hook, a New York Jew 'philosopher', who liked Bolsheviks and must have been aware of Jewish fake anthropology and history. [Added 20 June 2021 - RW: It struck me that if 'Covid' turns out to be a huge death injection scheme, Jewish practice is to announce it beforehand, and conceivably Caton was a small part of this policy, denouncing the contribution of AIDS and other fake diseases yet to be announced.] What a shame he's dead. Maybe Joan Shelton with her media collaborators was part of this, too?
David Chalmers In North London. Had views on the gravitational constant, G, and problems with its dimensions; denied circular polarisation of light; and had some explanation for the two slit experiment with light. I sent Chalmers a copy of a tape of Prof Basil Hiley, on quantum physics; probably garbage, and also one of Phil Holland talking alternative stuff. Chalmers claimed to be able to work out the construction of nuclei from the components & to be able to predict the properties of an isotope. Hard to assess...
Bernie Cohen, Prof. of Electronics. I never found out what claims he was making; maybe something to do with strategies for digital processes, such as multiple attempts to phone the same number.
Cohen has some online material included in Ivor Catt's untechnical rage passages; with typical Jewish misdirecting dishonesty Catt fails to notice the sound reasons for opposing Jews. Probably Ivor never understood any of it, despite claiming to be an expert on propaganda, and only protested because he thought I'd directed people from his electronics efforts. For the record, I never considered his material was serious. I could never get a straight answer to questions. [3 Aug 2022]
Malcolm Davidson and Dr. D. S. Walton. Co-published "Digital Hardware Design", in 1979 with Catt. I could never find what this book had that they considered novel.
Dr Sam Falle of Leeds: Ivor told me he 'made a prediction which was blocked for 10 years'. And mathematical modelling, e.g. of gas; 'his department has a, or the, leading model of spread of fire.' And wars: he sounded to me a sub-Lewis Fry Richardson character. 'Sam Falle points out [1994] that the vast majority of ... science students in the UK are in any case foreign, and the foreign proportion is rising. He equates this with the increasing employment, first of slaves and then of foreign mercenaries in the Roman Legions, shortly before the Roman Empire collapsed. Falle sees a similarity between the role of the engineer today and the soldier of yore. ..'
John Ferguson, southern England, seems to be the author of The Religions of the Roman Empire (1970) who in turn recommended T. R. Glover's The Conflict of Religions in the Early Roman Empire (1920). (The Roman Empire is quite often used to test rather crude historical hypotheses, I suppose because of its remoteness in time, and the fact that most people have heard of it and have views on it).
Harold Hillman Had a medical theory about cell structures: he thinks most of these are, in fact, artifacts, caused by the process of slicing with a microtome. This is what I gathered from Ivor Catt; in fact, Hillman's a critic of many techniques used in cell biology research, including electron microscopy applied to soft tissue, and biochemistry conducted without control experiments; Hillman says there's been no progress in medical research—apparent contrary examples are mere improvements in technology. As regards ethics, Hillman thinks any colleague of reasonable status who writes, should get an answer, as a sort of Hippocratic principle.
Harold Hillman had a lot of influence on me, though not on biologists, biochemists, and medical people: a few weeks before writing this piece, and incidentally a victim of stroke, he told me he still has no school or group of followers. My website has a huge amount on this man Harold Hillman and Biology. Without Ivor, I doubt I would ever have contacted Harold. He regarded himself as Jewish, and we fell out after my awareness that the 'Holocaust' was fraudulent. He was not very impressed with other science dissidents: "It's such hard work being a dissident.. most of them want to join the establishment.. if their work's accepted they forget all the others.. they're only interested if they think they can help them..." For years Ivor put this on his site: Riposte; I make the commitment that anyone wishing to counter any assertion made on my websites will be guaranteed a hyperlink to a website of their choosing at the point where the disputed assertion is made. However, it became irritatingly clear that his 'guarantee' was worthless.
Harold on How academic dissidents fail to co-operate
Eugen Hockenjos then in north London. Interested in legal questions of divorced fathers without child access.
Walter Philip 'Phil' Holland was something like the physics equivalent of Hillman. He had a theory of 'Nendorecs', 'Nuclei with an Equal Number of Degrees of Order Resonating in an Electron Cloud Boundary' which he tried to apply to compounds, and also living things and towns. This wasn't convincing to me. More interesting seemed his grasp of things like triple points—he had a new theory about clouds, phases of water, and the weather. My website has this: How Much of Modern Physics is a Fraud?. The sections on 'superfluid helium', and 'myth of speed of light as a limit', are easy to understand and well worth reading. Phil was not skeptical about moon landings, or Auschwitz, or Christianity; and he disbelieved in Darwin, but also Einstein. He worked all his life at Windscale/ Sellafield, but as yet I haven't tried to get him to help decipher 'nuclear power'.
Heinz Lipschutz, a pilot in Wales, (now dead) wrote Confessions of a Frustrated Inventor in March 1988, which included lengthy mention of his U-plane, which he first patented 35 years before. He re-surfaced in The Independent in May 1991. Now, the technical journals announce it as an exciting new idea in submarines! So far, there is no [known] activity whatsoever in Britain. The U-plane goes down—or may go down—to the sea floor. Lipschutz inventions included a two-stroke engine with double the power-to-weight ratio. He claimed to have approached Marconi before the Second World War with ideas for aircraft guidance, with no response; he claimed more planes were lost trying to find their way home than due to German attack. This is a telephone chat between Lipschutz and myself Lipschutz on U planes (i.e. underwater airplane style craft) recorded in May 1996. The second half is his account of inertial navigation of bombers; Lipschutz thought many pilot deaths could have been saved (and many German deaths increased).
M. Mahoney, University of Santa Barbara, described as 'a leading expert in suppression'. He seems to comment on peer-reviewed papers. A test-case was Peters & Ceci, who in 1982 tested the peer-review system by submitting almost identical articles to journals which had already published them, typically two years later, but with names and organisations changed, or with just the conclusions changed to something less supportive of expected outcomes. Few of these tricks were detected. (Note that some Internet sites now specialise in detecting plagiarism. And other sites specialise in rewrites so that a piece of text is disguised, for example by changing phrase order and inserting synonyms).
Joe Marsh, UMIST Archivist in the history of science.
Brian Martin, of the Dept. of Science and Technology Studies, University of Wollongong (guess which country!) Author of Intellectual Suppression (1986; Links to entire book as a PDF file). Brian Martin also wrote the introduction (1991) to Louis Pascal's piece (below) claiming the origin of AIDS was a result of would-be oral polio vaccine in Africa in 1958-59, made from living monkeys' kidneys.
Ivor wrote: ... my extensive research into the Politics of Knowledge led me to write to Brian Martin in Australia that I believed that if one came up with a potentially major contribution towards the amelioration of the AIDS epidemic, one would be prevented from publishing it. Brian responded by saying that he knew such a man, Louis Pascal in New York ...' And there were others: In July 1985 an expert panel assembled by WHO [World Health Authority] decided the ... theory was not credible ... . In May 1987 Eva Snead, a San Antonio physician, announced on New York local radio the theory that contaminated live oral polio vaccine led to AIDS. [And 1988?] The independent decision by Herbert Ratner, M.D., specialist in preventive medicine, public health director of Oak Park, Illinois, to link OPV with AIDS, was blocked by The Lancet. ...
It's worth trying to tease out some of the fantastic complications here: that 'AIDS' actually existed, and had been proven to be caused by one virus, and had known effects; in fact, virology, certainly in 1984, was a highly suspect science, detection being only by indirect methods, some involving highly suspect electron microscopy work. It was not even certain that polio was caused by a virus, or that vaccination would work, if it was. However, as a money-making scheme, AIDS was highly successful. See below.
Brian Martin's work seems to have been mostly as an editor. Intellectual Suppression starts with a piece on Australian scientists and the 'Cold War', written by a 'journalist and film-maker', which shows no evidence of awareness that e.g. the AASW [Australian Association of Scientific Workers] was very likely a Jewish front. Anyway, it's clear Brian Martin had no methodology for detecting 'suppression'.
