To attempt such a brazen, frontal assault can only mean that the deep-state is getting desperate. Or, maybe this was a diversion?
15:09 EDT
I've been watching this goombah for a while now. You know he's from New Jersey, don't you? And you know about New Jersey, don't you? They just passed a rain tax. What's a rain tax? Basically, if you cover the ground with anything ... a driveway, a house, a parking lot ... that surface blocks the rain, causing the rain to run off, and you should be taxed for that. Now, remember, it's also illegal to catch that rainwater to prevent it from running off, even if you send it into the ground via a French drain.
I saw Germany enact a rain tax just before I left. Everyone rolled their eyes. Some even complained. No one did anything about it. This is how I knew that no one would do anything about it in New Jersey. And you can expect a rain tax to come to your state soon, too.
I saw a lot of things in Germany decades before I saw them here. That's how I've been able to so accurately predict events here. For example, back in the early 1980s, I used to see the occassional bumper sticker reading, "Less manly is more human(e)." Thirty years later in the USA, masculinity is being disparaged as being toxic.
And that's not all that's going wrong in the People's Republic of New Jersey. Remember the Iron Curtain? Think the leftists here would never dare try something like that to keep people from fleeing their high-tax states for lower-tax states? Guess again! California has long been magically discovering back taxes owed by those who've moved out of state, hiding behind the eleventh amendment, so, now that you live in another state, you can't sue them for this. I kid you not. I, myself, am a victim of this. So, what does this have to do with New Jersey? They actually formalized this in law with a new tax, the infamous New Jersey exit-tax.
You can expect to see this in New York (if they don't already do like California does), Washington, Oregon, even the rapidly blueing Texas.
So, now Jerry Nadler is even trying to persuade the public that Attorney General Barr is 'an agent of President Trump', and, as such, should be given no quarter. Yes, the Attorney General, William Barr, who worked under Bill Clinton (and also Ronald Reagan), was approved by Congress, after being appointed by President Trump to work under him in the Department of Justice, part of the Executive Branch, which President Trump is the head of, the Chief Executive, ... an agent of Trump.
Gee. Ya think?
Tell me, Nadler, who exactly do you think he should be an agent of? Putin? You?
What an absolute fool. This guy is very clearly another Alexandria Occasio-Cortez, picked by a puppet-master, backed by deep-pocketed power-brokers, to be their avatar, their mole, in our government.
But he's about to feel the trap coming down on his neck.
Keep an eye on him.
15:09 EDT
You'll want to listen to this a few times. There's a lot. And it's stunning. It blew my mind.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
13:30 EDT
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
10:41 EDT
I was first introduced to torque converters by my father when I was about 8 years-old, and I had a huge struggle comprehending it. This is the sort of thing that led my teachers and parents to suspect that I had a learning handicap. But the truth was that my teachers, including my poor father, were omitting information critical to my understanding. It wasn't critical to their understanding, mind you, just to mine. Why? Because, unlike me, they could accept incomplete information, and reason their way through it later on. Tell them that the sun is a nuclear engine, and they accept that, prima facie, never once stopping to say to themselves or their teachers, "Wait! What about sunspots? Nuclear bombs don't do that. And what are those things that look like lightning bolts? The sun doesn't do that."
So, when someone tells me that a torque converter multiplies torque, my mind immediately rebels. "How can it multiply torque? Nothing about it trades speed for leverage. Or is there some magic in the flow of the fluid that I just don't understand?" Well, as it would later turn out, my boss at Daimler-Benz AG had designed their new transmission, and he understood a thing or two about torque converters. He was able to explain to me that the 'multiplication' effect wasn't about a change in relative leverage, but a change in absolute traction.
You see, the problem with a fluid coupling is that it's essentially one fan blowing another fan, but with nothing to push against. And, right now, if you're like me, you're thinking, "Wait! Since when does any fan have anything to push against? It pushes against the air." And the answer is, yes, a fan pushes against the air, all the air in the room. And it draws on all the air in the room. It's like a swimmer trying to push off from a standing start in the middle of the pool. Sure, he can get moving just pushing against the water, but couldn't he get an even faster start pushing off from the side of the pool instead? Of course he could! And this is what's happening in the torque converter, which, when starting, without the stator/reactor, is just the very same fluid coupling it becomes at full speed. If it could push off against something, it could start much faster. The stator gives it that solid footing to push off from, just like the swimmer, or like a jet plane launching in front of a blast deflector, which not only deflects the blast, but gives the engine something to push against besides just air.
09:07 EDT
Now, you're probably asking yourself what this has to do with pseudo-science. And, just how is this kind of science pseudo-science? What, in fact, is pseudo-science.
Well, frankly, there is no such thing as pseudo-science. There may be poorly executed experiments, illogical hypotheses, arguments based too much on data which is itself suspect, or negated by other data. In other words, junk science. But there is no pseudo-science. Even those who believe that bigfoot exists, that Nessie lives, that aliens visit the earth, or that the earth is hollow, are scientists in the truest sense of the word. That is not to say that they are correct, or even qualified to make the assertions that they make, but, the sad fact is, that they are very often guilty of no wilder flights of fancy than your average evolution advocate, global warming alarmist, or even NASA solar physicist.
Nevertheless, the pejorative, pseudo-science, has become the favorite (though, by no means sole) weapon in the Church of Orthodox Science's arsenal, and they level it at anyone who disagrees with them. Given that propensity to stifle debate, and knowing a fair amount about alternative ideas, I decided to take up the gauntlet, and aim their very own weapon right back at them.
So why would such supposedly erudite personae descend to name-calling?
There are many reasons.
