It was a 5-year project to develop and test a commercially-sized marine current turbine. The turbine was installed in the summer of 2003 off Foreland Point, near Lynmouth on the North Devon coast of England, and has been successfully operated and tested sincethen.
The turbine is a 300 kW, horizontal-axis machine that resembles a 2-bladed wind turbine, but with the rotor underwater. The turbine is mounted on a steel pile fixed into a socket in the seabed, and the power train – the rotor, gearbox and generator - can be slid up and down the pile and out of the water for servicing.
The project has included identifying a site for the turbine and obtaining all the necessary Permissions to install it, including conducting an Environmental Impact Assessment into its effects on marine life and processes, the landscape, and other sea users.
The project was co-ordinated by the renewable energy consultancy, IT Power. The other Partners were Seacore, a marine construction company, ISET, a research organization attached to Kassel University, and Jahnel-Kesterman, a specialist gearbox manufacturer. Aparallel project funded by the UK Government Department of Trade and Industry, DTI, had IT Power as its co-ordinator and Seacore as a partner, but added Marine Current Turbines Ltd., Bendalls Engineering, and Corus as UK partners. This consortium developed the machine from an early concept stage to detailed designs, then manufactured or purchased the components, and assembled and tested the prototype. The installation was carried out by a jack-up barge that could stand on legs on the seabed, providing a stable platform for drilling and assembly. No underwater operations were required.
Early testing has confirmed much of the design philosophy, and the turbine has performed at least as well as predicted. New techniques have been developed to install the turbine in a deep, high current area, and much has been learnt about working in such environments. The project has increased understanding of the nature of tidal flows, and the behavior of a rotor in tidal currents. SEAFLOW lays the foundations for the development of a new industry, exploiting what is could be a sizeable renewable energy resource. The partners plan to follow SEAFLOW with further, larger prototypes, and to move to commercial production in the medium term. A dedicated company, Marine Current Turbines Ltd, has been set up to achieve this.
Source: India Daily Technology Team,
Nov. 27, 2005
India plans unmanned mission and is studying technical challenges in manned mission to far out in space
India has planned an unmanned scientific mission to moon called Chandayan-I which is scheduled for launch in 2007-08, Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office Prithviraj Chavan informed the Rajya Sabha (Upper House of Parliament) on Thursday [8 December].
In a written reply, Chavan said Chandrayan-I spacecraft is scheduled for launch by India's Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle during 2007-08.
To another question, Chavan said the Indian Space Research Organization is conducting preliminary studies to understand the technological challenges involved in undertaking manned mission to space.
These studies, he said include design of suitable space capsule to carry astronauts, life support systems, thermal management, issues related with re-entry and training facilities for the astronauts.
However, at present there is no proposal seeking approval to send humans to space.
Source: India Daily, Technology Team,
Dec. 8, 2005
In a written reply, Chavan said Chandrayan-I spacecraft is scheduled for launch by India's Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle during 2007-08.
To another question, Chavan said the Indian Space Research Organization is conducting preliminary studies to understand the technological challenges involved in undertaking manned mission to space.
These studies, he said include design of suitable space capsule to carry astronauts, life support systems, thermal management, issues related with re-entry and training facilities for the astronauts.
However, at present there is no proposal seeking approval to send humans to space.
Source: India Daily, Technology Team,
Dec. 8, 2005
Existence of life in the cosmos, interesting results from Electron Probe Microanalysis
Scientists all around the world have found some interesting results while analyzing meteors and comet remains on the ground. Electron Probe Microanalysis provides some detailed data on the chemistry of the remains.
Electron Probe Microanalysis (EPMA) basically works by bombarding a sample with a focused electron beam (typical energy = 5-30 keV) and collecting the X-ray photons thereby induced and emitted by the various atomic species in the sample. Because the wavelengths of these X-rays are characteristic of the emitting species, the sample composition can be easily identified by recording WDS spectra (Wavelength Dispersive Spectroscopy). WDS spectrometers are based on Bragg's law and use various moveable, shaped mono-crystals to reflect the X-rays in the direction of the detectors (mostly gas-filled proportional counters).
EPMA is a fully qualitative and quantitative method of non-destructive analysis at the surface of materials, with sensitivity at the level of ppm. Routine quantification to 1% reproducibility is obtained over several days. It is the one of the most precise and accurate micro-analysis techniques available.
Source: India Daily, Technology Team,
Dec. 7, 2005
Electron Probe Microanalysis (EPMA) basically works by bombarding a sample with a focused electron beam (typical energy = 5-30 keV) and collecting the X-ray photons thereby induced and emitted by the various atomic species in the sample. Because the wavelengths of these X-rays are characteristic of the emitting species, the sample composition can be easily identified by recording WDS spectra (Wavelength Dispersive Spectroscopy). WDS spectrometers are based on Bragg's law and use various moveable, shaped mono-crystals to reflect the X-rays in the direction of the detectors (mostly gas-filled proportional counters).
EPMA is a fully qualitative and quantitative method of non-destructive analysis at the surface of materials, with sensitivity at the level of ppm. Routine quantification to 1% reproducibility is obtained over several days. It is the one of the most precise and accurate micro-analysis techniques available.
Source: India Daily, Technology Team,
Dec. 7, 2005
What Planet is Bill Clinton Living On?
by Arianna Huffington
After watching Bill Clinton’s jovial joint appearance with Bush 41 on Larry King last night, I found myself wondering what planet this guy is living on. He seemed utterly disconnected from reality.
The two former presidents were on the show to discuss “the big announcement” of the first major grants from the Bush/Clinton Katrina Fund, but King started the questioning by asking both men about Iraq.
Bush, Sr. begged off, saying: “I don’t get into these things, Larry, anymore, you know that.”
Maybe Clinton should have tried the same dodge, because his response was utterly incoherent -- starting with his claim, “I’m here to do this tsunami work” (hurricane work, Mr. President. The tsunami work was in the spring).
Then he offered up this pearl of wisdom on the war in Iraq: “Whether you were for it or against it or whatever your opinions of it are to date, every American ought to be pulling for this mission to succeed.” What the hell is that supposed to mean?
This is a catalytic moment in the Democratic Party, with its members struggling to define their position on the war (my advice: follow Jack Murtha), and the best Clinton can come up with is an empty bromide about every American pulling for the mission to succeed?
He then backed up his argument by saying: “All you have to do is remember this terrible terrorist attack in Jordan that was launched from the Sunni section of Iraq to know that”. Huh? You lost me there, Bill. Are you suggesting that we need to fight them over there so that they won’t blow up weddings in Jordan?
Just a couple of weeks ago, Clinton told a gathering of students in Dubai that the invasion of Iraq was “a big mistake”. So why didn’t he say that last night? Didn’t want to hurt Poppy’s feelings? Or is he taking a page out of Hillary’s Iraq playbook and calibrating his position depending on who he’s talking to?
Clinton was just as lost in space when the discussion turned to Katrina, the ostensible reason for the ex-presidents’ appearance. There was lots of talk about the $110 million the pair had raised -- including donations from the governments of Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, and Trinidad and Tobago -- for Katrina relief, but not one word on the current uproar over the failure of President Bush and Congress to follow through on the promise to rebuild the Gulf Coast.
On the very same day that Mississippi Gov. -- and GOP stalwart -- Haley Barbour was lamenting that “inaction in Washington” was having “very negative effects on our recovery and rebuilding”, Bill Clinton was acting as if everything was going great: “The president has appointed a very good man -- Don Powell -- to head up the reconstruction effort. He’s a really good man and I think he’ll do fine.” Tell that to Katrina’s victims who are still waiting for the White House to deliver a comprehensive recovery plan and for Congress to authorize the money to pay for it. As Robert Byrd put it: “It’s December. The hurricane struck in August, and yet the victims seem forgotten by the White House.”
And, at least on Larry King, Clinton completely ignored the emotional Congressional testimony the day before of a group of black survivors of the storm. Didn’t the first black president feel their pain enough to even mention them?
The weirdest part of the interview was the discussion of Clinton’s summer visit to the Bush compound in Kennebunkport. The two former rivals sounded positively besotted with each other:
Bush: “We gave him a good time -- and went out and lost to him in golf and did a lot of fun things… It’s very easy and compatible. Guy fit right in, right into the family.”
Clinton: “I had a wonderful time… He took me out in his speedboat and nearly killed me, he was driving so fast -- I just loved it.”
Could Clinton sound any more like a giddy schoolgirl? His speedboat? Really? Ohmygod!
It all reminded me of “Vows,” the breathless New York Times feature where newly married couples describe their courtship. I can just imagine it:
“At first it was a love-hate thing, what with us running against each other in ‘92. Then came the tsunami and, as we were raising the $1 billion, the sparks started to fly. Just like it happened with Renee Zellweger and Kenny Chesney -- only without the sudden divorce, charges of “fraud”, and insinuations of homosexuality. I think our relationship was really cemented that time we were flying to Asia, and I let George have the only bed on the plane while I slept on the floor. He always said that “meant a great deal” to him. Then came that fateful summer trip to Kennebunkport: I won at golf, he drove too fast in his speedboat. After that it was just a matter of deciding which one of us would pop the question….”
This cover of this month’s Esquire calls Clinton “The Most Influential Man in the World”. Last night he seemed like “The Most Clueless Man in the World”. And the giddiest.
Arianna Huffington is a nationally syndicated columnist, author of ten books and co-founder and editor of the HuffingtonPost.com. She is also co-host of "Left, Right & Center," public radio's popular political roundtable program. Her weekly commentary is syndicated in newspapers across the country by Tribune Media Services.