Brian Martin. Nov 2022, on 'COVID'. He appears here as one of the names in a Springer Verlag PDF paper, for free distribution (a first for Springer?) supposedly on COVID censorship and suppression stratagems. I think the name with an Anglo-Saxon name, I'd guess to make it look more palatable. He was at the University of Wollongong, but seems to have been made a professor late in life; I'd guess an unqualified Jew. He investigated things like AIDS and pesticides and nuclear stuff but always appeared to me to be controlled opposition. The pdf download is worth a look for its disinformation aspects, i.e supposed plain speaking on COVID media stratagems, without ever doubting 'the virus'.
Kurt Metzer somehow was contacted by Ivor: I think in his earlier years he'd been named in some journalistic physics piece. He was German, worked with Pauli of the 1927 Solvay Conference, left 'Nazi Germany', and 'won an Exhibition to Trinity', but wasn't successful continuing physics. Lived in squalor, with mental life filled with bits of such people as Heisenberg and Schrödinger.
Bill Miller in Scotland was described by Ivor as 'my patron for three decades in the matter of Wafer Scale Intergation...' He was 'intrigued by the politics of fundamental scientific advance'.
Gordon Moran was first contacted after newspaper discussed his work in uncovering a piece of bogus art history in Siena, an equestrian portrait of highly questionable authenticity. His initial point of friction was the Kunsthistorisches Institut, Florence, apparently an art research library which censored out his point of view. (Try searching for Guidoriccio or Guido Riccio). His book Silencing Scientists and Scholars in Other Fields: Power, Paradigm Controls, Peer Review and Scholarly Communications ($73.25 hardback, $39.50 paperback) was published in 1998. Perhaps ironically, the price suggests the book is intended for the library market.
Margaret Moss wrote to Ivor: "The relevance of exclusion diets and therapy with nutrients to chronic diseases is suppressed, as is the damage done by mercury in dental fillings, and mould toxins in combine harvest grain." Ivor seems not to have followed through here.
Louis Pascal: Ivor took great interest in What Happens When Science Goes Bad The Corruption of Science and the Origin of AIDS: A Study in Spontaneous Generation. Pascal had been told Kinshasa and Kigali were centres of the supposed pandemic. Pascal knew of the world's first mass polio vaccination campaign, more or less in the same areas. It was of course experimental. By 1987, he'd worked out his theory. After numerous turnings-down, it was published, or made available, in December 1991 by Brian Martin. (This was before the days of mass Internet). Harold Hillman made an edited version, but took out Pascal's rhetoric, something Pascal was very unhappy about.
Theo Theocharis took physics, at Imperial College in London, but became interested in philosophies of science, and the related sociologies and psychologies of physicists. He lived in squalor in a privately-rented flat, drawing social security, with a lodger paying expenses. Ivor liked him. Here are some topics, extracts and quotations:
• Shirley Williams in 1971 in The Times complained that increased science spending hadn't increased GNP. By 1986 there was a Save British Science campaign, with much agonising over 'cuts' in other countries, and so on. 'Nature' (15 Oct 1987 and/or 16 Feb 1993) published a letter complaining of the ludicrous nature of much of science, by Theocharis and M Psimopoulos, 'in the Department of Physics, Imperial College.' Well, they were 'in' the building.Luca Turin a London University biophysicist trying to work out how the sense of smell operates. Catt knew him; my guess is as a result of an incident at the Pasteur Institute in France: according to Wikipedia, '[Luca] Turin and his colleague Nicole Ropert reported ... that they believed some of [Henri] Korn's research on neurotransmitters was based on fabricated results. ... he was told to find work outside France ...' Note that Harold Hillman's large-scale critiques includes neurotransmitters as a fake; on this basis alone it seems likely Luca Turin must have been right. And this case probably adds evidence to Jewish science frauds.
• Popper, Imre Lakatos, T S Kuhn, and Feyerabend were Theo's bêtes noires. However I don't think he understood the difference between falsifiability of a single observation, and falsifiability of a theory; and also he doesn't seem to have grasped Popper's objection to e.g. Freud was that it was 'irrefutable' in a different sense from other, testable, theories. He said excitedly but wrongly: "The earth is (approximately) a sphere" is not a scientific statement because it is not falsifiable. Theo also didn't like the idea that observations are fully theory-laden, and untheoretical items of observation simply do not exist.
• His summary of the problems with modern science included: "Acausality, the dual nature of things, the speed of light is not constant with reference to an observer, and the principle of relativity itself". He listed amusing comparisons of theology with modern physics, without showing the comparisons were sound..
• Here's an example of his style from 'London Student Skeptics' (11 May 1992): In ordinary English (and I think in the original Latin) the term "error" denotes both the notion "slight inaccuracy" and the entirely different concept "complete incorrectness". ... 2500 years ago Epicharmus of Cos remarked that it is the letter and the number.. that separate us from other animals.. but [these] though of course essential are only a small fraction of the totality of factors that give us the possibility of becoming civilised.. There are also observacy, logicacy, analytacy, synthetacy, and.. significacy. The set of all these factors I refer to as epistemacy. [He explains literacy is knowledge of, familiarity with, letters, words, sentences, texts, language, grammar, syntax; and so on - observacy with the techniques of observation, mensuration, experimentation; .. analysis or resolution, the skill of breaking up a complex system into simple components.. synthetacy familiarity with the reverse process.. recombining, putting together again the constituent parts.. Significacy is the knowledge of the correct meaning, the precise essence, the true significance of words and phrases, symbols and equation, processes and operation, techniques and methods. ...
• Theo noted the many clashes among scientists: I remember he handed me a photocopy of an obituary of either Michael Ventris (of Linear B) or his official rival. And he commented on Harrison winning his competition for a timepiece and having endless problems getting paid: the then-government didn't go to Oxbridge for a solution to the longitude issue! An 'amateur' is a lover of a subject; a professional does it 'for a fee'.
• "[Theocharis] found in USSR, Stalin was anti-modern physics; then in about 1936 there was a sudden change.. the physicists all disappeared.. replaced by modern physicists. And he looked into the connection between anti-semitism and modern physics.." Probably this was connected to Jewish plans for uranium and the atom bomb hoax—but such ideas were ten to fifteen years in the future.
• "Alexander killed more Greeks than Persians" he said, "but don't say that to any Greek!" I don't think he ever questioned that modern Greeks were descended from ancient Greeks, though this seems unlikely.
He disliked partisan histories; Greeks and Turks are taught different versions, with potentially catastrophic results. "Salonika (some connection with Thessalonika; 2nd city of Greece, NE of Athens, where Ataturk was born or at least 'came from'), had the biggest Jewish population of any city in the world in about 1900, being multicultural with Jews the greatest minority. Now, after the war of I think 1922, and Cyprus, young Greek nationalists want a war in the Aegean to recover Constantinople; and Theo thinks an agreement between Israel and Turkey, which survived e.g. the Gulf War possibly even strengthened, might be an attempt to recover several islands and Salonika."
Bryan G. Wallace of Florida, author of The Farce of Physics (about 1990). Ivor wanted Wallace to answer two questions: the impedance of free space, and root mu over epsilon. I don't think he replied, or that they met. Some years later, The Farce of Physics was posted on Internet. I don't think it was ever revised.
A similar writer is/was Nevile Martin Gwynne. Click here for his article on Einstein and his history of disputes within the relativity 'community' in the English-speaking world.
Dave Walton, Co-author. Unfortunately in 1997 I found by phone-call that everything he said could have been scripted by Ivor; the phrasing etc and outdated technical references etc and stuff out of Kuhn more or less the same.
Other Collected Names of Suppressees and Commentators
Some from a list by J L Linsley Hood from about 1982, a previous generation of objectors; I've added others, something like twenty years more recent, since they roughly speaking belong together.
Harold Aspden of a journal "Speculations in Science....", controlled by Aspden et al, who gave a 'rude rejection' to a Catt piece. I never established what the point was of this journal.
Herbert Dingle (now dead) became mildly notorious when he changed his mind about relativity many years after contributing to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.
