Gab@StFerdinandIII - https://unstabbinated.substack.com/
Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands. Cults everywhere: Corona, 'The Science' or Scientism, Islam, the State, the cult of Gender Fascism, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion...
Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death
Einstein must have known by 1920 that the aether, and the aether drift, had been proven by the Americans Michelson, Morley in 1887; Morley and Miller from 1900-1905; and Miller from 1905-1913 with hundreds of thousands of light interference readings. Einstein took the aether out of science in 1905 with his ‘Special Theory’ of Relativity but as any good magician is wont to do, the great philosopher reinserted the aether into his 1915 ‘General Theory’. Given the aforementioned light experiments and mechancial proofs, he had no choice.
This aether ‘resurrection’ (Einstein’s word) was an ‘imponderable’, largely mass-less, pseudo-gaseous entity, not of any great materiality or mobility (see quote above). He used it to explain ‘gravity’ within his 4th dimension of the unproven spacetime merger. This conjuring was of course a philosophical trick, it was not based on experimental evidence. More here
Fizeau’s water experiment found no movement of the Earth. Neither did the Michelson-Morley effort of 1887. For Einstein, Relativity became an imperative premised on the supposed anomaly he found between Maxwell’s electromagnetism and mechanical motion, namely the lack of the Earth’s mechanical motion.
To explain heliocentricity Einstein had to contend with the failures of the Fizeau, Michelson and Airy experiments on the one hand, and with the widely accepted aether and electromagnetic theories and equations of James Clerk Maxwell on the other. After 1887 he had to reinterpret these catastrophic failures to save the Copernican phenomena.
“It is no doubt that Michelson’s experiment was of considerable influence upon my work insofar as it strengthened my conviction concerning the validity of the principle of the Special Theory of Relativity.”2 (March 17, 1942)
The above statement is classic Einstein. He purposefully misinterprets what the Michelson-Morley (MM) experiment actually found and tautologically declares that as supporting proof for his mental gymnastics! More here
1887 was a year of disaster for ‘The Science’ and Copernicans. The most complex light-interference experiment ever tried in history had failed to detect the Earth’s motion through space. The MM experiment was not unique but replicated across more than 300.000 similar experiments.
Tell me again the list of experiments Einstein performed to ‘prove’ ‘Relativity’? Oh, there aren’t any? Other than tortured, tautological, complex maths, and incorrect claims of phenomena description, what mechanical proof is there for Relativity?
More here
In Relativity, space and time are merged. As given above it is false. Many posts have outlined why space-time is fiction, and why dozens of scientists and physicists do not agree with this postulate. Scientific objections to ‘spacetime’ date back to pre-World War I. This post addresses the incorrect technical aspects of Special Theory of Relativity (STR) and time and space.
Space and time were merged to allow Einstein and Relativists the opportunity to explain away the lack of evidence for the Earth’s mobility, and the reality that interferometer experiments had detected the aether. Space and time must be merged within Relativity to allow for the distribution of energy, the creation of inertia and gravitational fields in space. It is not that anything was proven. It was that the maths required a 4th dimension to impose Relativistic velocity and calculations. Any sentient human understands that we live in 3 dimensions.
Herbert Ives an American physicist and engineer, in the 1930s disproved, through hands-on experimentation, the key postulates of Relativity. Ives disproved the invariant speed of light, and proved the existence of the aether. Needless to say, ‘The Science’, so heavily invested in Einstotle’s magical world of make-believe, was uninterested. Turner and Callaghan’s volume preserves Ives’ papers, experiments and conclusions. They are incontrovertibly valid.
Ives was not alone in disproving Relativity in the 1930s. During the 1920s and 30s, the great and unknown American physicist Dayton Miller, over 20 years, eviscerated Einstein’s theories with some 200.000 inteferometer experiments, which validated the Michelson-Morley results of 1887. These men, along with Sagnac, Gale, Anderson, Dirac, Airy, Lodge amongst many others this substack has discussed, are rarely if ever taught. If they are mentioned, ‘The Science’ will mendaciously state that their efforts support Relativity! This is a lie. They disprove Einstotle’s philosophical maths.
Space merged with time and being ‘curved’ is one of the great mysticisms from the Church of ‘The Science’. It is nonsense of course. See the quote aboe. Einstein knew it was a fable. He even admitted that the universe is Euclidean, not a geometrically curved dimension.