Common Dreams,
Published on Saturday, December 10, 2005 by the Huffington Post
After watching Bill Clinton’s jovial joint appearance with Bush 41 on Larry King last night, I found myself wondering what planet this guy is living on. He seemed utterly disconnected from reality.
The two former presidents were on the show to discuss “the big announcement” of the first major grants from the Bush/Clinton Katrina Fund, but King started the questioning by asking both men about Iraq.
Bush, Sr. begged off, saying: “I don’t get into these things, Larry, anymore, you know that.”
Maybe Clinton should have tried the same dodge, because his response was utterly incoherent -- starting with his claim, “I’m here to do this tsunami work” (hurricane work, Mr. President. The tsunami work was in the spring).
Then he offered up this pearl of wisdom on the war in Iraq: “Whether you were for it or against it or whatever your opinions of it are to date, every American ought to be pulling for this mission to succeed.” What the hell is that supposed to mean?
This is a catalytic moment in the Democratic Party, with its members struggling to define their position on the war (my advice: follow Jack Murtha), and the best Clinton can come up with is an empty bromide about every American pulling for the mission to succeed?
He then backed up his argument by saying: “All you have to do is remember this terrible terrorist attack in Jordan that was launched from the Sunni section of Iraq to know that”. Huh? You lost me there, Bill. Are you suggesting that we need to fight them over there so that they won’t blow up weddings in Jordan?
Just a couple of weeks ago, Clinton told a gathering of students in Dubai that the invasion of Iraq was “a big mistake”. So why didn’t he say that last night? Didn’t want to hurt Poppy’s feelings? Or is he taking a page out of Hillary’s Iraq playbook and calibrating his position depending on who he’s talking to?
Clinton was just as lost in space when the discussion turned to Katrina, the ostensible reason for the ex-presidents’ appearance. There was lots of talk about the $110 million the pair had raised -- including donations from the governments of Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, and Trinidad and Tobago -- for Katrina relief, but not one word on the current uproar over the failure of President Bush and Congress to follow through on the promise to rebuild the Gulf Coast.
On the very same day that Mississippi Gov. -- and GOP stalwart -- Haley Barbour was lamenting that “inaction in Washington” was having “very negative effects on our recovery and rebuilding”, Bill Clinton was acting as if everything was going great: “The president has appointed a very good man -- Don Powell -- to head up the reconstruction effort. He’s a really good man and I think he’ll do fine.” Tell that to Katrina’s victims who are still waiting for the White House to deliver a comprehensive recovery plan and for Congress to authorize the money to pay for it. As Robert Byrd put it: “It’s December. The hurricane struck in August, and yet the victims seem forgotten by the White House.”
And, at least on Larry King, Clinton completely ignored the emotional Congressional testimony the day before of a group of black survivors of the storm. Didn’t the first black president feel their pain enough to even mention them?
The weirdest part of the interview was the discussion of Clinton’s summer visit to the Bush compound in Kennebunkport. The two former rivals sounded positively besotted with each other:
Bush: “We gave him a good time -- and went out and lost to him in golf and did a lot of fun things… It’s very easy and compatible. Guy fit right in, right into the family.”
Clinton: “I had a wonderful time… He took me out in his speedboat and nearly killed me, he was driving so fast -- I just loved it.”
Could Clinton sound any more like a giddy schoolgirl? His speedboat? Really? Ohmygod!
It all reminded me of “Vows,” the breathless New York Times feature where newly married couples describe their courtship. I can just imagine it:
“At first it was a love-hate thing, what with us running against each other in ‘92. Then came the tsunami and, as we were raising the $1 billion, the sparks started to fly. Just like it happened with Renee Zellweger and Kenny Chesney -- only without the sudden divorce, charges of “fraud”, and insinuations of homosexuality. I think our relationship was really cemented that time we were flying to Asia, and I let George have the only bed on the plane while I slept on the floor. He always said that “meant a great deal” to him. Then came that fateful summer trip to Kennebunkport: I won at golf, he drove too fast in his speedboat. After that it was just a matter of deciding which one of us would pop the question….”
This cover of this month’s Esquire calls Clinton “The Most Influential Man in the World”. Last night he seemed like “The Most Clueless Man in the World”. And the giddiest.
Arianna Huffington is a nationally syndicated columnist, author of ten books and co-founder and editor of the HuffingtonPost.com. She is also co-host of "Left, Right & Center," public radio's popular political roundtable program. Her weekly commentary is syndicated in newspapers across the country by Tribune Media Services.
Common Dreams,
Published on Saturday, December 10, 2005 by the Huffington Post
Former Canadian Minister Of Defence Asks Canadian Parliament Asked To Hold Hearings On Relations With Alien "Et" Civilizations
Former Canadian Minister Of Defence Asks Canadian Parliament Asked To Hold Hearings On Relations With Alien "Et" Civilizations
Thu Nov 24, 7:00 AM ET
OTTAWA, CANADA (PRWEB) November 24, 2005 -- A former Canadian Minister of Defence and Deputy Prime Minister under Pierre Trudeau has joined forces with three Non-governmental organizations to ask the Parliament of Canada to hold public hearings on Exopolitics -- relations with “ETs.”
By “ETs,” Mr. Hellyer and these organizations mean ethical, advanced extraterrestrial civilizations that may now be visiting Earth.
On September 25, 2005, in a startling speech at the University of Toronto that caught the attention of mainstream newspapers and magazines, Paul Hellyer, Canada’s Defence Minister from 1963-67 under Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Prime Minister Lester Pearson, publicly stated: "UFOs, are as real as the airplanes that fly over your head."
Mr. Hellyer went on to say, "I'm so concerned about what the consequences might be of starting an intergalactic war, that I just think I had to say something."
Hellyer revealed, "The secrecy involved in all matters pertaining to the Roswell incident was unparalled. The classification was, from the outset, above top secret, so the vast majority of U.S. officials and politicians, let alone a mere allied minister of defence, were never in-the-loop."
Hellyer warned, "The United States military are preparing weapons which could be used against the aliens, and they could get us into an intergalactic war without us ever having any warning. He stated, "The Bush administration has finally agreed to let the military build a forward base on the moon, which will put them in a better position to keep track of the goings and comings of the visitors from space, and to shoot at them, if they so decide."
Hellyer’s speech ended with a standing ovation. He said, "The time has come to lift the veil of secrecy, and let the truth emerge, so there can be a real and informed debate, about one of the most important problems facing our planet today."
Three Non-governmental organizations took Hellyer’s words to heart, and approached Canada’s Parliament in Ottawa, Canada’s capital, to hold public hearings on a possible ET presence, and what Canada should do. The Canadian Senate, which is an appointed body, has held objective, well-regarded hearings and issued reports on controversial issues such as same-sex marriage and medical marijuana,
On October 20, 2005, the Institute for Cooperation in Space requested Canadian Senator Colin Kenny, Senator, Chair of The Senate Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, “schedule public hearings on the Canadian Exopolitics Initiative, so that witnesses such as the Hon. Paul Hellyer, and Canadian-connected high level military-intelligence, NORAD-connected, scientific, and governmental witnesses facilitated by the Disclosure Project and by the Toronto Exopolitics Symposium can present compelling evidence, testimony, and Public Policy recommendations.”
The Non-governmental organizations seeking Parliament hearings include Canada-based Toronto Exopolitics Symposium, which organized the University of Toronto Symposium at which Mr. Hellyer spoke.
The Disclosure Project, a U.S.– based organization that has assembled high level military-intelligence witnesses of a possible ET presence, is also one of the organizations seeking Canadian Parliament hearings.
Vancouver-based Institute for Cooperation in Space (ICIS), whose International Director headed a proposed 1977 Extraterrestrial Communication Study for the White House of former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, who himself has publicly reported a 1969 Close Encounter of the First Kind with a UFO, filed the original request for Canadian Parliament hearings.
The Canadian Exopolitics Initiative, presented by the organizations to a Senate Committee panel hearing in Winnipeg, Canada, on March 10, 2005, proposes that the Government of Canada undertake a Decade of Contact.
The proposed Decade of Contact is “a 10-year process of formal, funded public education, scientific research, educational curricula development and implementation, strategic planning, community activity, and public outreach concerning our terrestrial society’s full cultural, political, social, legal, and governmental communication and public interest diplomacy with advanced, ethical Off-Planet cultures now visiting Earth.”
Canada has a long history of opposing the basing of weapons in Outer Space. On September 22, 2004 Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin declared to the U.N. General Assembly,” "Space is our final frontier. It has always captured our imagination. What a tragedy it would be if space became one big weapons arsenal and the scene of a new arms race.
Martin stated, "In 1967, the United Nations agreed that weapons of mass
destruction must not be based in space. The time has come to extend this ban to all weapons..."
In May, 2003, speaking before the Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada Lloyd Axworthy, stated “Washington's offer to Canada is not an invitation to join America under a protective shield, but it presents a global security doctrine that violates Canadian values on many levels."
Axworthy concluded, “There should be an uncompromising commitment to preventing the placement of weapons in space.”
On February 24, 2005, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin made official Canada's decision not to take part in the U.S government’s Ballistic Missile Defence program.
Paul Hellyer, who now seeks Canadian Parliament hearings on relations with ETs, on May 15, 2003, stated in Toronto’s Globe & Mail newspaper, “Canada should accept the long-standing invitation of U.S. Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio to launch a conference to seek approval of an international treaty to ban weapons in space. That would be a positive Canadian contribution toward a more peaceful world.”
In early November 2005, the Canadian Senate wrote ICIS, indicating the Senate Committee could not hold hearings on ETs in 2005, because of their already crowded schedule.
“That does not deter us,” one spokesperson for the Non-governmental organizations said, “We are going ahead with our request to Prime Minister Paul Martin and the official opposition leaders in the House of Commons now, and we will re-apply with the Senate of Canada in early 2006.