Robert Dunn Quaker (who 'served on Meeting for Sufferings for six years in the 1970s'.) Ivor was a Quaker, and from time to time attempted to interest Quakers in contentious issues. (Since writing this, I noted an interesting piece by Miles Mathis, showing that Fox, the founder of the Quakers, was probably a crypto-Jew).
Louis Essen according to Catt, the world's leader in time, at NPL [National Physical Laboratory] ".. I went to see him.. world famous.. FRS.. he made the first caesium clock or whatever.. he ought to be really sure of himself, he'll talk.. he panicked.. he told me he was weak on maths.. he'd got the mathematicians to work on it.. He said to me there was an error about the nature of time.. he thought they'd be thrilled.. the leading name in the world on measurement of time found an error! He had no idea there were problems in science.. the head of the NPL said don't associate this with us.. the Institute of Physics said they'd publish, he had galley proofs.. they never published..."
Paul Forman, Smithsonian Institution. Seems to be Forman, P. (1971) Weimar culture, causality, and quantum theory, 1918-1927: adaptation of German physicists and mathematicians to a hostile intellectual environment, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 3, 1-115. Probably part of the demonisation of Germany. after 1945 as 'anti-rational'.
C B Francksen electromagnetism commenter, I think
Michael Gross As to mercury in dental fillings. "Michael Gross told me that in dentistry they made the mistake of looking for ions not molecules (or vice versa) and so failed to find the Hg being emitted from the fillings. He finally heard of a researcher in the USA who was also suppressed, who put tooth fillings into sheep and then found Hg all over their bodies. When the profession said it came from somewhere else, he used an Hg isotope, yet still he was suppressed. Michael Gross said they were suppressing the info because of the threat of large scale lawsuits suing for damages, but finally, decades later, they gradually moved away from Hg because of the danger. (He knew the dentists were looking for the wrong thing for Hg because he came from another discipline). This of course is one of the causes of suppression; the entrenched mafia protect their ignorance and block information inflow from outside. In a perverse way, similarly, Runcorn justified rejection of plate tectonics on the grounds of lack of knowledge or emphasis by entrenched groups, but thought of it as merely unfortunate rather than insidious. He had no doubt that all parties were honest, earnest searchers after the truth."
Steven Hawking [not a 'suppressee'] "... I say that science was betrayed by 'modern physics'. However, there exists another division; between the Hawking coterie and the modern physics community. Mainstream modern physics withdraws from Hawking, who because of his professional position is the most credible of the meta-religious (from their point of view). .... Hawking is trying to ride both tigers; Modern Physics and Religious Modern Physics. Partly he does this because he is a macro-physicist (stars) and not a micro-physicist (quarks, strangeness). He would claim ignorance about the quark. This introduces another division in physics; the modern physics man being essentially a particle physics (micro) man, while Hawking talks about stars and big bang and so forth. ..."
W T Morris seems to have joined in the electromagnetism discussions
Professor Runcorn at Imperial College, on geology and plate tectonics [June 1994:] "... Runcorn had dual experience of suppression. I understood that Plate Tectonics, or as he terms it "continental drift", was ignored when first proposed around 1910. Then in the '40s Runcorn and his co-researcher in space physics brought their knowledge of magnetic fields in heavenly bodies to bear on the earth; found variations in the earth's magnetic field which was conclusive proof of continental drift; and published the idea a few decades late. Plate tectonics was then accepted after a delay of a few decades. He had also complained to Theocharis about the editor of Nature refusing to publish recent work of his.
When I actually listened to Runcorn, I was astonished to find that his lengthy monologue excluded the possibility that suppression exists in science. Unprompted, he went through a lengthy explanation as to why various specialist groups of various eras were justified in rejecting (which he totally confused with "suppressing") the idea of continental drift, until he came along with the convincing evidence. He further asserted that continental drift was widely discussed between 1910 and 1950, which was untrue. ..."
[Feb 1996]: Ivor told me with a big and repeating giggle-like laugh that Runcorn was hooked on freebies—lecturing to the Royal Society, back from a freebie. He was battered to death in an American hotel room on a freebie! [Laugh] Murdered in a hotel room in San Diego—that's what I get from all these scientists.. they're busy preparing papers for international conference next week, and next month they're taking their family to a free trip to Australia ...
Ulrich Schmidt, New Delhi, India. Seems to have studied physics in Germany, possibly around the time Solvay had fixed its form.
Federico Di Trocchio, Rome, Italy Author on 'heresies' in science; I believe a book was published by Di Trocchio, in Italian and/or Spanish, the title translated as Misunderstood Genius, on one or more of the people listed by Catt.
M G Wellard wrote about the work of James Clerk Maxwell
Colwyn Williamson, University of Swansea. Seems to have been involved in campaigning for academic freedom. Ivor Catt considered he in effect was only concerned with keeping official bodies of knowledge tidy, not with new unwelcomed material, although the Education Reform Act 1988 seems to guarantee it: "academic staff have freedom within the law to question and test received wisdom and to put forward new ideas and controversial or unpopular opinions without placing themselves in jeopardy of losing their jobs"
Dr. J. Woodhouse, Dept. of Engineering, Cambridge, on the acoustics of violin strings. (He may, or may not, be connected with James Beament, who wrote on the myth of the Stradivarius, by which he meant the sound quality doesn't need the apparatus of varnish, glue, body shape, and so on).
Harold Hillman was a founder member of Amnesty International. On International Campaign for Academic Freedom, Harold Hillman tried to found ICAF with these people:-
H G Wells on the difficulties of co-operation (among whites?): 'What concerns us more directly here are those meetings and movements and discussions that occurred when the idea of the League of Nations was being shaped. These deliberations brought home to me the confused divergence of historical preoccupations among those taking part in them. Their minds were full of broken scraps of history, irrational political prejudices, impossible analogies. Everyone saw the idea from a different angle and seemed prepared to realise it by the hastiest of compromises. ... But the difficulty of producing these two reports opened my eyes to the enormous obstacles in the way of all volunteered co-operation. It seemed impossible to hold a team together. They differed upon endless points and they would not come together to hammer them out. They were all too intent upon what they considered more immediately important things. Our chief financial supporter deserted us to go off wool-gathering upon his own lines. He could not see what need there was for all this highbrow research. But we were all going off upon our own lines. We had already disintegrated before we were disregarded.'
- Ivor Catt
- Christian Schwabe (biochemist) tried to discredit evolutionary theory, relying on biochemical techniques, which 'proved' structures existed which couldn't have evolved. Schwabe naturally thought this disproves Darwinism. Instead, it's supporting evidence that the techniques are defective. Hillman could presumably have pointed this out, but didn't like to. This is my archived copy of his website. (He may have updated it)
- Brian Martin (an American in Australia; see above).
- AIDS dissidents including Louis Pascal and Hiram Caton, also Americans. See above.
- Theo Theocharis, a dissident in physics. See above.
- Gordon Moran. See below.
- Halton Arp, revisionist astrophysicist, was discussed, but not contacted. See above.
- Noam Chomsky, one of whose books was at that time being printed as a mass market paperback, was I think contacted. Apart from knowing very little about science, Chomsky would not be likely to be helpful for reasons discussed here Manufacturing Consent and The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda. Anyway; this came to nothing.
- Conrad Russell, author of The English Civil War was involved with other group(s) at about the same time concerned with censorship. I know now he would not have been of any use, since he had no idea about science, and no idea about censorship: his main concern was that funding might be reduced for important books—like his.
- Index on Censorship were approached in April 1993, according to my notes. This organisation is essentially political, with the function of ignoring evidence not liked by elite groups. Their aim is to publicise their opponents, not their own shortcomings: thus (e.g.) Iran can be accused of scandalous secrecy over nuclear issues, but Israel remains uncommented. Or US war crimes are ignored; any others are treated with presumably mock horror. And of course their science awareness must be close to zero.