The merger of space with time is one of the great deceptions in ‘The Science’. The 2 concepts have nothing to do with each other. They are merged to correct errors in Relativity’s maths, and to compensate for the very weak force that is gravity, and to explain how planets over billions (soon trillions?) of Darwinian years, serenely glide around their ‘star’.
For some reason there is widespread acceptance, even amongst ‘sceptics’, of the anti-reality position that space-time are merged into a 4th dimension. Tesla one of the 20th century’s most prolific engineers, knew that Relativity, including the 4th dimension of ‘space-time’, was a fraud. He also propsed a sensible ‘dynamic gravity’ theorem that the relativists did not accept.
Tesla is mostly forgotten and rarely taught. Here we have a man who more than any other single person, helped form our modern world. The magic of electrical power - imagine a world without it! So here in magnificent mediocrity I sit surrounded by the Catholic Croatian Tesla’s brain.
It was Tesla who created the entire framework of AC power, including generation, motors, coils, capacitators, transformers and fluorescent lighting. Edison had promoted Direct Current which had a 21-mile distribution limitation, essentially building entire power plants to service small areas, flowing into incandescent lights. This was impracticable and uneconomic. He rejected working with Tesla, hiring and firing the workaholic Croation, with disputes over money and engineering. The Edison-Tesla conflict and saga fills an entire book and is not the focus on this short post. More here
In 1931 a 25-year-old Austrian mathematician, Kurt Gödel, developed the ‘Incompleteness Theorem’ as he analysed mathematical formulae and their relevancy. The theory is still valid today and has never been refuted, based as it is on simple common sense and demonstrable logic which parametrises the limits of provability in formal axiomatic and mathematical theories.
Principle 1: in a consistent and formal system named F, within which mathematical operations are carried out, there are statements of the language within F, which can be neither proven nor disproven (unless one uses an outside framework reference, or context, see the simple examples given above) and,
Principle 2: in this formal system named F, we cannot prove that the system itself is consistent, we must assume that it is intern
ally consistent. The internal consistency of the system has a great impact on the mathematical operations but cannot be verified without the use of an external frame of reference.
Relativity was ushered into being to explain the thousands of experiments that can find no motion of our planet. In the last post we looked at the error in the tensor calculus maths in Relativity. By itself this disproves the theory and all its many hydra-headed claims.
We also discussed the illogical nature of Relativity, both Special and General, given that neither theory can explain heliocentricity, or the thousands of experiments which failed to find the movement of the Earth. This short post has a look at Mercury’s perhelion and gravity and why Relativity is unnecessary in both cases as an explanatory model. More here
Einstein’s Relativity yields results which are in conflict with the postulates upon which it is based namely:
1. Space time curvature is the basis of General Relativity (a demonstrably false and unproven concept),
2. Physical laws are the same in all frames of reference (equivalency). This is also false (see below) (Bertschinger, 1999).
The above are tautological as summarised below. In order to produce his equivalency through mathematical models only, namely tensor calculus equations, Einstein had to invent the curvature of space time. Logically, this means that his postulates are circular and incorrect. You see this in the maths.
There is at least one significant error in Einsteinian maths which impact the derivations. This error must have been known by Einstotle and those within the discipleship of Relativity. Intelligent undergraduates in physics have no doubt uncovered the error and raised objections, only to be beaten down by dogmatic high priests who demand bended knees and subservience to Relativity.
In many posts we have discussed the Lorentz Transformation which is the basis of Relativity and was ushered into existence by the Dutchman Hendrik Lorentz after the failure of the 1887 Michelson-Morley interferometer experiment, to find the motion of the Earth. Of course Lorentz was awarded a Nobel Prize for saving the Copernican phenomena. His name and memory are now consumed by Einstotle, the holiest of the Saints within the Church of Scientism. Few have heard of the Dutchman.
Experiments with light and water have found no movement of this planet. The only way to explain this was to invoke ‘Relativity’, namely that an ‘observer’ on a moving body cannot calculate the movement or velocity of that body or object, in relationship to another moving body or object. This was the great saviour of Copernicanism. No Relativity, no Copernicanism, no Big noisy Banging. More here
The Doppler effect was discovered by Christian Doppler in 1842. This effect occurs when the source of wave emission moves closer or farther away from the observer. The waves are compressed when the source moves closer and stretched when the source moves farther away. This phenomenon does not occur, however, when the receiver moves closer or farther away from a stationary source since the waves coming to the receiver are the same in both cases.