“Time is on the side of open disclosure that there are ethical Extraterrestrial civilizations visiting Earth,” The spokesperson stated. “Our Canadian government needs to openly address these important issues of the possible deployment of weapons in outer war plans against ethical ET societies.”
Word Count: [1011]
Canadian Exopolitics Initiative
http://www.peaceinspace.net
Thu Nov 24, 7:00 AM ET
OTTAWA, CANADA (PRWEB) November 24, 2005 -- A former Canadian Minister of Defence and Deputy Prime Minister under Pierre Trudeau has joined forces with three Non-governmental organizations to ask the Parliament of Canada to hold public hearings on Exopolitics -- relations with “ETs.”
By “ETs,” Mr. Hellyer and these organizations mean ethical, advanced extraterrestrial civilizations that may now be visiting Earth.
On September 25, 2005, in a startling speech at the University of Toronto that caught the attention of mainstream newspapers and magazines, Paul Hellyer, Canada’s Defence Minister from 1963-67 under Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Prime Minister Lester Pearson, publicly stated: "UFOs, are as real as the airplanes that fly over your head."
Mr. Hellyer went on to say, "I'm so concerned about what the consequences might be of starting an intergalactic war, that I just think I had to say something."
Hellyer revealed, "The secrecy involved in all matters pertaining to the Roswell incident was unparalled. The classification was, from the outset, above top secret, so the vast majority of U.S. officials and politicians, let alone a mere allied minister of defence, were never in-the-loop."
Hellyer warned, "The United States military are preparing weapons which could be used against the aliens, and they could get us into an intergalactic war without us ever having any warning. He stated, "The Bush administration has finally agreed to let the military build a forward base on the moon, which will put them in a better position to keep track of the goings and comings of the visitors from space, and to shoot at them, if they so decide."
Hellyer’s speech ended with a standing ovation. He said, "The time has come to lift the veil of secrecy, and let the truth emerge, so there can be a real and informed debate, about one of the most important problems facing our planet today."
Three Non-governmental organizations took Hellyer’s words to heart, and approached Canada’s Parliament in Ottawa, Canada’s capital, to hold public hearings on a possible ET presence, and what Canada should do. The Canadian Senate, which is an appointed body, has held objective, well-regarded hearings and issued reports on controversial issues such as same-sex marriage and medical marijuana,
On October 20, 2005, the Institute for Cooperation in Space requested Canadian Senator Colin Kenny, Senator, Chair of The Senate Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, “schedule public hearings on the Canadian Exopolitics Initiative, so that witnesses such as the Hon. Paul Hellyer, and Canadian-connected high level military-intelligence, NORAD-connected, scientific, and governmental witnesses facilitated by the Disclosure Project and by the Toronto Exopolitics Symposium can present compelling evidence, testimony, and Public Policy recommendations.”
The Non-governmental organizations seeking Parliament hearings include Canada-based Toronto Exopolitics Symposium, which organized the University of Toronto Symposium at which Mr. Hellyer spoke.
The Disclosure Project, a U.S.– based organization that has assembled high level military-intelligence witnesses of a possible ET presence, is also one of the organizations seeking Canadian Parliament hearings.
Vancouver-based Institute for Cooperation in Space (ICIS), whose International Director headed a proposed 1977 Extraterrestrial Communication Study for the White House of former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, who himself has publicly reported a 1969 Close Encounter of the First Kind with a UFO, filed the original request for Canadian Parliament hearings.
The Canadian Exopolitics Initiative, presented by the organizations to a Senate Committee panel hearing in Winnipeg, Canada, on March 10, 2005, proposes that the Government of Canada undertake a Decade of Contact.
The proposed Decade of Contact is “a 10-year process of formal, funded public education, scientific research, educational curricula development and implementation, strategic planning, community activity, and public outreach concerning our terrestrial society’s full cultural, political, social, legal, and governmental communication and public interest diplomacy with advanced, ethical Off-Planet cultures now visiting Earth.”
Canada has a long history of opposing the basing of weapons in Outer Space. On September 22, 2004 Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin declared to the U.N. General Assembly,” "Space is our final frontier. It has always captured our imagination. What a tragedy it would be if space became one big weapons arsenal and the scene of a new arms race.
Martin stated, "In 1967, the United Nations agreed that weapons of mass
destruction must not be based in space. The time has come to extend this ban to all weapons..."
In May, 2003, speaking before the Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada Lloyd Axworthy, stated “Washington's offer to Canada is not an invitation to join America under a protective shield, but it presents a global security doctrine that violates Canadian values on many levels."
Axworthy concluded, “There should be an uncompromising commitment to preventing the placement of weapons in space.”
On February 24, 2005, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin made official Canada's decision not to take part in the U.S government’s Ballistic Missile Defence program.
Paul Hellyer, who now seeks Canadian Parliament hearings on relations with ETs, on May 15, 2003, stated in Toronto’s Globe & Mail newspaper, “Canada should accept the long-standing invitation of U.S. Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio to launch a conference to seek approval of an international treaty to ban weapons in space. That would be a positive Canadian contribution toward a more peaceful world.”
In early November 2005, the Canadian Senate wrote ICIS, indicating the Senate Committee could not hold hearings on ETs in 2005, because of their already crowded schedule.
“That does not deter us,” one spokesperson for the Non-governmental organizations said, “We are going ahead with our request to Prime Minister Paul Martin and the official opposition leaders in the House of Commons now, and we will re-apply with the Senate of Canada in early 2006.
“Time is on the side of open disclosure that there are ethical Extraterrestrial civilizations visiting Earth,” The spokesperson stated. “Our Canadian government needs to openly address these important issues of the possible deployment of weapons in outer war plans against ethical ET societies.”
Word Count: [1011]
Canadian Exopolitics Initiative
http://www.peaceinspace.net
ESA's high resolution on Phobos
11 November 2004,
This image, taken by the High Resolution Stereo Camera (HRSC) on board ESA’s Mars Express spacecraft, is one of the highest-resolution pictures so far of the Martian moon Phobos.
The image shows the Mars-facing side of the moon, taken from a distance of less than 200 kilometres with a resolution of about seven metres per pixel during orbit 756, on 22 August 2004.
This colour image was calculated from the three colour channels and the nadir channel on the HRSC. Due to geometric reasons the scale bar is only valid for the centre of the image.
Credits: ESA/DLR/FU Berlin (G. Neukum)
Robot que debía aterrizar en asteroide pierde contacto con base
El robot Minerva, liberado el sábado pasado por la sonda espacial Hayabusa, debía haber tocado la superficie del asteroide Itokawa, en órbita alrededor del Sol, a fin de obtener datos sobre la composición de ese cuerpo celeste.
El Minerva debía preceder a la Hayabusa en la toma de contacto con el Itokawa, a fin de reducir los riesgos para el aterrizaje momentáneo de la sonda, previsto para finales de este mes.
Un portavoz de la Agencia de Exploración Espacial de Japón explicó a EFE que 'es prematuro decir que se ha perdido, pero, por el momento, no tenemos contacto con el robot'.
El Minerva mide 12 centímetros de diámetro y tiene una longitud de 10 centímetros; pesa apenas 600 gramos y está provisto de tres cámaras que debían enviar esa información pionera a la Tierra a través de la sonda Hayabusa.
Las fotografías tomadas desde la sonda Hayabusa mostraron al dispositivo cibernético Minerva alejándose del asteroide sin haber cumplido su objetivo, indicó la agencia espacial nipona.
Según la agencia, parece poco probable que el campo gravitacional del Itokawa atraiga al artilugio hacia su superficie, pero los científicos del centro de exploración espacial japonés siguen intentando comunicarse con el robot.
Aunque las dificultades son extremas, la esperanza no está perdida, pues las partículas de plasma solar que hay en torno al asteroide podrían impulsar de nuevo al Minerva hacia ese campo de gravedad del bólido celeste.
La sonda Hayabusa había liberado al Minerva a las 15.24 del pasado sábado, hora japonesa (06.24 GMT), para que realizara el experimento de toma de contacto con el Itokawa y reuniera datos clave para la exploración espacial.
Un intento inicial fue descartado el pasado 4 de noviembre, debido a varios problemas técnicos.
Según explicó otro portavoz de la institución espacial nipona a la agencia de noticias Kyodo, ahora es el turno de la sonda Hayabusa, para entrar en contacto físico con el citado asteroide.
Está previsto que el próximo 19 de noviembre, la Hayabusa se acerque y toque la superficie del asteroide durante unos segundos, para recabar datos sobre la temperatura e imágenes del Itokawa.
El 25 de noviembre, la sonda espacial tratará de realizar una nueva aproximación y contacto con el asteroide a fin de conseguir muestras directas que permitirán conocer más detalles sobre el origen de nuestro sistema solar.
Tras cumplir su misión, la sonda Hayabusa encenderá su motor y emprenderá el regreso a la Tierra, a donde llegará en junio de 2007.
El asteroide fue descubierto en 1998 por científicos del Instituto de Tecnología de Massachusetts, en Estados Unidos, y nombrado en honor de Hideo Itokawa, el pionero de la investigación espacial japonesa.
El Itokawa tiene forma de patata, según la Agencia de Exploración Espacial, con 312 metros de anchura, 584 metros de longitud y 276 metros de altura, y se encuentra a 290 millones de kilómetros de la Tierra.
Fuente: Terra-EFE
14 de Noviembre de 2005
El Minerva debía preceder a la Hayabusa en la toma de contacto con el Itokawa, a fin de reducir los riesgos para el aterrizaje momentáneo de la sonda, previsto para finales de este mes.