Harold had tried to arrange a Conference on Academic Suppression in 1984. He could raise no 'funding' for it, and as far as I know it came to nothing. Later, he thought 'Academic Freedom' would be a better title. One problem was deciding who could join: perhaps an alternative refereeing system, replacing so-called peer review? Should such people be identified? Another problem was separating the politics of suppression from the actual substance at issue. (The issue of full-on censorship, for example in nuclear issues, is another problem; naturally, not addressed). And another was the difficulty of summing up each case: suppose people are unconvincing, poor talkers, or simply refuse to answer detailed questions? And what happens if a case is weak, or relies on hard-to-locate evidence? What happens if there are no experts? ['David Burnett, a senior pathologist, told me that "experts" in the virology field would panic over the LP theory because it spanned too many disciplines']
Ivor had grandiose plans: ' ... a conference ... should such money become available ...(but ... it would in my opinion be better spent otherwise). ... [S]uch a conference launches the matter, the published proceedings reinforce its place ... We need two tiers. First, a board, which has responsibility for statements made on behalf of ASAF. ... I think an individual board member should act on his own if he adjudges it reasonable; preferably by getting a "no answer means yes" from other board members; .. The level below the board will be on the notepaper of press releases etc but will not have approved actions in advance..'
Unsurprisingly, and with no money, this project failed.
'Freedom to Care' ('FtC') by contrast was successfully established, in 1992, I think by Hunt, Pink (whistleblower on psychiatric patients being beaten up), and Chapman, as a company limited by guarantee. It is now part of Netzkraft Movement which has 2,291 participants and is funded by Spix, which I assume is a German charitable money umbrella. Freedom to Care is a whistleblowers help group. Any science revisionism seems to have receded; replaced by falsification of records, thefts from patients, abuse by nurses, undeclared income.
Chris Chapman Excerpts from: 'Fraud at Leeds', Laboratory Practice,Volume 41 No. 11 & 12 pp 6, 10 / 36, 37. By Alex Crawford. 'In 24 years with Leeds General Infirmary, former top-grade biochemist Dr Chris Chapman built up an excellent reputation as an expert in immunoassay development. The kits he developed saved the National Health Service an estimated £2m. But, even after such a splendid record of achievement, Dr Chapman was made redundant in July, the day before his fiftieth birthday. It all began to go wrong for him in 1986, when his unit became part of the chemical pathology department, jointly managed by the Leeds Western Health Authority and Leeds University. Almost immediately, he came across the corrupt activities of acting head of department Dr Colin Toothill, who was using NHS resources to run a private lead-testing service and was channelling thousands of pounds into accounts that he controlled. Dr Chapman was so incensed that he reported this corruption to the internal auditor, who brought in the statutory auditor. After the corruption was investigated, he received the following letter, dated 14 October 1987, from Leeds Western Health Authority assistant treasurer (internal audit) Richard Sumpner: "... I should, therefore, like to thank you both personally and on behalf of the treasurer's department, and trust that under the new head of department you will enjoy better times." Unfortunately for Dr Chapman, better times did not come with the arrival of the new head of department, Professor John Whicher, and another top grade biochemist, Dr Ian Barnes. ...' Chapman had a particular loathing for Vincent Marks, though hew too naive to investigate Jewish links. He accumulated a huge collection of files—liable to happen in these cases. The events at Leeds were investigated at a high level, by Merlyn Rees, though his report seems to have been a whitewash. Unfortunately, Chapman died of cancer in 1998.
Richard Ennals, investigating Private hospitals in Britain after a family death.
Geoff Hunt; background in philosophy of science and ethics. 'Director, European Centre for Professional Ethics, University of East London'.
Martin Lunn whistleblower in Addenbrookes Hospital, with doubts about experimental design of drug tests for schizophrenics. He left an 'untenable' situation, but received 'a considerable sum'.
Dr Dick van Steenis Dutch-ancestry GP who became interested in the medical effects of small particles in the air. Asthma, cancer, orimulsion written in co-operation with Dick van Steenis.
Harold Hillman see above for more. Harold was a leading light in 'Freedom to Care'.
Dr Michael Stack Dunne. Chalones were supposed to be chemicals emitted by organs to indicate their size; 'signalling' to explain how bits of the body remained the correct relative size. After lots of papers, the topic seemed to have been deemed wrong; no further papers appeared, but with no acknowledgement or comment that this had occurred. And a rapid cancer scan of chromosomes, but which wasn't a double-blind test.
Dr G Robert N Jones. Biochemist who said he's making progress in cancer; paradigm shift re its cause, involving mitochondria, "the powerhouse of the cell", and energy metabolism. [Harold Hillman did not accept this widespread idea that mitochondria are the source of energy in cells]. In the mid-1970s Jones wrote to ICRF, Marie Curie etc, and wants to approach the Charity Commission. "I have a cheap treatment.. spend a bit of money on.. nutrients.." His DIY treatment is no longer on Internet.
Barbara E C Banks Professor of Biochemistry, who crossed swords with Linus Pauling, challenging the whole idea of 'high energy bonds', still, at the time, and probably still now, accepted. She also had an ongoing medical negligence case, having been overdosed heavily, I think with an anaesthetic, and irreversibly harmed.
She described herself as 'an expert in not persuading the scientific establishment to re-examine much cherished beliefs'. One paper on 'The High Energy Phosphate Bond Concept' was Reassessment of the Role of ATP in Vivo by Barbara E C Banks and C A Vernon. (J. theor. Biol. (1970) 29, 301-326). Another is Chemistry in Britain, Nov 1969, Thermodynamics and biology. Linus Pauling's reply (with two others) is in Chemistry in Britain Nov 1970. If these seem a long time ago, they are.
Harold Hillman had a high opinion of Barbara Banks's intellectual skills, describing her as a 'genuine thinker', or something similar. I have a tape recording of them both in conversation. There are brusque brushings-aside of her views online, which need not be taken seriously.
H H Bauer on Knowledge Monopolies and Research Cartels. 2004 journal article which is moved, not technically well, onto Ivor Catt's website. For my taste, unsubtle and with no awareness of science for domination and war, technical value of secrets (e.g. vast amounts of information were moved to Jews), and unawareness of the fact that one person's shocking cost increase in another person's large gain.
Derek Bryce-Smith, Professor of Chemistry at Reading University, England. He was interested in elements, both essential (such as zinc and iodine) and poisonous (such as lead). Between 1990 and 1997 I had intermittent correspondence with him, and met him. At the time I had no tape recorder. My notes are here bryce-smith-lead-in-petrol-1990-1997.pdf in portable document format. (Without internal clickable links). I'm all but certain he played an important part in having lead removed from petrol. The caaaign probably was the nearest thing to a model of how campaigns should be conducted.
Bruce Graham Charlton Was/is Professor at Buckingham University, a new place established with difficulty. Charlton seems to have edited Medical Hypotheses, the journal established by Horrobin. Charlton doesn't like aspects of modern science, which he correctly sees is largely corrupt, without understanding why. Just as Ivor Catt has the identical problem.
Much of 'science' is repetitive, but provides an income. It resembles the Church of England as it used to be when firmly established: if some exams were passed when young, and if an appointment was made as a vicar or bishop, a lifetime income was guaranteed; it was even called "a living". Originality was not expected, though some tasks had to be carried out, and some comments on e.g. the life of Jesus might be acceptable. Science now resembles that, but Charlton and Catt expect original research, which, it turns out, is too difficult for most people. Hence the absurd multi-signature papers, the unreadable and unread journals, and mimic-friendly material, the strange promotional techniques such as 'salami splitting'. The situation is similar in the so-called 'arts'.
Charlton and Catt have not understood the situation, which applied since at least 1900, of Jewish finance. Jews in 1913 invented the Federal Reserve, in effect constructing their own mine of precious metal—except it is paper. Jews extended their power from 1914-1945 with wars designed for that purpose, and to kill many non-Jews. They were very successful, and a mark of their success is that few people understood what they were doing—including Charlton and Catt.
Added 28 Dec 2021 I found (on Ivor Catt's site) a longish piece by Charlton. Not even trying: the corruption of real science University of Buckingham Press, 2012. Variants are online. Here's a very short extract: The fact is that humans no longer do - can no longer do - many things we used to be able to do: land on the moon, swiftly win wars against weak opposition and then control the defeated nation, secure national borders, discover 'breakthrough' medical treatments, prevent crime, design and build to a tight deadline, educate people so they are ready to work before the age of 22, suppress piracy on the high seas.... Charlton thinks 'transcendent truth' should be the aim of science. Charlton praises Einstein, Erwin Chagaff (Jew from Europe), Feynman, Bronowski, Ziman, and others. Unfortunately, all this is standard Jew speak and shows no understanding of science or history. Or money-making careerism of the traditional religious sort. I could find no biography online; maternal descent is usually a Jewish marker, but there's no information on his family.