Light acts in a similar manner. If the source of light is moving closer to the observer, the light waves are compressed or ‘blue-shifted’; while if the source of light is moving farther away from the observer, the light waves are stretched or ‘red-shifted’. This is the theory. Redshifting has little to do however with ‘age’, or even distance and recession. It is an emanation from the light spectrum at a frequency level. It does not confirm ‘time’ as explained below.
More here
One of the more popular, if apocryphal ‘proof’s of Copernicanism, is the ‘phases of Venus’ argument, first put forward by the irascible, self-promoting Galileo who disbelieved in the veracity of comets, and whose proof of Copernicanism rested on tidal flows. The myth of Galileo and his purported struggle for ‘science’ against an ignorant, unknowing and corrupt Church is dealt with here. Almost none of what is taught about the Galileo ‘travesty’ is valid.
A charge forwarded by the Copernicans was that that Ptolemy’s geo-centric model could not account for the phases of Venus. This is not true. It does not infer that Ptolemy’s model was correct, but it also does not mean that the Copernican model is valid.
More here
A long-standing problem, known to ancient astronomers, is that of planetary retrograde motions. Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, appear as bright stars that move along paths inclined to the ecliptic by only a few degrees. Their observed periods of motion with respect to the Sun range from 116 days for Mercury, 584 for Venus and 780 days for Mars.
These planets move west to east through the stars like the Sun and moon do, but from time to time the planets halt their eastward motion and appear to move backward, east to west, before resuming their normal eastward motion. In principle, each of the planets, as viewed from Earth, will create a retrograde motion, although some, due to their proximity to Earth, will have more pronounced retrogrades. This is true of Venus and Mars, the latter’s path being the most eccentric.
Retrograde motion does not support heliocentricity and raises quite a few questions. After stellar parallax and stellar aberration, it is the most cited ‘proof’. None of them, however, ‘confirm’ heliocentricity.
More here
In 1995 the European Space Agency launched the SOHO or the Solar and Heliospheric Operations space probe. SOHO studies and photographs the relationship between the Sun and Earth.
SOHO was designed to help answer:
The structure and dynamics of the solar interior
Why does the solar corona exist and how is it heated to the extremely high temperature of about 1 000 000°C?
Where is the solar wind produced and how is it accelerated
The origins and trajectories of comets (some 5000 discovered)
SOHO moves around the Sun in step with the Earth, by slowly orbiting around the First Lagrangian Point (L1), where the combined gravity of the Earth and Sun keep SOHO in an orbit locked to the Earth-Sun line. The L1 point is approximately 1.5 million kilometres away from Earth (about four times the distance of the Moon), in the direction of the Sun.
SOHO has an uninterrupted view of the Sun.
SOHO transmits a continuous 200 kbit/s data stream of photographs and other measurements via the NASA Deep Space Network of ground stations. Probably the key objective of SOHO's utility is to predict coronal mass ejection (CME) arrival times at Earth. This is to protect electrical grids and satellites. CMEs directed toward the Earth may also produce geomagnetic storms, which in turn produce geomagnetically induced currents, in the most extreme cases creating black-outs or disruptions. More here
SOHO transmits a continuous 200 kbit/s data stream of
photographs and other measurements via the NASA Deep Space Network of ground stations. Probably the key objective of SOHO's utility is to predict coronal mass ejection (CME) arrival times at Earth. This is to protect electrical grids and satellites. CMEs directed toward the Earth may also produce geomagnetic storms, which in turn produce geomagnetically induced currents, in the most extreme cases creating black-outs or disruptions.
Niall Ferguson to his credit recognizes the role faith plays in both the development of reason, and of the political-economy and its social-environmental evolution. His comments are worth reading at some length. On page 264 he gets to the crux of the matter as to why the West is better than the Rest [to quote his own depiction]:
“Religions matter. In earlier chapters we saw how the 'stability ethic' of Confucianism played a part in imperial China's failure to develop the kind of competitive institutional framework that promoted innovation in Western Europe....But perhaps the biggest contribution of religion to the history of Western civilization was this. Protestantism made the West not only work, but also save and read. The Industrial Revolution was indeed a product of technological innovation and consumption.”