Un portavoz de la Agencia de Exploración Espacial de Japón explicó a EFE que 'es prematuro decir que se ha perdido, pero, por el momento, no tenemos contacto con el robot'.
El Minerva mide 12 centímetros de diámetro y tiene una longitud de 10 centímetros; pesa apenas 600 gramos y está provisto de tres cámaras que debían enviar esa información pionera a la Tierra a través de la sonda Hayabusa.
Las fotografías tomadas desde la sonda Hayabusa mostraron al dispositivo cibernético Minerva alejándose del asteroide sin haber cumplido su objetivo, indicó la agencia espacial nipona.
Según la agencia, parece poco probable que el campo gravitacional del Itokawa atraiga al artilugio hacia su superficie, pero los científicos del centro de exploración espacial japonés siguen intentando comunicarse con el robot.
Aunque las dificultades son extremas, la esperanza no está perdida, pues las partículas de plasma solar que hay en torno al asteroide podrían impulsar de nuevo al Minerva hacia ese campo de gravedad del bólido celeste.
La sonda Hayabusa había liberado al Minerva a las 15.24 del pasado sábado, hora japonesa (06.24 GMT), para que realizara el experimento de toma de contacto con el Itokawa y reuniera datos clave para la exploración espacial.
Un intento inicial fue descartado el pasado 4 de noviembre, debido a varios problemas técnicos.
Según explicó otro portavoz de la institución espacial nipona a la agencia de noticias Kyodo, ahora es el turno de la sonda Hayabusa, para entrar en contacto físico con el citado asteroide.
Está previsto que el próximo 19 de noviembre, la Hayabusa se acerque y toque la superficie del asteroide durante unos segundos, para recabar datos sobre la temperatura e imágenes del Itokawa.
El 25 de noviembre, la sonda espacial tratará de realizar una nueva aproximación y contacto con el asteroide a fin de conseguir muestras directas que permitirán conocer más detalles sobre el origen de nuestro sistema solar.
Tras cumplir su misión, la sonda Hayabusa encenderá su motor y emprenderá el regreso a la Tierra, a donde llegará en junio de 2007.
El asteroide fue descubierto en 1998 por científicos del Instituto de Tecnología de Massachusetts, en Estados Unidos, y nombrado en honor de Hideo Itokawa, el pionero de la investigación espacial japonesa.
El Itokawa tiene forma de patata, según la Agencia de Exploración Espacial, con 312 metros de anchura, 584 metros de longitud y 276 metros de altura, y se encuentra a 290 millones de kilómetros de la Tierra.
Fuente: Terra-EFE
14 de Noviembre de 2005
An Insider Novel of Nuclear Power...
RAD DECISION,
http://raddecision.blogspot.com/
An Insider Novel of Nuclear Power.
A techno-thriller about a nuclear power plant, written by an engineer with over twenty years of experience in the American nuclear industry.
-------------------------------------------
“I'd like to see Rad Decision widely read.”
Stewart Brand,
Co-founder of The Global Business Network,
Creator of The Whole Earth Catalog, noted Futurist
-------------------------------------------
38 episodes.
Fifteen minutes reading time per episode.
All episodes available.
PDF file available.
Rad Decision tells the story of the people and machinery that make up a nuclear power plant, and the dark tale of a man who believes it is his destiny to destroy it. Written by a long-time engineer in the American nuclear industry, the novel includes an overview of how electricity is made and a step-by-step, inside look at how a nuclear plant operates - - from its equipment to its people to the politics and money behind it. The health effects of radiation and the events at Chernobyl and TMI are also discussed. Soon, the reader plunges into a nuclear accident in the making. While Rad Decision is written for the lay reader who is concerned about nuclear energy, the more technically-inclined will also find plenty of satisfying detail. But first and foremost, Rad Decision is an enjoyable thriller.
No nuclear insider has ever told this story before - - there is simply no book on the market like Rad Decision. (And its free to readers.) Here’s a way to learn about energy issues in general -- and nuclear power in particular -- and be entertained at the same time. Read Stewart Brand’s controversial article discussing nuclear power
in the May 2005 Technology Review: http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/05/issue/feature_earth.asp
http://raddecision.blogspot.com/
An Insider Novel of Nuclear Power.
A techno-thriller about a nuclear power plant, written by an engineer with over twenty years of experience in the American nuclear industry.
-------------------------------------------
“I'd like to see Rad Decision widely read.”
Stewart Brand,
Co-founder of The Global Business Network,
Creator of The Whole Earth Catalog, noted Futurist
-------------------------------------------
38 episodes.
Fifteen minutes reading time per episode.
All episodes available.
PDF file available.
Rad Decision tells the story of the people and machinery that make up a nuclear power plant, and the dark tale of a man who believes it is his destiny to destroy it. Written by a long-time engineer in the American nuclear industry, the novel includes an overview of how electricity is made and a step-by-step, inside look at how a nuclear plant operates - - from its equipment to its people to the politics and money behind it. The health effects of radiation and the events at Chernobyl and TMI are also discussed. Soon, the reader plunges into a nuclear accident in the making. While Rad Decision is written for the lay reader who is concerned about nuclear energy, the more technically-inclined will also find plenty of satisfying detail. But first and foremost, Rad Decision is an enjoyable thriller.
No nuclear insider has ever told this story before - - there is simply no book on the market like Rad Decision. (And its free to readers.) Here’s a way to learn about energy issues in general -- and nuclear power in particular -- and be entertained at the same time. Read Stewart Brand’s controversial article discussing nuclear power
in the May 2005 Technology Review: http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/05/issue/feature_earth.asp
United Nations: Recommendation to Establish UN Agency for UFO Research
UN General Assembly decision 33/426, 1978
Summary: At its 87th plenary meeting, on 18 December 1978, the UN General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Special Political Committee recommended the establishment of an agency or a department of the United Nations for undertaking, co-ordinating and disseminating the results of research into unidentified flying objects and related phenomena.
UN General Assembly decision 33/426, 1978
Establishment of an agency or a department of the United Nations for undertaking, co-ordinating and disseminating the results of research into unidentified flying objects and related
phenomena
At its 87th plenary meeting, on 18 December 1978, the General Assembly,on the recommendation of the Special Political Committee adoptedthe following text as representing the consensus of the membersof the Assembly:
"1. The General Assembly has taken note of the statements made, and draft resolutions submitted, by Grenada at the thirty-second and thirty-third sessions of the General Assembly regarding unidentified flying objects and related phenomena.
"2. the General Assembly invites interested Member States to take appropriate steps to coordinate on a national level scientific research and investigation into extraterrestrial life, including
unidentified flying objects, and to inform the Secretary-General of the observations, research and evaluation of such activities.
"3. The General Assembly requests the Secretary-general to transmit the statements of the delegation of Grenada and the relevant documentation to the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, so that it may consider them at its session in 1979.
"4. The Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space will permit Grenada, upon its request, to present its views to the Committee at its session in 1979. the committee's deliberation will be included in its report which will be considered by the General Assembly at its thirty-fourth session."
Summary: At its 87th plenary meeting, on 18 December 1978, the UN General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Special Political Committee recommended the establishment of an agency or a department of the United Nations for undertaking, co-ordinating and disseminating the results of research into unidentified flying objects and related phenomena.
UN General Assembly decision 33/426, 1978
Establishment of an agency or a department of the United Nations for undertaking, co-ordinating and disseminating the results of research into unidentified flying objects and related
phenomena
At its 87th plenary meeting, on 18 December 1978, the General Assembly,on the recommendation of the Special Political Committee adoptedthe following text as representing the consensus of the membersof the Assembly:
"1. The General Assembly has taken note of the statements made, and draft resolutions submitted, by Grenada at the thirty-second and thirty-third sessions of the General Assembly regarding unidentified flying objects and related phenomena.
"2. the General Assembly invites interested Member States to take appropriate steps to coordinate on a national level scientific research and investigation into extraterrestrial life, including
unidentified flying objects, and to inform the Secretary-General of the observations, research and evaluation of such activities.
"3. The General Assembly requests the Secretary-general to transmit the statements of the delegation of Grenada and the relevant documentation to the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, so that it may consider them at its session in 1979.
"4. The Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space will permit Grenada, upon its request, to present its views to the Committee at its session in 1979. the committee's deliberation will be included in its report which will be considered by the General Assembly at its thirty-fourth session."
Statement on Canada & U.S. Missile Defence
Connie Fogal, Leader of the Canadian Action Party, endorsed a five point Statement presented by ICIS (Instute for Cooperation in Space)
May 2004,
The Martin-Liberal government is misleading the public about Canada’s participation in U.S. Missile Defence. Canada’s decision to participate in NORAD operation of the aerospace early-warning system for North America means that Canada functionally joins U.S. Missile Defence.
U.S. Missile Defence is part of a U.S. strategy to convert Canada into a war-fighting client of the United States permanent warfare state.
Paul Martin is complicit in causing the Weaponization of Space, as the “land-based” U.S. National Missile Defence system will cause the Weaponization of Space.
In joining U.S. Missile Defence, Paul Martin is making Canada an accidental or intentional nuclear weapons target and part of the nuclear war-fighting forces of the United States military.
U.S. Missile Defence is a profoundly destabilizing, global problem demanding a global solution in the form of a Space Preservation Treaty banning Missile Defence systems and space- based weapons.
The Martin-Liberal government is misleading the public about Canada’s participation in U.S. Missile Defence. Canada’s decision to participate in NORAD operation of the aerospace early-warning system for North America means that Canada functionally joins U.S. Missile Defence.