Now, American universities have vast numbers of third-rate Jews, and of Asian mediocre scientists, because Jews pay for education out of taxes, in the long term. And this explains another thing, which greatly puzzled Catt, about GEC (General Electric) in Britain, and Civil Servants, and money wasting. GEC wanted to borrow and waste money, because the borrowing was from the government, and government debt is paid to Jews, such as Weinstock, Chairman of GEC. Something similar happened in the USA: LBJ, a Jew, lost tens of thousands of helicopters, and planes, and more bombs than in the whole of WW2, to build up government debt. The nuclear weapons projects were fraudulent: nuclear weapons were a media propaganda construct. All this of course is difficult to understand. My website big-lies.org tries to explain.Two more meta-comments on official science.
Michael T Deans in London, W4 for many years, has this website. Science Uncoiled. Deans ran a Mensa coffee evening for years in his apartment, usually with few attendees. He studied for a biochemistry PhD, which was not awarded. In my view, he took over many current errors in biology, including mistakes about the cell wall, where he developed theories of membrane pumps, based, in my view, taken from Harold Hillman, on mistakes. He included metal ions in his theories, finding reasons why trace elements such as iodine, fluorine, vanadium, chromium, zinc, copper, selenium, magnesium, and many others, including, hypothetically, silver, do their respective things. He did not allow for the possibility that DNA must have evolved from simpler precursors. He had a numerological slant, in my view unfortunately. But there were tantalising possibilities:
[1] Theoretical understanding is worshipped, but empirical practice is regarded as of lower status. Unfortunately many phenomena are not fully understood. Electricity is a good example; there obviously is such a thing, its generation by (for example) dynamos is completely reproduceable, and such things as electrolysis and electroplating and induction and transistors are in routine use. But what the hell is it? It seems unsatisfactory to say 'nobody knows'. A mathematical treatment—as though symbols answer the question—distances the question, but it's still there.
[2] Publishing, publications, citations, are implicitly pushed and suggested—'publish or perish' was a slogan when what were called universities were hugely funded for the first time. In fact, this makes material available to everyone, including a proportion of junk. But this is historically rather naive; the whole system of churches, lands, buildings and their Jewish origin has been forcibly kept secret as much as possible. Belief in the automatic approval of publication is appropriate for juniors and pleaders and climbers.
'I propose the 5-hook theorem: The growth of 5-hooked cells is self-limiting, 6 or more hooks lead to unrestrained growth. (The presence of a 4-hook cell amongst the 5-hooks may be needed.) The proof of this theorem promises to be difficult (as was that of the 4-colour theorem in mapping).' (Deans's explanatory notes include: 2 Hooks - filaments; 3 Hooks - sheets; 4 Hooks - tubes; 5 hooks - organs of higher life-forms. 6 Hooks - Unlimited growth - cancer).
In early evolution, metal ions must have played an important part: Deans thought magnesium in chlorophyll was an earlyish development, enabling the sun's rays to convert CO2 and H2O into carbohydrate. But magnesium was, he thought, needed for motility. Hence at the start of evolution, some creatures could move but not photosynthesise, and others could photosynthesise but not move. Hence (maybe) there are no mammals or reptiles or birds that photosynthesise.
David Horrobin Now dead. Here's a letter from him (June 1993) giving his insights into rebel scientists or would-be scientists:
Dear Mr. West,Many thanks for you interesting letter of 10th June. I was very pleased to hear from you. I am on the whole receptive to new ideas and I set up the journal Medical Hypotheses because I felt that many innovative concepts never saw the light of day. I am pleased to say that the Journal has been successful and is now widely accepted by "establishment" figures. Most of the papers submitted to it come from main stream medical schools. The Journal is in all the major data bases including the Index Medicus, and the Science Citation Index. As a result, authors who publish in Medical Hypotheses usually get lots of reprint requests. I would be very happy to review a paper from Michael Deans. It is important that he understands that he should try to relate what he is saying to the existing body of knowledge. Even though he may be making revolutionary proposals, he must understand that the readers will be starting from where they are. If the existing body of knowledge is simply totally dismissed, then not many people will get far into their papers. Highly original thinkers are often quite strange people. Although they may be very original, the often have little insight into what is required to persuade others of the validity of their concepts. They frequently seem to think that the world owes them an obligation and that it is evidence of vindictiveness or corruption when the world does not want to listen. I think this helps to explain why such people are often not only at daggers drawn at the world in general but have a highly toxic relationship with other highly creative but rejected people. All too often their view is that the world is entirely correct in rejecting out of hand other people's hypotheses, but is committing a dire mistake in rejecting their own! I think I have some understanding both of these highly creative people and also of the way in which the scientific community works. I see one of my tasks is trying to provide a bridge between the two although all too frequently I get no thanks from either side. However, I do get a good deal of satisfaction from the fact that as a result of my efforts many hypotheses have seen the light of day whereas otherwise they would have been lost forever. I would certainly be happy to see something from Dean. I enclose a copy of the Instructions to Authors for Medical Hypotheses. I can assure him that the Journal does have a wide readership, and that if his paper is published in it, it will be widely considered.
With best etc etc David Horrobin
Norman Hossack is an inventor. I met him when he lived in London, my curiosity aroused by his idea of a light motor bike with a horizontal suspension. (The same design is ubiquitous in mountain bikes: it's entirely possible others had the same idea). Here's a link to Norman Hossack where I briefly summarise his bike design; he's now in the USA doing different work.
Roy Jennings worked at Post Office Research at Dollis Hill, then on cardiograms at Sussex University. Harry Rantzen told me "he hasn't had his results published since 1960s." Henry Barnato Rantzen; the book I found was published 1968—see below.
Gilbert Ling was/is a Chinese American, in my view politically naive, who developed similar theories to Harold Hillman. They communicated and met. Here is Gilbert Ling's own introduction to his cell hypothesis.
William Bryant Logan author of Dirtt. The Ecstatic Skin of the Earth (published (1995; p'back 2007). Attempt to generalise about the surface of the earth, including fine minerals and residues and plants and animals, plus the underground networks of fungal strands. Maybe includes under the sea. (There's no index). A difficult subject to popularise, as it can have little visual appeal, unlike, say, flowers and butterflies. Moreover, minerals look much the same (note the book's title) and have only been systematised since the rise of chemical and physical analytical methods. Moreover, the production is terrible, with tiny print and absurd capital flourishes.W A P Manser Britain in Balance - the Myth of Failure (1971, new or revised edition 1973). Interesting book on British economic policy; something I'd call 'revisionist', involving statistical problems in deriving simple measures, logical arguments about imports and exports, and the history of British government accounting and interventions, but of course nothing Jewish. Very detailed references to many authoritative books. 'Authoritative' in the traditional sense. And stunning examples at intervals: 'Half of all Britain's imports by weight are now oil'.
A J P Taylor is quoted on the cover as saying 'It is political dynamite, making nonsense of this country's economic policies over the last 40 years. The pundits greeted it with embarrassed silence.'
I met Manser twice, contacted him through Baring Bros, and the Institute of Economic Affairs, and did my best to interview him seriously. Nothing came of this, but his book is an interesting and highly unusual example of the emergence of an apparently revisionist book through personal concern.John Imbrie & Katherine Palmer Imbrie on Ice Ages: Solving the Mystery (1979) probably part of 'climate change' as used by Jews, including carbon dioxide, but before attempts at computer models. As the title suggests, tends to present as final solution, the results of large numbers of participants. A sceptical view here is by Kurt Johmann in the USA, who however won't update it.
Elaine Morgan (1920-2013) published The Aquatic Ape in 1982, and The Aquatic Ape Hypothesis in 1997 (p'back 1999). Interesting and convincing; deals with 8 or 9 million years ago in Africa. But has little on mental abilities.