All true. Though Weber's Protestant read, work and save ethic, is indeed a prime source of European dynamism it must also be said that the Catholic Church saved Europe and should be given joint credit for its rise to dominance. The Roman church developed the economy, fought wars of liberation and defence against Islam [including the Crusades which bought Europe 500 years of time to develop]; stimulated the creation of schools, universities, enquiry and debate; and financed science and art. The balance sheet of the Catholic Church is usually taught as a negative. This is nonsense. Even with the sordid foibles, corruption and inquisitorial nature of the Church, its influence in European development is undeniably positive and decisive.
The 'Great Republic' is a book compiled from many essays which Churchill wrote about America, during his many years in politics. This book was formed and edited by his grandson, Winston S. Churchill who was also for a time, an MP in the British Parliament. The book makes for interesting reading because it covers all of American history, including the Revolution, the Civil War, slavery, America's role in two World Wars, and even the creation of Canada. One of the more interesting chapters is named 'The American Constitution'. It is a good read because it gives the reasons why America, and its key foundational text is so outstandingly unique.
One has to wonder what Churchill would say today of the American government's disregard for this document? What would be his reaction to the destruction of the rules of political engagement which allowed in very large part, the creation of the modern world and of American exceptionalism? The Federal government alone now consumes close to 30% of national income, with ownership of key sectors such as auto manufacturing and banking. One doubts very much, that Churchill would be impressed by the totalitarian pretensions of the unDemocratic or anti-Republican parties.
One of Churchill's strengths in his 66 year long political career, was his defense of both democracy; and of the Constitutional division of powers. He admired the US foundational texts as being unique in human history, and the bedrock of the Republican ideal. The US Constitution was not just an piece of parchment concocted by rich, white men, who owned slaves – but rather the apogee of genius, crafted by highly intelligent men, who were successful in life, and knew how a prosperous and well-functioning nation state should be developed.
“Socialism seeks to pull down wealth; Liberalism seeks to raise up poverty.”
[Churchill May 14 1908, Dundee Hall speech].
This is little book a wonderful and new product for Churchilliana. The publishing firm, General Books, copied a number of Churchill's speeches between 1906 and 1912 using optical character recognition software. These full length reproductions were then turned into a book of some 138 pages. They are a fine compilation on Churchill's vision of 'Liberalism', or the establishment of what some might call welfare-capitalism, which merges aspects of socialism and communal responsibility, with trade, free[ish] markets, and aspects of capitalism.
These speeches formed the ideology and political convictions of Churchill the politician during the social-reforming era of 1906 to 1912. This was when the modern welfare state and its important components was created. Churchill became a minister of power during 2 governments serving as MP for Manchester North-West [1906-8], and Dundee [1908-22]. He entered the Cabinet in 1908 until 1910 as President of the Board of Trade and served as the Home Secretary from 1910 to 1911. These crucial 5 years from 1907 to 1912 were essential to restoring the communal health of Great Britain and the many 'have-nots'. Churchill's speeches make the argument as to why this is so and why a safety net of health, insurance, poor relief, and wage floors is necessary. Conservatives might be shocked but yes we do need a minimum welfare state.
The usual lament is that 'we don't build anything anymore' in advanced economies. This is not true. 15 % of GDP is in manufacturing and if one adds in software and technology development – which is a manufacturing process – the number is 30%. IT accounts for about 15% of US GDP making it the single most important industry. There are three factors about manufacturing which the mainstream media never reports.
Euro, soon to be a Zeuro. Europe has long been infected with the disease which first appeared with some force in the mid 19th century from the revolutionary slogans of 1848 to the mindlessness of Nietzsche's sad little writings which attempted to create 'supermen' out of a culture which was becoming socialist. All people, cultures, ideas and nations are equal. Fairness means everyone is the same. Equality is where all people and states are equally poor and miserable. Any 'gaps' in wealth, productivity, talent or initiative must be 'reduced' by government. If you try hard you are a criminally liable idiot, a threat to the state. Life is a large vacation punctuated by periods of unproductive, unsatisfying labour. The tenets of Christian civilization – rationality, gratitude, humility, hard-work, the reduction of the ego, the Golden Rule – are all relics of superstition and stupidity. Narcissism, self-absorption, 'free' benefits, TV and cults are the coveted idols of sophistication.