NORAD at present is involved only in air warning, not in an outer space-warning system. International Tactical and Warning and Attack Assessment (ITWAA) retaliation and attack toward incoming missiles are not now part of NORAD. If Canada agrees to NORAD’s operation of an expanded aero-space early-warning system, then this means that Canada is participating as part of the U.S. Missile Defence system. Under an expanded NORAD, the tracking and retaliatory functions of the U.S. Missile Defence system cannot practicably be separated. By being part of NORAD, Canada would functionally be part of the U.S. Missile Defence system. Thus, Canada’s signing onto “an aerospace early-warning system for North America”, is in fact “a move that smooths the path for almost certain participation in the U.S. missile defence shield.” (Globe & Mail. April 30, 2004.)
U.S. Missile Defence is part of a U.S. strategy to convert Canada into a war-fighting client of the United States permanent warfare state. A March 31, 2004 Ipsos-Reid-Council of Canadians poll found that “seven in ten (69%) of Canadians disagree with the statement “Canada should actively support the Bush administration’s missile defence system even if it may require dedicating military spending to the program or allowing US missile launchers in Canada.” Because of this firm opposition to U.S. Missile Defence amongst Canadians, deception and stealth are behind the U.S. manipulation of a “Canadian decision” to join into the U.S. Missile Defence, and thereby integrate Canada into the U.S. permanent warfare state. The United States timetable to weaponize space was promulgated on December 16, 2002, when U.S. President George W. Bush directed the U.S. Department of Defense to: (1) “develop and deploy missile defenses capable of protecting not only the United States and our deployed forces, but also friends and allies; (2) also structure the missile defense program in a manner that encourages industrial participation by friends and allies, consistent with overall U.S. national security; and (3) shall promote international missile defense cooperation, including within bilateral and alliance structures such as NATO, and shall negotiate appropriate arrangements for this purpose.” U.S. President George W. Bush, U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD-23 – December 16, 2002.
Paul Martin is complicit in causing the Weaponization of Space, as the “land-based” U.S. National Missile Defence system will cause the Weaponization of Space. If Canada becomes involved with land-based U.S. Missile Defence, this will include a network of sensors and command and control nodes which may be used for space based weapons. (1) Land-based Missile Defence can be used as an anti-satellite weapon (ASAT). If Canada becomes involved with U.S. Missile Defence and the U.S. decides to use a land-based interceptor against an object orbiting in space, as an anti-satellite weapon (ASAT), Canada would be involved in using space weapons. According to one NGO expert, U.S. Missile Defence could more easily be used as an anti -satellite weapon than as an interceptor for an incoming missile; (2) Elements of the U.S. Missile Defence space-based surveillance and tracking system can be used as space weapons. The U.S. NFIRE satellite, although it is theoretically only for surveillance and tracking, can be equipped with a Kill-Vehicle- Other U.S. Missile Defence-related dual use light-weight optics, relay mirrors and precision tracking systems can be used for space- based weapon applications; (3) The U.S. Defence budget calls for spending on a space-based missile defence range. According to one observer, "the U.S. Administration and U.S. Missile Defence Agency have explicitly included plans for a space-based layer, as well as ground-based and sea-based elements, in the proposed missile defence network. This entire Missile Defence network will use a common set of sensors and command and control nodes. Providing support for the space-based sensors, as Canada may find an attractive option, would support all elements of the U.S. Missile Defence system, including, if it exists a space-based layer. The U.S. President's budget includes the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) and asks for six-year funding increases for U.S. Missile Defence Interceptors PE, including funding for a space- based missile defence range;” (4) The U.S. Air Force Transformation Flight Plan (November 2003) calls for "active-on- board protection capabilities, "full-spectrum sea, air land and space-based offensive counterspace systems capable of prevention of unauthorized use of friendly space services and negating capabilities from low earth up to GEO orbits. The focus when practical will be on denying adversary access to space on a temporary basis." When impractical, permanently destructive weapons such as U.S. Ballistic Missile Defence would be used, by implication.
In joining U.S. Missile Defence, Paul Martin is making Canada an accidental or intentional nuclear weapons target and part of the nuclear war-fighting forces of the United States military. Canada, one of the world’s staunchest opponents of nuclear warfare, has now become a part of United States Nuclear war-fighting strategy and of the U.S. policy to weaponize space. With Paul Martin as Prime Minister of Canada, the U.S. Presidential Directive has been fulfilled. On February 23, 2004, Canadian federal defence minister David Pratt refused to rule out U.S.-controlled missile launches from northern Canada as part of the missile defence shield. Addressing this issue, Pratt stated on the CTV program, Question Period, "We're not saying no. We're not saying yes." Nunavut, Canada’s Arctic territory, may be high on the list of possible U.S. Ballistic Missile Defence missile interceptor and radar sites. Minister of Defence Pratt’s non-denial reveals that the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defence system is not designed for response to rogue state missiles, as the U.S. Space Command states. Rather, located in Nunavut, for example, the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defence system will be probably deployed as anti-satellite weapons and/or interceptor weapons in a United States preemptive nuclear attack against Russia, or in a United States retaliatory strike against a Russian nuclear first strike.
U.S. Missile Defence is a profoundly destabilizing, global problem demanding a global solution in the form of a Space Preservation Treaty banning Missile Defence systems and space-based weapons. The Canadian Action Party has formally called for the global solution of a Space Preservation Treaty banning Missile Defence systems and space-based weapons. Canadian cities, including Vancouver, Victoria, Burnaby, Nanaimo, Sparwood, and Bowen Island B.C. have called for a Space Treaty Conference to ban Missile Defence systems worldwide and ban all space-based weapons. We in Canada should oppose US plans for Missile Defense and not participate in them. Canada should encourage all Nations to sign a Space Preservation Treaty banning Missile Defence systems and all space-based weapons, as Canada did in the treaty- signing conference in December 1997, where 122 countries signed the Convention Banning Land Mines.
May 2004,
The Martin-Liberal government is misleading the public about Canada’s participation in U.S. Missile Defence. Canada’s decision to participate in NORAD operation of the aerospace early-warning system for North America means that Canada functionally joins U.S. Missile Defence.
U.S. Missile Defence is part of a U.S. strategy to convert Canada into a war-fighting client of the United States permanent warfare state.
Paul Martin is complicit in causing the Weaponization of Space, as the “land-based” U.S. National Missile Defence system will cause the Weaponization of Space.
In joining U.S. Missile Defence, Paul Martin is making Canada an accidental or intentional nuclear weapons target and part of the nuclear war-fighting forces of the United States military.
U.S. Missile Defence is a profoundly destabilizing, global problem demanding a global solution in the form of a Space Preservation Treaty banning Missile Defence systems and space- based weapons.
The Martin-Liberal government is misleading the public about Canada’s participation in U.S. Missile Defence. Canada’s decision to participate in NORAD operation of the aerospace early-warning system for North America means that Canada functionally joins U.S. Missile Defence.
NORAD at present is involved only in air warning, not in an outer space-warning system. International Tactical and Warning and Attack Assessment (ITWAA) retaliation and attack toward incoming missiles are not now part of NORAD. If Canada agrees to NORAD’s operation of an expanded aero-space early-warning system, then this means that Canada is participating as part of the U.S. Missile Defence system. Under an expanded NORAD, the tracking and retaliatory functions of the U.S. Missile Defence system cannot practicably be separated. By being part of NORAD, Canada would functionally be part of the U.S. Missile Defence system. Thus, Canada’s signing onto “an aerospace early-warning system for North America”, is in fact “a move that smooths the path for almost certain participation in the U.S. missile defence shield.” (Globe & Mail. April 30, 2004.)
U.S. Missile Defence is part of a U.S. strategy to convert Canada into a war-fighting client of the United States permanent warfare state. A March 31, 2004 Ipsos-Reid-Council of Canadians poll found that “seven in ten (69%) of Canadians disagree with the statement “Canada should actively support the Bush administration’s missile defence system even if it may require dedicating military spending to the program or allowing US missile launchers in Canada.” Because of this firm opposition to U.S. Missile Defence amongst Canadians, deception and stealth are behind the U.S. manipulation of a “Canadian decision” to join into the U.S. Missile Defence, and thereby integrate Canada into the U.S. permanent warfare state. The United States timetable to weaponize space was promulgated on December 16, 2002, when U.S. President George W. Bush directed the U.S. Department of Defense to: (1) “develop and deploy missile defenses capable of protecting not only the United States and our deployed forces, but also friends and allies; (2) also structure the missile defense program in a manner that encourages industrial participation by friends and allies, consistent with overall U.S. national security; and (3) shall promote international missile defense cooperation, including within bilateral and alliance structures such as NATO, and shall negotiate appropriate arrangements for this purpose.” U.S. President George W. Bush, U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD-23 – December 16, 2002.
Paul Martin is complicit in causing the Weaponization of Space, as the “land-based” U.S. National Missile Defence system will cause the Weaponization of Space. If Canada becomes involved with land-based U.S. Missile Defence, this will include a network of sensors and command and control nodes which may be used for space based weapons. (1) Land-based Missile Defence can be used as an anti-satellite weapon (ASAT). If Canada becomes involved with U.S. Missile Defence and the U.S. decides to use a land-based interceptor against an object orbiting in space, as an anti-satellite weapon (ASAT), Canada would be involved in using space weapons. According to one NGO expert, U.S. Missile Defence could more easily be used as an anti -satellite weapon than as an interceptor for an incoming missile; (2) Elements of the U.S. Missile Defence space-based surveillance and tracking system can be used as space weapons. The U.S. NFIRE satellite, although it is theoretically only for surveillance and tracking, can be equipped with a Kill-Vehicle- Other U.S. Missile Defence-related dual use light-weight optics, relay mirrors and precision tracking systems can be used for space- based weapon applications; (3) The U.S. Defence budget calls for spending on a space-based missile defence range. According to one observer, "the U.S. Administration and U.S. Missile Defence Agency have explicitly included plans for a space-based layer, as well as ground-based and sea-based elements, in the proposed missile defence network. This entire Missile Defence network will use a common set of sensors and command and control nodes. Providing support for the space-based sensors, as Canada may find an attractive option, would support all elements of the U.S. Missile Defence system, including, if it exists a space-based layer. The U.S. President's budget includes the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) and asks for six-year funding increases for U.S. Missile Defence Interceptors PE, including funding for a space- based missile defence range;” (4) The U.S. Air Force Transformation Flight Plan (November 2003) calls for "active-on- board protection capabilities, "full-spectrum sea, air land and space-based offensive counterspace systems capable of prevention of unauthorized use of friendly space services and negating capabilities from low earth up to GEO orbits. The focus when practical will be on denying adversary access to space on a temporary basis." When impractical, permanently destructive weapons such as U.S. Ballistic Missile Defence would be used, by implication.