Harry B. Rantzen (=Henry Barnato Rantzen) author of Uncertainty in Nature and Communication (1968), a book I found by chance. Rantzen (in the IEE) was clearly competent in electronics and/or electrical engineering; he worked with the UN and the BBC, and was the father of Esther Rantzen, though his wife had little interest in his theories. His book was largely statistical, with his modified version of the Gaussian distribution. It supposedly dealt with 'pattern recognition'. In his calculations, Rantzen deduced that stability was implicit in a year of 365.3 revolutions; the tropopause was connected with 37.5 degrees latitude; the annual temperature cycle implied that 1/4 of 22 feet, i.e. 5'8", represented an important boundary—i.e. that height was about optimum for eyesight; and the moon's cycle round the earth. He had things to say about the populations of cities and social organisations. He designed a frequency-separated digital hearing aid. Despite a number of talks with him, I was never happy that his material was sound. Four stars because I think his material (I have some unpublished letters and notes) is worth a look.
I have, or had, a copy of his book, and written notes he made on it, though at present I can't find them. The nearest I have is notes typed on an old Amstrad computer I think, mostly 1990-1991. Anyone interested will find them at this link.
Mike Todd Mike Todd worked at the BBC, in what I suppose they'd call a senior technical position. This was in the day of the PET microcomputer, which counted as high tech. I don't think he had any idea of the propaganda function of the BBC. He seemed familiar with the pop radio types, the setters of the various national editions of the Radio Times. I mention him as a friend; I don't think he was 'alternative' in any sense.
I've just found he has or had a website, miketodd.net/index.htm which seems to date from 2001, latest entries being 2019. He was from South Shields.
G A Wells, Professor of German and author of many books on Jesus as a personage who never existed. The Jesus Legend (1996) at the time of investigating was his most recent book, though a booklet The Acts of the Apostles - A Historical Record? was published in 2000. I include him as an example of would-be scientific reassessment of Christianity.
Joanna Wheatley investigated organophosphate insecticides. She was/is a beef organic farmer.
Properties of OPs (organophosphates) (2000) Joanna (experienced in electron microscopy) talks about her science protests about BSE and organophosphate insecticides. Interesting comments on the difficulties of science and government officials. With Harold Hillman, Rae West
Another important name is the late Mark Purdey an interesting organic farmer. Both these people were involved in the BSE Enquiry also known as the Phillips Enquiry.
Margaret Winfield, 1990 book, published in rather thin paperback by Social Audit, full title: 'Whistleblowing: Minding your own business - self-regulation and whistleblowing in British Companies'. On this subject, Catt had a photocopy of a magazine called The Scientist, Dec 14 1987, which included some short personal American, I think, stories of 'Whistle Blowing'; I didn't get a chance to read them. About this time, a new law was passed by Parliament on whistleblowing: as might be imagined it was complex, badly-written, and had large numbers of notes.
There were other names flickering on and off various people's radars. The following info may not be quite correct: Ivor Catt never paid serious attention to Hillman's opinions; others not followed up at all, as far as I know, include: Leslie Munro, who wrote on buildings and damp ground; Eric Laithwaite at Imperial College, famous for having had his presentation on gyroscopes and their effect on weight removed from the Royal Society's records; Anthony de Reuck (former editor of Nature, before Maddox); insecticides, generally; Lynn Trainor, chief man at CERN, in a 1972 footnote to one of Ivor's books.
I've just noted Eric Dollard as an electromagnetism critic, but I know nothing of him.
Rule Britannia, Britons never never never shall be slaves? When are Britons going to awaken to the very real threat to the stability of their nation and the reality of the horrific legacy that they leaving future generations? Over the centuries, brave men and women have spilled rivers of blood fighting for the freedoms we nowadays take so much for granted. They fought and died in faraway lands so that their homeland would remain free from invasion by foreigners and their alien customs.The passages in red are largely fantasy: Hitler wanted peace, faraway wars were not usually about homeland defence, the British government actually helped Stalin, the fighters were not spontaneous, but were given food, clothing, weapons and told what to do. The lesson seems to be that many people are sheep, who do what they're told—particularly when information is controlled so they know no better. It's plainly unrealistic to expect such rather ordinary people to burrow into the foundations of science for a critical examination, when even people who have nominally spent years studying science make no attempt to order their thoughts. The unifying theory of Jews and the Fed and their unlimited free 'money', the liking for debt because the interest from governments is enormous, the funding of information and legal control, and the hatred of whites, and the liking for killing 'goyim' and destroying 'goy' achievements, are certainly out of the range of Ivor and many others—here are my 'Joff' sites notes. His reasoning was unsophisticated: there was a Jew in the next bed in hospital; therefore, presumably, GULags never existed and Jews don't control the media. And hypotheses as varied as fluoridation of water as a deliberate anti-goyim act, and ruined education as another variety of the same thing, are not yet within these people's ken. Let's hope younger people do better.
Since the end of WW2, our spineless, treacherous politicians, of all parties, have systematically destroyed the legacy those brave heroes left for us; they have allowed the invasion and colonisation of this once great land by creeds and cultures so at odds with our own, that those that died for our country would find it unrecognisable if they could return to modern day Britain.
Is this any way to treat their memory? Is this any way to treat our children's future? We, as Britons, have a duty to our future generations to preserve our country in good order for our children, their children and their children's children; but so far when the history of the second half of this century is written, we will be seen as the cowards that would not stand up to the tyranny of a bunch of traitors just six hundred and fifty strong; our parliament!
It will be said of us, that we stood idly by as a few greedy politicians gave our children's future away, stayed silent and allowed their freedoms to be eroded, and looked the other way whilst foreigners were given a free hand to take over and eventually rule this once proud nation.
We will be judged by our descendants, and compared unfavorably to our ancestors; they will wonder why, just a few years prior to our stewardship of this country, our parents were prepared to spill their last drop of blood in defence of these Islands, yet we had been cowed by silly little words like racist or bigot.
• Phil Holland co-assembled How Much of Modern Physics is a Fraud? with me. Phil was very original 'superfluid helium', 'the speed of light as a limit', 'triple points, meteorological maps; but had not the slightest scepticism about moon landings, Auschwitz, or Christianity. These conflicts are tiresome; he worked all his life in nuclear power, is side issues such as liquid sodium cooling. I explained the sceptical view of power, and I could see he was surprised. But eventually I tired of having to push the issue and have lost touch.
• Michael Deans interested me in trace elements and evolution of life. But he built up a largely fantastical set of theories. He did not communicate regarding the biochemistry of salt. Something of note is repetitiveness: some of these people argue with wording and diagrams from decades back, usually a worrying sign as they have so far not made an impact.
• Barbara E C Banks with her debate relating in effect to the supposed energy-giving properties of mitochondria. I have no idea what happened. Very likely the issue is dragging on.
• Frank McManus and his malnutrition theory on lack of salt in food. And trace elements. And, also, unfortunately, belief in flat earth (apparently supported on the elephants and tortoises principle), the earth's atmosphere unable to exist in contact with a vacuum, the Devil as a force in the world, the Tribe of Dan, and evolution as false. I hardly bothered to explain to him the hypothesis that Jewish organisations are behind the campaigns to reduce salt.
... Anyway, I suppose this transitions to the topic of the Jewish question in science. Judging by names, many of Ivor's associates, Malcolm Davidson, Tony Davies, Alex Jakovlev, think they are Jews. Their output of rubbish on electromagnetism meanwhile continues ...
These notes are intended for rationally-inclined people who see some of the oddities of the world, and wonder whether they should take the risk of doing something for themselves.
Here's a preparatory page, dating from 2011/12, started by Nico Haupt, and looking into the continuity of science-based companies in spite of wars and chaos. Nico Haupt on odd migrations of science workers, for example RADAR, TV, cameras, and atoms
Let's start with examples of Jewish influences on science.
Jewish and Crypto-Jewish Views of History Itself Just a few notes on a large subject. Jews have a long tradition of very considerable secrecy, so some detective work is necessary to tease out the clues from the patchwork of history of science. Most Jewish aims are part of their secrecy, and most people (I presume) do not identify wars between non-Jews as an aim, or ownership by Jews of intellectual rights to others' discoveries, or such things as views on race, and on populations, and on births and deaths, and on educational success.