When your society is built upon the foundations of Rousseau and modern cultural Marxism it is bound to fail. When a currency is created to 'hide the decline', and allow governments more unfettered access to printed money currency, regulations, taxation, and power, the end is only a matter of time. Of course European 'leaders' now 'demand' a fiscal union. That is after all the whole point of the Euro exercise. Create a monetary disaster which implodes fiscal reality, and then offer 'solutions' which involve more government centralization and unfettered power.
Fiat currencies will disappear at least in their current form. When Nixon abolished the Gold Standard in 1971 he did so for self-interested reasons. He was aping the failed but short term policy of Lincoln during the Civil War – print more money all the time – to fund the war effort. That lasted only 4 years, and the inflationary effects were real but eaten up within 5 years by a rebounding economy, growing large and powerful on a unified Continental sized market. Nixon's feat has endured 40 years with a huge increase in the printing of money aligned with zero interest rates in the past 10 years, guaranteeing some form of future financial destruction. There are laws of economics, and we can't ignore them, though the big brains which run the world often times do.
US debt took off post 1971, when the US dollar was decoupled from the Gold standard.
The ancient Greeks set up the Oracle of Delphi as a temple to Apollo the Sun and Music God. The high priestesses were stoned on Datura leaves and mumbled some nonsense to any who brought a question. They were revealing what the 'Earth Mother' forecast. But like Nostradumuses sayings, much of what these stoned women muttered was completely inane and incomprehensible. No matter. The Delphic cult believed. This is essential. Muslims believe they are the chosen ones destined by the moon deity for an after-life of pleasure and endless sex [at least for Muslim men]. Our new Earth Mother cult has to give the cult members a combination of Delphic surety and Islamic rewards. It must in other words, transcend mere paganism and take on the attributes of a religion. To this end I propose the establishment – with tax money – of Churches in every single urban center, with the name of 'Earth Mother Institute'. Thus they will not look like a 'normal church' and won't be vilified by really smart people or the media. We will teach that by following our cult, your life will be purified, you will be moral, you will be superior, and at some point, because you are 'one with nature', you will be rewarded in both this life and the next.
Climate Change is a mythical problem premised on grand lies and fraud. Witness some real world facts: Co2 Emissions today are at their 2nd lowest level in history.
During the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today.
The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 18 times higher than today.
The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm
Ice Ages are the norm:
“For ninety percent of the last million years, the normal state of the Earth's climate has been an ice age. Ice ages last about 100,000 years, and are punctuated by short periods of warm climate, or inter-glacials. The last ice age started about 114,000 years ago. It began instantaneously. For a hundred-thousand years, temperatures fell and sheets of ice a mile thick grew to envelop much of North America, Europe and Asia. The ice age ended nearly as abruptly as it began. Between about 12,000 and 10,000 years ago, the temperature in Greenland rose more than 50 °F.”
The UN IPCC scam
The fact that Co2 does not cause anything is a scientific fact. The Earth is not a greenhouse and ergo there can be no forcing of water vapour causing global cooling. There are over 1 million impact variables in the earth's convection system. The most common climate is an ice age – a reality completely divorced from Co2 levels or human activity. The sun has more to do with climate patterns than human activity.
No one from the Marxist-Globalist Globaloney Warming cult can explain the creation and the ending of the last ice age. Nor can they posit why Co2 levels which are at their 2nd lowest level in the last 2 million years have any ties to temperature, in spite of local climactic conditions and physical thermodynamics – both of which disprove 'global temperature' as utterly meaningless. The cult can't explain local variations or why the IPCC fraudulent data confirms that the earth is cooling, not warming. IPCC models [26 of them], have proven utterly futile at predicting any real world climate events or temperatures – a fact again left unexplained by the Eco Fascist cult.
Socialist reduction
Socialism always fails. States cannot afford socialized programs. If you deem health care to be a human right than nationalize food, housing, water bottle distribution, and clothing. Health care is no different than any other market. If a socialized system is truly necessary than we should at least have the rational intelligence to allow a functioning market to co-exist in which private insurances, care, and access are subject to price points and supply and demand factors. Not only would that alleviate the stress on state budgets it would improve the morality of the system by both decreasing costs and death rates. The modern dark-age mantra of 'socialism is good' is absurd. Time to move on.