In joining U.S. Missile Defence, Paul Martin is making Canada an accidental or intentional nuclear weapons target and part of the nuclear war-fighting forces of the United States military. Canada, one of the world’s staunchest opponents of nuclear warfare, has now become a part of United States Nuclear war-fighting strategy and of the U.S. policy to weaponize space. With Paul Martin as Prime Minister of Canada, the U.S. Presidential Directive has been fulfilled. On February 23, 2004, Canadian federal defence minister David Pratt refused to rule out U.S.-controlled missile launches from northern Canada as part of the missile defence shield. Addressing this issue, Pratt stated on the CTV program, Question Period, "We're not saying no. We're not saying yes." Nunavut, Canada’s Arctic territory, may be high on the list of possible U.S. Ballistic Missile Defence missile interceptor and radar sites. Minister of Defence Pratt’s non-denial reveals that the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defence system is not designed for response to rogue state missiles, as the U.S. Space Command states. Rather, located in Nunavut, for example, the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defence system will be probably deployed as anti-satellite weapons and/or interceptor weapons in a United States preemptive nuclear attack against Russia, or in a United States retaliatory strike against a Russian nuclear first strike.
U.S. Missile Defence is a profoundly destabilizing, global problem demanding a global solution in the form of a Space Preservation Treaty banning Missile Defence systems and space-based weapons. The Canadian Action Party has formally called for the global solution of a Space Preservation Treaty banning Missile Defence systems and space-based weapons. Canadian cities, including Vancouver, Victoria, Burnaby, Nanaimo, Sparwood, and Bowen Island B.C. have called for a Space Treaty Conference to ban Missile Defence systems worldwide and ban all space-based weapons. We in Canada should oppose US plans for Missile Defense and not participate in them. Canada should encourage all Nations to sign a Space Preservation Treaty banning Missile Defence systems and all space-based weapons, as Canada did in the treaty- signing conference in December 1997, where 122 countries signed the Convention Banning Land Mines.
The Launching of the New Energy Movement
We recognize that the single most highly leveraged opportunity for advancement toward solving complex global problems lies in transforming the way human civilization generates and utilizes energy. New Energy Movement is focused on facilitating this transformation.
- New Energy Movement Mission Statement
The New Energy Movement is dedicated to gaining public support for research and development of new energy technologies that can be rapidly deployed in commercial and consumer markets. The movement was launched at a public forum in Portland, Oregon September 25-26, 2004, entitled "New Energy: The Courage to Change". The conference was dedicated to the memory of Dr.Eugene Mallove, a dedicated champion of new energy R&D, whose untimely death was mourned by all in attendance.
Three hundred people listened to and interacted with some of the field's most prominent advocates. Speakers included The New Energy Movement's founder Dr.Brian O'Leary, astrophysicist, new science pioneer and author of Miracle in the Void and Re-Inheriting the Earth; Jeane Manning, a leading new energy journalist and author of The Coming Energy Revolution; Dr. Tom Valone, Director of the Integrity Research Institute and author of seminal new energy books; Dr.Steven Greer, founder of both the Disclosure Project and Space Energy Access Systems (SEAS), a new energy R&D firm; Mark Comings, founder of Dynamis, a new energy R&D incubator firm, and a physicist with a gift for depicting converging trends in physics and mysticism.
The audience also heard from Martin Burger, CEO of Blue Power, on Tidal Power R&D; Win Lambertson, the inventor of the E-Dam device, on solid-state zero-point energy devices and Ken Rauen, a former research colleague of Eugene Mallove, on both water-borne fusion technologies and advanced thermodynamics.
While participants eagerly absorbed the latest information and insights provided by the major speakers, they also had a chance to enter their own comments and ask questions during two panel discussions, the first dealing with promises and obstacles and the second with how to make the transition to a sustainable economy, with a particular focus on the role of The New Energy Movement.
A highlight of the conference was the singing of Shawn Gallaway, a singer-songwriter, whose music helped to elevate and inspire the gathering, illustrating the power of that old/new form of energy called Love. His song "I Choose Love" easily won common endorsement as the anthem of the movement.
What is the importance of this movement and how is it likely to evolve in the future? The New Energy Movement was created because of the long-felt need of its leaders for citizen support to change the status quo and existing paradigm in the energy field. Because of the resistance of much of the scientific community, the indifference or even hostility of government and the press, new energy advancements are largely unknown and unsupported by the general public. And because of this, it is extremely difficult to get the funds needed for R&D from angel investors. These funds are critical for moving many promising devices from "proof of concept" to prototypes ready for production.
Something in the overall equation has to shift, and the one approach that has not yet been fully utilized is educating and mobilizing public support at the grassroots. If such support is built, it will make it more likely that investors will come on board or that innovative funding arrangements can be created. Moreover, in some scenarios of bringing out new energy devices public support will be an essential safeguard against possible suppression by hostile forces. Of course, once working devices are publicly demonstrated or go into production, market forces will become the most potent way to spread the new technologies widely.
The highlight of the two-day gathering was the energy and spirit displayed by conference participants. Participants eagerly absorbed the knowledge and inspiration passed on by the major speakers and panelists, and when it came time for them to ask questions or voice their views, many were eager to step to the mikes provided for that purpose. Also visible was enthusiastic informal networking. We plan to allow even more time for such networking at future meetings, using innovative ways to share networks and the results flowing from them in public sessions.
Cooperation among all parties interested in the new energy field is essential if progress is to be made. As was expressed by many the rise in consciousness required to bring such cooperation into being will come about simultaneously with development of the new devices and processes. As if to underscore this realization, many stepped forward to volunteer their services, filling out information giving us an idea of their interests, talents, skills and resources. Already it is clear we have the nucleus of what will be a growing movement for change.
As we raise the funds needed to put The New Energy Movement on a solid and stable footing, we will be able to spread information and guidance for expanding the movement to other parts of the United States and the world. We are beginning this effort by supporting chapters of The New Energy Movement now being set up in cities in the U.S, Canada, Ecuador, Costa Rica and South Africa.
The New Energy Movement's board and members are considering the best ways both to grow the movement and approach both the promise and obstacles to creating a free energy economy. How much attention should be put on reaching out to national leadership, both public and private, at a time when vested interests are so powerful and so resistant to new solutions? How much should we concentrate on building up the capacity of local communities to create a sustainable future, as larger societal structures become less and less able to meet human needs? How can we best help inventors be creative and productive? How can we use the internet to reach out to potential members in a way that mobilizes support rapidly and effectively? How do we create and support grass-roots New Energy Movement chapters? These are just of a few of the issues to be resolved as The New Energy Movement plants its roots and grows. We welcome input from all who want to participate.
As we at The New Energy Movement look toward the future, we hold fast to the words of Margaret Mead on the power of the few:
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
MAJOR SPEAKERS - SUMMARIES
The following summaries of talks given by the major speakers have been drawn largely from those prepared by Susan Carter and T.Cullen of Pure Energy Systems News. Their summaries have been edited by me and include some new wording. The original versions can be found at the Pure Energy Systems website -pureenergysystems.com/events/conferences/2004/NewEnergyMovement/index.html Audio and video tapes of the speakers' presentations, as well as transcripts, are available through www.newenergymovement.org.
Dr.Brian O'Leary
Dr. Brian O'Leary could be described as author, astronaut, college professor or political energy advisor, but the best title to give him is iconoclast. Excommunicated from the priesthood of science for his study of New Energy, he is the founder of the New Energy Movement organization and was the opening speaker for their flagship conference in Portland, Oregon, Sept 26th and 27th. He also opened the second day of the meeting.
Starting out with the quote "Society honors its live conformists and dead troublemakers." Dr. O'Leary was visibly moved while honoring Gene Mallove, murdered in May. Mallove, a fearless and tireless champion of cold fusion and other new energy innovations, lived with full and fruitful awareness of the New Energy Movement's motto:
We recognize that the single most highly leveraged opportunity for advancement toward solving complex global problems lies in a transformation in the way human civilization generates and utilizes energy.
Dr. O'Leary, listing broad global challenges such as war, pollution and population growth, declared we must "muster the courage to change" and that the valid solutions to our gravest problems will arise out of a broad based social movement. Warming to his theme and true to his iconclastic nature he said, "We must dissolve the myths that hold us back as a civilization. There are NO laws in physics. There is NO Second Law of Thermodynamics. There are only theories, and the theories need to be changed to match the facts."
O'Leary went on to list other myths that must be done away with, such as, "If New Energy were real, we'd have it by now," and "We must await the commercial magic bullet". He challenged the oft-repeated assertion that "extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof", asserting "they need reasonable proofs like any other theory".