Most books on science have been written or assembled by Jews, and those which are selected for special treatment, popular or academic, are Jewish. Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) is a good example of a much-trumpeted book, emphasising 'revolution' in a typically Jewish way, and apart from a few parts of science, almost completely lacking in detailed science—as is fitting for exploiters, rather than creative people.
For British readers, an example is the father-and-son John Desmond Bernal (1901-1971) and Martin Gardiner Bernal (1937-2013). J D Bernal is usually described as Irish, but in fact had Jewish roots, and was part of the largely secret 19th-20th century osmosis of Jews into Britain. The father was a sort of philosopher of the vague type often found in Jews, who of course never explicitly reveal anything Jewish. It's an ontological disproof of their magnificence; their greatest triumphs have to be kept secret. J D Bernal wrote on Science in History, Science at the Crossroads, and generally was associated with Jewish-connected conferences. His son wrote Black Athena, 'the Afro-Asiatic roots' of Greek science. Part of his history relied on Phoenicians; very probably he hinted at Jews and the Mediterranean.
An analogous pair were R B Haldane and J B S Haldane. Richard Burdon Haldane wrote on Adam Smith, Schopenhauer, and gave a (religious) Gifford Lecture in 1903. H G Wells referred to R B Haldane on the Absolute, as 'that great bladder of nothingness'. J B S Haldane wrote widely: Science and the future (Daedalus 1923), chemical warfare (Callinicus, 1925), ethics, populations, evolution, heredity. He had a Marxist view of the sciences, and wrote Science Advances starting in 1941. He contributed one chapter of 23 to I Believe in 1940, recognisable by Jew-aware people as promoting the Second World War for Jews.
There's enormous scope for investigating both individual Jews (Steven Rose, for example, is/was in England; there are many more in the USA), and subjects dominated by Jews, such as the far-fetched parts of physics. Einstein worship is now passing, presumably as too boring or old. Freud has been displaced by other ridiculous Jews pseudo-psychology. Economics still fails to be a serious subject. Military science is I'd guess the worst-treated of any issue.
Here's a link to a 1940 collection of 23 essays by selected writers. I Believe which is a sort of unofficial summary of Jewish-favoured people before the Second World War started physically. My notes were made before I was personally Jew-aware. People in the know may find my comments on Harold Laski (for example) as absurdly feeble. I didn't want to update it. Several other similar books are included.
Here's a link to Science and the Nation by 'The Association of Scientific Workers' (note the Jewish-style 'workers' reference) a Penguin paperback book dated 1947.
Second World War & United States Fred Leuchter turns out to be a significant figure, though he has not had the support he deserved and doesn't seem to have a website. Some of his patents and inventions have been stolen by Jews. As yet he is not well known for this work. Here is a download from Jan Lamprecht (Aug 2022) of a 2hr 36 min mp3 audio.
Germar Rudolf has a PhD in chemistry. Leuchter and Rudolf have co-operated to debunk so-called 'gas chambers' in Poland.
Electronics (as it's now called) and radio Edwin H. Armstrong (1890-1954) was a pioneer in radio. His influence recurs throughout accounts of the history of radio. For example, he was credited with inventing FM radio. He came to clash with David Sarnoff. Probably the details are too technical for most people; I'm just noting this case here. But bear in mind that the Jewish outlook generally involves taking possession of inventions and creations, but not originating them. It is a weakness of whites that they often invent, but don't plan what to do with their inventions: the ideological stand that invention and publication should be free for the world encapsulates the viewpoint, which Jews have exploited.
Medical and Population. I doubt that many whites (I mean more-or-less educated people in much of the Americas, Europe, and colonies; whites for short) in about 1900 would have believed it possible that medical facts could be overridden by Jews (people who probably falsely believe in a long ancestry; plus national collaborators with loose connections). Yet today it's clear that genetic defects such as sickle-cell anaemia, inbreeding defects, and more imprecise categories such as low IQ, are deliberately being introduced by Jews. There's a whole subculture, also pushed by Jews—usually women—for whites, condemning what they call 'eugenics'. Bear in mind, when dealing with Jews, that one of their long-term projects is to harm whites; Jews in the USSR illustrate this, and so do wars—notably both World War I and World War II. The ridiculous 'definition' of 'anti-semitism' doesn't define 'Jews'—a rather tricky matter, I can imagine a mad hatters' tea party of 'Rabbis' oy vaying over it. But note that is steers clear of genocidal intent!
As regards diseases in the technical sense, 'HIV/AIDS' is a Jewish fraud, which still lingers around, as Jewish oddities tend to, occasionally ignited into simulated reality by some dull Jewish scribbler. Another Jewish fraud is the coronavirus lockdown, though the motive is not known at the time of writing.
Jews seem to monopolise odd mental cults and habits, always money-making—psychoanalysis, Ritalin, ADHD, the Sacklers, illustrating the types.
And Jews go for ideas which harm 'goyim'. A good recent example is the campaign against salt in food, apparently accompanied by entire biochemical persons omitting the chloride component from salt, despite the fact that stomach acid can only be made from chlorides. Note that there's a form of disguise here, something characteristic of Jews—the expression 'crypto-Jews' was not coined by chance. At present, Jewish paper money filters out from its roots to a vast outlying set of 'goyim' circling around like vultures.
Population control and contraception and abortion are timeless Jewish interests; some of early Christianity, such as living in deserts and celibacy, must have had population control motivations. Present-day promotion by New York Jews for abortion, even by unqualified people and at full term, must be anti-black. British post-war TV had a lot of anti-family material; I remember some programme where a wife was told resignedly "but of course you will" have more children. Population control by war or famine is a Jewish speciality, where they can do it. So is starting wars: their best-known policy is faking a single atrocity, then publicising war through subordinates. Maybe a reverse policy will come to be adopted, that one Jewish murder of a white requires 100,000 Jewish deaths in retaliation.
As to 'research', Jews have a huge influence because of their present-day command of paper money. Almost all universities, hospitals, research institutes, medical trainers, and inspectors rely of Jewish money, directly or indirectly. If they don't want research, they will stop it. Cell biology theory has a large number of errors and mistakes, luring people into wasting their lives.
Note that there's nothing new about this, apart from the large scale derived from modern productivity, and the potential dangers inherent in technical skill. Medical science barely existed for a thousand years after Galen. Established religion has much the same effect, where the explicit credo plus the secret administration worked to the advantage of such people as bishops and their overseen distributed episcopal functionaries.
Jew-fearless people and websites can turn up examples of Jews harming science. An example is Instauration (1975-2000). I found a review of a book on science fraud by Broad and Wade, giving examples of frauds. One was a famous case, by Cyril Burt, whose suppose frauds were shown by Hans Eysenck not to be fraudulent. Of interest here was that most of the other frauds were Jewish, but Burt, who I presume wasn't Jewish, was mentioned far more often than the others. As usual, Jews lie and mislead.
Publicity and Propaganda. These are not obviously related to science fraud, but links are easy to establish, and rather disgusting. The New Scientist in Britain was a Cold War foundation; naturally it had and has nothing on weapons, both fraudulent and otherwise: it had almost nothing on chemical warfare in Vietnam, for example, and the effects of 'defoliation'. All serious material on cell biology was censored. A side-effect was promotion of scientifically ignorant women; there was a process similar to the later pushing of incompetent blacks.
The National Geographic in the USA pushed all the Jewish frauds: moon landing fakes, climate fakes, cell biology fakes, energy fakes. As with for example the BBC, genocides in Russia and Germany and elsewhere were censored or omitted, and the media was owned by Jews with detailed control over topics of concern to Jews.
Statistical fakes are another Jewish speciality, honed during the Jewish genocide in Russia, including the Holodomor. Jewish control of all European media was an essential part of this process, and of course very much simple and automated: all they had to do was look for truth, and crush it. The process is similar to what is happening in Internet, with control over such platforms as Youtube. It's only a matter of time before hosting sites and search engines are fully attacked; judging historically they may well be successful, and sites like this will become only a memory, hated by Jews. Meanwhile, fakes include censuses of whites, in which assorted other groups are included, usually to suppress facts about crime, parasitic costs, employment, education, and whatever else is targeted.