Jobs are on the line. There's no arguing that. Ever since the FDR administration embraced science for its ability to advance weapons programs for WWII, the 'firehose of government funding' has not only legitimized and formalized a scientific community (which had actually already been started by Abraham Lincoln), it also eliminated, as government funding always does, all other alternatives (which would have horrified Lincoln). Moreover, as government intervention also always does, it corrupted its own baby into a Frankenstein monster. I mean, have you ever seen a degree in any university's course catalog called, Scientist? No. Of course not. 'Scientist' is a title bestowed upon one by virtue of one's profession (working for NASA or the ESA, but also the EPA, the DoE, some sectors of the DoD, NSA, many employees of government contractors, like Lockheed, or even just a high-school science teacher may call themselves a scientist) and/or one's membership in one of the world's science advocacy associations, such as, in the USA, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Now, obviously, all these depend on government funding in one way or another, to one degree or another. And that means that, if government policy changes, many people could suddenly find themselves looking for work. I've seen it happen many times. And there just aren't that many openings in the private sector for people with these qualifications. So, competition is fierce, meaning that everyone is very defensive of their reputation, because your reputation is your resume. If you get laughed out of the NAS, you lose your job, and have no prospects for a future after that. So, yes, there is that to be considered. Proving any of these guys wrong is like kicking a hornet's nest. And we have plenty of examples of this to draw on. Just look up what happened to Immanuel Velikovsky.
And he's not the only one.
Then there's the Midas touch. The leftist FDR had a long history of employing Microsoft's now famous E3 strategy (Embrace, Extend, Extinguish), most notably when he was the Secretary of the Navy, and assembled a team at Bolinas Station, CA, to try to find some way around Tesla's radio patents, culminating in the formation of the Radio Corporation of America (RCA).
Now, frankly, the government had no business creating a public corporation, but, after all, even though working under the equally leftist Woodrow Wilson, then Secretary of the Navy, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, had to sneak this wholly government owned and operated organization past the tax-payers somehow. Along the way, he absorbed Marconi's company (which was equally guilty of trammelling Tesla's patents), drove a stake through the heart of Edison's General Electric, and, ultimately, denied Tesla his money anyway, effectively driving Tesla away, too. FDR did a lot of damage on his way to the top. As part of the program, the media, even Hollywood, was engaged as an ally to pretty much anything the War Department felt expedient. And that brought the already globalist-controlled media into the fold as the public relations branch of the government-funded and controlled science institutes.
You never hear anything of any of this today, so the connections aren't so obvious. You really have to hand it to Eric Dollard, though. As I've said many times before, anyone serious in almost any field, whether electronics, computer programming, mathematics, even linguistics, must necessarily become an historian. And that's just what Eric did. And that speaks to his expertise. You don't become so expert in the history of a field unless you need to, and you need to when you start retracing and rediscovering all the ground covered by your predecessors. And that's a level achieved by very few. And, Eric, too, learned just how much disinformation had been spread around by academia, and was still being spread around by the media, thanks to that Midas touch that FDR put on them.
Then there's just human nature. It's long been noted that people have to be ready for new information. It's even been claimed that the natives who first saw the sails of the Europeans' ships couldn't see them, and thought they were seeing clouds instead. And that was supposedly because wind-driven ships with masts full of wind-billowed sails was just so far outside their experience that their brains couldn't classify them in any meaningful way, so their brains just gave up.
It's like those pictures you've seen that look either like an old woman or a young woman, but you just can't see the young woman until someone explains it to you.
MARCUS! Back to the comet!
Right. Pseudo-science. Why? This isn't the first time we've seen this kind of thing. Back in 2013, we saw an otherwise unremarkable asteroid sprout SIX cometary tails in every direction.
So why all the surprise now? Because NASA just won't abandon the dirty-snowball theory of comets.
What have asteroids got to do with comets?
We (NASA et al) have landed directly on two comets and three asteroids, and we've found no salient differences between them other than the shapes of their orbits. They are dry, barren rocks.
And this is where my pseudo-science charge comes in. Were these self-anointed priests in the Church of Orthodox Science (aka scientists) actually, seriously, sincerely engaged in the pursuit of science via the scientific method, they would necessarily have had to abanandon the dirty snowball theory no later than 5 July, 2005. But they didn't. Instead, they never questioned their assumptions, and, instead, began looking for every possible THEORETICAL explanation for why all the available EMPIRICAL evidence does not, in fact, prove them wrong.
Talk about cognitive dissonance! And these are the same people who accuse us 'non-scientists' of falling prey to the Dunning-Kruger effect. Conversely, these are also the same people who never once questioned Stephen Hawkings' record-breaking longevity ... right up until us pseudo-scientists started crying foul. Poor Hawkings was dead within a year of THAT diagnosis.
So, to what do I attribute these tails?
Simple: Electricity.
I'm an adherent of the Electric Universe theory, which postulates that most of what we see in the universe is a direct result of vast quantities of electrical charge flowing throughout space. And, just as the Gulf Stream (also, by the way, a result of electrical influence similar to the bands of Jupiter) flows like a river through the Atlantic ocean, so, too, flow these electrical rivers of charge in coaxially twisted-pairs through the midst of other charges and potentials, delivering astronomical blocks of power in one place or another. In this case, we're seeing the redirection of huge, multiphase, power streams out through the asteroid belt, probably because of the same arrangement of planets (notice how all the gas giants are on the same side of the solar system) which appear to be causing the recent drop in sunspot activity by shifting the sun's barycenter, and redirecting current that might otherwise have flowed through the sun toward the planets instead.
After all, we've known for several years that the winds on Venus have been accelerating, Mars has been warming, and Jupiter's aurorae have been increasing. Clearly something's increasing energy in the solar system, but it sure ain't the sun. It's output is down.