The major myth he wished to dissolve is that the US government is going to do the research and development needed to solve the energy problems. Quoting Bertrand Russell, he said, "The resistance to a new idea increases as the square of its importance."
Dr. O'Leary pointed out that the average citizen's trust in the free market to introduce energy solutions on a timely basis is unjustified. "The market hasn't done this, and it won't until the people clamor for it."
Dr. O'Leary was cheered as he threw down his final gauntlet, "Let's have a positive 'terra-ist' attack and let's planet together!" Brian O'Leary's fiery delivery and in-your-face attitude was a perfect opener for the New Energy Movement which dares to take on the biggest icon of all - the oil industry.
Opening the second day of the conference, Dr.O'Leary proclaimed the truism that if we keep going in the direction were going, we will get there. . Instead, we need to determine new goals and move towards a more conscious future. "To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men," he said, quoting Abraham Lincoln.
O'Leary stated that our goal is the introduction of "energy sources which are clean, affordable, decentralized, benign. feasible and reliable and that are accountable to the public." To reach that goal, he offered a number of social and personal action steps, which were a mix of science and spirituality. He advocated a Manifesto for Sustainability and a Global Green Democracy. Spiritually we need to recognize that the world is a reflection of our inner self, and until we clean up our own inner and outer spaces, the world will not be harmonious.
"We resonate with ZPE," he avowed, claiming that spoon bending experiments he has demonstrated show our influence on the biosphere. "Human intentions can influence the universe." Dr O'Leary pointed to additional evidence such as Cleve Baxter's experiments showing how plants respond to human thought and feeling, and Dr.Masaru Emoto's research on the hidden messages of water, which reveal the harmonic and orderly crystalline form of clean water and the deformed and disharmonic form of polluted water.
O'Leary acknowledged that there are environmentalists who will oppose powerful new energy technologies because they fear their use will lead to over-consumption instead of a more pristine environment. He held we need to bring this and other issues out in the open and have intelligent social and political debates about energy options.
Dr. O'Leary also suggested we adopt a broad, holistic Manifesto for Sustainability. "Together we need to create a new science of consciousness that includes quantum physics, parapsychology and alternative healing as well as zero-point energy research." Most of all, he claimed we need to get beyond materialism, reductionism and self-determination and consider the effect of all our thoughts and actions on the whole world.
O'Leary firmly stressed that the solution to our energy problems lies in social activism and joint advocacy along with altruistic and public funding from citizens. He advocated strength in numbers as a counter-weight to corporations that rape the planet for their own selfish gains.
Jeane Manning
Jeane Manning, New Energy Movement board member and author of The Coming Energy Revolution and Energie, said her goal was to make the New Energy field user friendly for the public.
She compared the clean-energy field to a continent with a great divide. On one side of the mountain are typical "renewables" from solar to wind, and on the other side is a vast uncharted territory called New Energy. The high ground between them is the point where explorers looking to the frontier glimpse an untapped Sea of Energy.
Manning said many new technologies are based on resonance. Walter Russell's scientific art such as "In the wave lies the secret" provides a visual reflection of this and other principles. Current technologies emphasize explosion reactions and heat, while New Energy emphasizes implosion and cool technologies.
Manning gave an overview of the many emerging technologies, showing many solutions to our fossil fuel addiction. Her presentation introduced:
Blacklight Power - Randell Mill's hydrino technology
Hydrogen on Demand - different ways to produce hydrogen that are less expensive and safer than current methods
Carbon Arc technology
Sonofusion - a method of using sound waves to create heat in a fuel-less furnace
Cold Fusion and Light Element Fusion - "while cold fusion was said to be buried back in 1989, it is still very much alive"
Exotic Vacuum Objects - research by Ken Shoulders with the goal of direct electrical output from ZPE. He intends to create ball lightning that can be harnessed to do work
New Heat Engines - in which table-top experiments turn conventional heat theory up-side-down
Resonance Amplifiers - many researchers, including Stan Meyer, have claimed excess energy through amplifying resonance effects, similar to a child on a swing using low-power nudges to amplify into big results. Xogen is one company Manning mentioned that gets energy from water resonance.
Electrostatic devices - can get energy directly from atmospheric charge
Aetheric Energy - which can be captured or accumulated
The E-Dam - made by Win Lambertson, another conference speaker who showed a device which is 153% efficient
Shape Power - special geometric shapes concentrate energy. Researchers' goal is obtaining useable power
Vortex Energy and Viktor Schauberger's work - devices which imitate nature's vortices and spirals, including very efficient pumps, twister pipes and wavy plate disks.
No-Fuel Steam Generators - which use a small amount of mechanical energy to generate excess heat
Spiraling Fluid Drives - by D. Hinrich are not overunity but do demonstrate Schauberger principles
Radiant Energy - a different kind of electricity discovered by Tesla and developed by Ed Grey, T. H. Moray, John Bedini and others, which meters can't yet detect. Today's fast electronic switching aids such approaches.
New Superconductors - such as those developed by Mark Goldes
Solid State Devices of various kinds - including new advances by John Hutchison which he says produce 1.3 volts per centimeter
Lifter Technology - like those promoted by Tim Ventura and JLN labs
Manning acknowledged the suppression of these new forms of energy, yet she rallied the crowd and gave them hope in her final slide: two simple light switches, one turned off and one turned on. "Let's turn off the power of corruption and turn on the power of people," she pleaded. Manning proclaimed that en masse, people, unafraid of new technology, can start using "small-is-beautiful" technologies and save the world. Her overview of the field made it possible to believe that people really can do just that.
Dr. Tom Valone
Tom Valone, President of Integrity Research Institute (IRI), was a powerhouse of knowledge and facts and gave a thorough overview of where we are currently at with energy needs and where we could go in the future to meet those needs.
His first blockbuster fact caught the audience's attention immediately; 85% of energy today comes from the combustion of dead fossils, forcing the world's atmosphere to overheat. We are likely seeing the results of global warming in our weather such as the four hurricanes in Florida experienced in 2004.
Valone commented that Hubbard's Peak - the peak of oil production - is right on the projected mark for the US. Most alarming is that the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is at three hundred parts per million (ppm), the highest it has been in 400,000 years and may reach six hundred ppm by 2050.
Further evidence of global warming are the liquid lakes at the North Pole. The ice cap is rapidly disappearing, which effects the reflected solar radiation, causing other global weather changes. Valone warned ominously that a sixth to eighty percent reduction in carbon emissions is required to stop global warming.
The most frustrating fact of all, he stated, was that two thirds of all the electricity produced in the US is wasted.
Integrity Research Institute (IRI) is researching the following energy solutions: 1) Atmospheric electricity, 2) Nuclear, 3) Quantum vacuum zero point, 4) Space propulsion energy, 5) Magnetic motors.
Atmospheric Electricity
Ben Franklin almost had it clear back in the 1700's. Electrostatic motors have been known about since the beginning of this country. One motor has been operating for eighty-six years and counting. Reference was made to the American Journal of Physics, 1971, pg. 778, regarding the 200 Gigawatt potential in the atmosphere.
The most promising technology has been known about nearly one hundred years: Tesla's Wardencliff tower and scalar waves. Valone has researchers that have analyzed every part and verified each component of Tesla's system to broadcast power worldwide. IRI is currently working to rebuild a Wardencliff tower.
Nuclear
Nuclear power is about more than just nuclear power plants. Valone told the The New Energy Movement audience about nuclear batteries and the work by Betavoltaics and Nuclear Solutions, (see "The Daintiest Dynamos", IEEE Spectrum, September,1004, p.36.
A very promising development of Paul Brown's is the photo-remediation of nuclear waste, using low energy gamma rays to transmute it to short-lived isotopes). Furthermore, he mentioned Paul Brown's patents for extracting energy safely from radioactive materials without nuclear power plants The studies in this field are showing one Megawatt in produces twenty Megawatts out. Valone reported that advances in this field have confirmed Brown's predictions. Recently, "Laser-driven photo-transmutation of I-129 - a long-lived nuclear waste product" was achieved with a table-top intense gamma ray laser, with accelerating gradients of 1000 times higher than conventional technology that Brown proposed. The 15 million year half life parent isotope was transmuted to a 25-minute daughter isotope I-128. The four-page article from J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 36, L79, 2003 is a free download from the UK Institute of Physics, www.iop.org/EJ/article/0022-3727/36/18/L01/d3_18_L01.pdf , and well worth reading.
Proton - Boron fusion was mentioned, where a high-voltage reaction with decaborane produces four Helium in the form of alpha particles with no neutron radioactivity. Dense plasma is focused in a unique device which produces the 1 billion degrees (100 keV) necessary to make Hydrogen and Boron-11 fuse together into Helium without high energy neutrons being released. A garage-sized fusion reactor would produce energy at three times the output of the Tokamak Reactor, with its old-fashioned deuterium confinement method. (See www.focusfusion.org for more information).
Quantum Vacuum Zero Point
Valone next spoke about the controversial quantum vacuum and zero point energy, pointing out that zero-point energy is NOT conserved. The energy density of zero-point energy is debatable but the quantum vacuum is the ultimate open system.
Many areas in this field are being studied: the Casimir Force, electron-positron production, electron charge cluster technology, toroidal fields, solid state diodes, and other devices. Electron charge clusters are showing nine times over unity. Electric Arc Discharge Accelerators also have more potential energy out than electrical energy in. We may someday rectify thermo-electric noise with diode circuits
On the positive side of this debate, over unity (and its synonyms) are being mentioned in mainstream literature. Dr. Peter Graneau is getting 150% efficiency outputs and flaunts the overunity claim in a peer-reviewed journal: "Arc-liberated chemical energy exceeds electrical input energy" (J. Plasma Physics, 2003, Vol. 63, Part 2, p.115). Pinto actually mentioned "free energy" in his article published in Physical Review Rev. B, 60 21, 1999 p. 4457. He uses micro lasers which affect the dielectric constant of nanosurfaces to get huge improvements in the Casimir force (yielding a projected one kilowatt per meter squared).