Long-term Jewish propaganda is obviously to expand themselves, and contract others. They have to pretend they have continuity over the long term, though the Khazars suggest most so-called 'Jews' were simply a product of the written word, a sort of mass conversion. Islam had a similar effect, no doubt invented by Jews. Jewish takeovers had an effect on the history of science, largely fakery. The modern jewish campaign to pretend blacks contributed to science are a good example of Jewish behaviour; I doubt if any whites would have dreamt of such a project, but it seems natural to Jews. So does the Jewish influence in shipping and trans-Atlantic slavery, and their attempts to lie about it. The so-called 'Holocaust' of Jews is a perfect example of Jewish lies, impossible to guess where it will end. Maybe for a few thousand years it will be chanted in the way that 'Jesus' was invented.
Again, apart from scale, and the immense production of Jewish paper money, this sort of thing has happened before. The Roman Catholic Church ran multiple frauds. However, Jews, with their probably inherited skills in secrecy, kept out of the way, making money from rents and ownership in ways hardly noticed—read any historians to see. The novelty is in photography and cinema and radio/TV, which are obviously superior to books of saints' lives, the tedium of Biblical translations, and oratory and song once a week in churches.
It's fascinating to speculate on Jews during the entire post-Roman era, and their collaborators, mostly I think religious. I've argued that the supposed conflicts were a pretence, though at the present time there seems to be a move to ruin churches, who have not had the skill to reveal Jewish machinations.
Physics. This can be presented very fairly as a pure Jewish fraud, which has spread world-wide to fake installations of various kinds, which make the possibilities of world-wide electricity, world-wide travel, world-wide sanitation, world-wide cleaning up seem more and more doubtful.
Just a few examples–
For uniformity, old (1939; 1848; Dover reprints) translations were OCRd and reprinted. With many errors. There's an unflattering review of this book in Nature Vol. 421, pp. 694-695, Feb 2003 by Owen Gingerich.
Copernicus. Galileo. Kepler. Newton... Miles Mathis first exposed Hawking as a substitute fake in 2015, but had doubts years before. '... Hawking was first diagnosed in 1963, and given two years to live.' The publisher is stated to be Running Press, of Philadelphia and London. |
Edgerton, Germeshausen, Grier film and photo fakers Edgerton, of MIT, became a household name with electronic flash images, such as the milk drop 'crown'. Film-makers were given priority by Jews to control public lies.
Fraudulent 'H Bomb test'
'Global Warming', 'Climate Change'
|
And Couper & Henbest on The Planets another coffee-table book. Post mortem Since writing this I noticed the BBC is promoting a hack book jointly authored by Moore, Brian May, and a charisma-free physicist with a Cambridge joke degree. The BBC is not of course supposed to advertise—but where powerful interests are involved this principle is always ignored. Brian May is in the position of famous violinists once—lionised by pushy hangers-on wanting a bit of reflected light, like bits of desiccated dark moon's surface. May seems to be on good terms even with Aldrin, the pugnacious moron and joke. Wouldn't it be nice to see a mockup of the moon—large vacuum chamber, completely dry, heaters in the roof simulating the sun's radiation, walls cooled with (say) liquid nitrogen to simulate space unshielded by our atmosphere, with Aldrin in his 'space suit' clambering into his tiny 'module' to eat, drink, whatever; maybe look at some Hubble telescope watercolours, or maybe show how to take off a space-suit and discard it on the moon. A nicely-updated gladiatorial show. Queen missed out on science revisionism; poor Freddie Mercury died, supposedly of 'AIDS', but as any US person involved in that money-making industry could have told them, of spurious virological treatments. I've just watched a TV thing with May and the drummer discussing the film of Bohemian Rhapsody: all the royalties went to the 'Terrence Higgins Trust'! A successful Jewish fraud—kill them and get them to pay for bogus research! We prey, you pay! One of the downsides of fame and (presumably) wealth is the problem of brushing-off or secretly evading current errors. A website hunt shows May opposes a suggested UK badger cull. Biological science since the 1950s has been damaged by mistakes around electron microscopy, and other techniques, which have been misapplied; the science of TB is therefore not known properly. Unfortunately DEFRA ['Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs'] officials hide their ignorance better, as the BSE/organophosphate debacle proved, so May isn't likely to be comparatively convincing on the science side. Maybe John Deacon, who seems to keep out, knows better. |
|
Here's an example from biology: 47 Unanswered Questions, with email replies to approx 20 named 'experts' - nicely detailed.
A standard technique is to reply a bit, then pretend some time in future that the case was considered years ago, and is now closed. It is used in religion, history, politics, financial fraud, war—and science.
Since Ivor Catt has appeared both ignorant and outspoken about me, let's use him as an example. Does he count as a 'Jew'?
• He seems hypersensitive on the Jewish issue, reacting with rather frantic aggression. Yet he poses as a rational scientist, not a 'hod carrier', able to analyse data with superior precision and clarity. Why this strange contrast?
• Much of his biography has oddities. His association with Clive Sinclair suggests a bit of sharp inter-Jew practice, perhaps to boost Sinclair's image at a difficult time. It occurs to me that Sinclair is a Jewish name, and Sugar of Amstrad and Kalms of Dixons were also Jews. Nothing appears to have come from his advertised inventions; his spiral for example was supposed to include defective chips, which would be bypassed; is this really any better than testing chips individually?
• His presentation is full of features typical of Jews. (1) Adulation of Einstein; (2) Repetitive presentation, reusing brief descriptions and diagrams, unchanged, over decades ('without barriers to communication there can be no communication'); (3) Refusal to debate in a structured way; (4) Trying to collect acolytes, with resulting collections of people monomaniacally ignoring each other; (5) Allying with unimpressive people (e.g. he included a silly email from a woman calling me and Miles Mathis shysters!); (6) Maternal line obscure, a familiar Jewish trick; (7) Misrepresentation ('There is no functioning legal system') and inability to present other people's views reliably, for example on divorce laws; (8) Unawareness of criticisms even from the 1930s, on solid object as largely space, and electrons as solitary charges; (9) View of history ignorant of everything critical of Jews, when many people have noticed that winning WW2 seems problematical.
The problem of doing something about 'Jews'.
The list above is typical enough of what may be found when wondering if a would-be maverick has found something worth investigating. Anyone aware of Jews has to watch for such things. But what should be done? There's no always-reliable answer. An individual might do better to wait; or to move to another subject, if this is possible; or to pretend to be Jewish so far as possible; or to work out some theory, to understand; or to form part of a secret group; or, like the majority, to do nothing special. I don't have a solution, though personally I'd prefer honesty.
• Most of the people involved in revisionist work are oldish males, with some supply of money.
• Realistically, few women are involved in serious research into underlying principles and assumptions; it's too difficult and there may be seriously vicious attacks.
• A back-of-an-envelope scribbled list of names gave me the result that only about one in six alternative types is likely to come up with much.
• There are often two types of revisionist: (1) Experts in some field(s), who have developed conflicting ideas from their one-time colleagues; Harold Hillman is a perfect example. And (2) Outsiders from the field(s), who bring some new perceptual scheme to bear on the topic, such as David Percy, who examined NASA photographs in detail and found them wanting. Another variety of outsiders are persons who do work which others should have done: David Irving being a perfect example.
Experts often retain baggage more or less by habit: I've just watched a video of Tetyana Obukhanych, a critic of vaccination, who I think retains a lot of spurious virological beliefs. Outsiders may have a hard time being taken seriously: NASA photograph/ film critics illustrate the point.
• Sources: Collecting your own documents (published books, papers, leaflets, clippings, videos; your own notes of meetings and recordings) can give you a helpfully solid background.
• Don't assume friends, colleagues, correspondents, emailers will always be open-minded. They may believe in Jesus, the flat earth, Auschwitz, 9/11 as Arabic, Jewish blood as not evolved, J F Kennedy as the same person as Jimmy Carter.
• Remember the 'technique of suspended judgment'. If you aren't fairly sure, or haven't looked at the evidence, don't form a snap judgment.