Valone further mentioned that Feigel is the first physicist to use ZPE to satisfy energy conservation. Alexander Feigel proved that virtual particles can be induced to travel in a preferred direction and transfer momentum, if they are in an electric field of at least 100 kV and a perpendicular magnetic field of 17 Tesla (10 kG), thus proving that the ZPF can cause motion of a dielectric fluid of 50 nm/sec (Feigel, A. "Quantum vacuum contribution to the momentum of dielectric media." Physical Review Letters, Vol. 92, p. 020404, 2004). Interestingly, the March 2004 issue of Aviation Week magazine was cited since it has an article called "To the Stars" that refers to zero point energy as the only possible power for future space travel.
Space Propulsion Energy
Quantumfields.com discusses a hydrodynamic model of vehicle interactions with zero-point energy which it loses its drag as the vehicle flies in a medium such as outer space whose temperature approaches absolute zero. Valone described the works of Paul H. Hill on inertial control, and how the apparent 90 degree right hand turns by UFOs can be explained with knowledge of classical physics and inertia. A discussion on space propulsion energy would not be complete without discussing the gravity work of T.T. Brown and John Searl (Valone is the author of a book on T.T. Brown called Electrogravitics Systems).
Valone briefly mentioned his own past work on homopolar generators, and its connection to the current work by Roshchin and Godin (http://integrityresinst.crosswinds.net/Roshchin_Godin.pdf). He reminded the group that the Roshchin and Godin machine produces a seven-degree drop in temperature in the area around the electrical generator as it operates, suggesting an unusual fulfillment of an energy conservation modality.
Magnetic Motors
Valone is currently most interested in a magnetic motor design by South African, Mike Brady. Because he could not find any patent information, he said he supposed the design is public domain. (See www.pureenergysystems.com for more information about Mike Brady). Valone hopes to have his own replication of this motor done within a few months.
Other magnetic motor designs were covered such as the Hartman Patent #4,215,330, a Spiral Magnetic Motor and a flywheel vehicle power project. He referred to the June 1979 issue of Popular Science which shows the original design of a spiral magnetic motor by the Kure Tekko company.
All of the magnetic motor designs presented work on the principle of a "magnetic gradient" which Valone said is the one gradient that has been ignored for energy transduction. Temperature, voltage, gravity, pressure, and chemical gradients, for example, have all been historically exploited for human power applications.
Conclusion
Tom Valone concluded by making the point that there is no reason to depend so heavily on fossil fuels; from Franklin to Tesla we have had all the technology we needed. With new energy inventions there are even fewer excuses to continue in our old, 20th century habits. The travesty is that global warming, and its associated effects that we are now experiencing, has largely been unnecessary.
Dr.Steven Greer
Dr. Steven Greer presented a high-powered, emotional presentation of the suppression of New Energy and the forces to reckon with as oil is supplanted by cleaner and cheaper technology. He claimed that before the end of World War II, we had technologies to eliminate the need for all fossil fuels. Since 1955, with the emergence of antigravity technologies, we would have had no need for roads by now, but that technology has been sequestered in highly secret, compartmentalized black budget projects
What we as a people are doing is a crime against nature, Dr.Greer stated flatly, and he warned of the consequences of doing nothing. He lamented that we have become a nation of passive cows that want to be fed while the world is falling apart. While discussing the people in power who are fighting disclosure of the available technologies, he concluded by saying that about 50% of those in in the upper realms of power are now favoring disclosure.
Dr.Greer said the world situation is all about centralized power and who is in the captain's seat running it. Certain people are addicted to power and are dragging the earth down with them. It is our responsibility to help them get over their addiction.
Dr. Greer, founder and CEO of Space Energy Access Systems, Inc. (SEAS), outlined the methodology he is using to unveil technologies and declared its kingpin to be public disclosure. He asserted repeatedly that his powerful contacts and black ops connections protect his team and inventors, but that his greatest insurance is the public.
Greer entertained, cajoled, chastised and enlivened the crowd with his stories of CIA intrigue and power structure threats. He warned that "they" will continue to threaten and intimidate until the public stands up to their machinations. He offered his organization to inventors as a safety net in a vast minefield.
He said there are four categories of unfruitful technology/inventors: 1) frauds, 2) people who have things in the early development stage, 3) people with inventor's paranoia or think the world isn't ready for it yet, and 4) people who took the $10 Million buyout thereby burying their technology.
"We can't keep letting old inventors take their inventions to the grave," Greer declared.
Greer began the quest for a workable new energy technology following 911. He spoke of difficulties cropping up with every new and promising technology. Obstacles aside, he claimed that SEAS is poised to be a corporate leader in the new energy field.
With 313 billionaires now in the world, the problem is not finding money to support the development of these technologies. The problem is finding a real technology and an inventor willing to trust his or her invention to a cooperative team effort.
Mark Comings
Mark Comings, a physicist, inventor and theorist, says we don't have an energy shortage, we have an integrity shortage. What we need is the will and courage to embrace and adopt plentiful, non-polluting energy sources that currently exist and move forward integrating these existing new systems into our existing infrastructure. We also need to accelerate our efforts to bring new highly efficient innovations into the marketplace. The enormity of the ambient energy that presently exists and is circulating throughout the environment of the planet in the form of Solar, Wind, Tidal and Heat etc. is such that these forms of energy alone could easily supply all of humanity's energy needs if intelligently utilized.
"The scientific community is aware of the Biospheric crisis, but the media are not doing enough to communicate the actual nature and severity of the ecological crisis to the people," Comings asserted. "The media is like an dysfunctional nervous system that is not accurately reporting what is actually going in the body of the Earth to the human cells of that very body". "The Biosphere is a singular and unitary life form; a macro-organism of which humanity is but a small part. Other species are not destroying and desecrating the Biosphere; humanity is unique in its destructive capacity." "We as humans are responsible to develop an energy generating infrastructure that is sustainable and harmonious with the biosphere in the long term". He added pointedly that corporations that only look out only for their bottom line of quarterly profits function like cancer tumors in the body of humanity and the body of the Earth. The corporate hegemony has metastasized, and it is up to all of us to stop its cancerous growth and redesign how corporations operate. After all, corporations are simply groups of humans operating according to certain programs and protocols. By changing these protocols and re-envisioning how corporations can operate with a primary recognition that fundamentally they are part of the Biosphere and must give back to the living fabric that they, and all life, ultimately depends upon. We can then begin to see corporations actually having a positive and even regenerative impact on the Earth's ecology.
"The vacuum of space is anything but a vacuum," he said. "It is enormously dense with geometrodynamic potential which is dynamically imbedded in the very fabric of space". John Wheeler postulates that space has an energy density of 10 to the 94th power grams per cubic centimeter. To call space a "vacuum" or the "quantum vacuum" is a misnomer because everything that we know about space indicates that it is not empty. It is not a vacuum but rather a plenum - an absolute fullness, characterized by nearly infinite energy density and boundless luminosity. Space is literally efflorescing with virtual photons and electron-positron pair production. It is not dead, empty or inert but radiant and shimmering with energetic potential.
We need to re-envision the foundations of physics. Our fundamental concepts of Space, Time, Light, Mass, Force etc are limited and are in the process of being dramatically re-visioned. "The so-called laws of physics are special case limits of reality; they are maps which do not necessarily fully represent the actual nature of the territory" .
The best science taking place at the leading edge of fundamental physics tells us that the fabric of reality is made of pure infinite potential and that energetic scarcity is a lie. Scarcity is therefore a false mental fiction. However, when it is believed and operated out of as a working assumption, it propagates and fulfills that expectation, thus creating an outer semblance of scarcity (through the behaviors of hoarding, centralized control and selling of energy). Thus, the false premise of scarcity is justified and reinforced, creating a vicious cycle that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Energetic scarcity is a fear-based human mental construct that has informed and continues to inform and impoverish the very structure of our social, political and economic systems thus impoverishing our collective psychological condition along with them.
All mass and matter arises dynamically out of this plenum of infinite potentiality and yet is paradoxically utterly continuous with, and is in fact a dynamic expression of, this plenum. This all pervading continuum or unified field has the features and qualities of what indigenous people called the Great Spirit. The infinite potential of the plenum is our potential. We are one with the quantum plenum!
Our bodies are piezo-electric bio-crystals, resonant transducers of living light and life force. We have the potential to increasingly become the human bio-crystalline technology of love and abundance. We can thereby learn to live in-phase and in resonant harmony with each other without fear, and the fear based projections that create unnecessary limitation and lack. We have unlimited access to the radiant field of consciousness which is infinite active universal intelligence, We all have direct and immediate access to that field which has been referenced by the spiritual traditions as the Divine Being.
"There is more to light than meets the eye. We need to articulate a deeper understanding of light which will engender a deeper understanding of ourselves and the nature of reality." "Maxwell's equations are not actually Maxwell's; they are a truncated and simplified vector form created by Heaviside and Gibbs for engineers. This form leaves out an entire oscillatory component of light, the longitudinal component." Comings declared. " It is quite significant as well as symbolic that twentieth century physics has been operating on a truncated and incomplete model of light. Light has more to it than we have generally suspected, Light is not just electro-magnetic."
Science been involved in a kind of Electromagnetic reductionism that does not do justice to the fullness of light. We must go into higher dimensions to better understand the nature of light. These greater dimensions of light have been described by the mystics of all traditions as the inner light, love, spirit, and consciousness. It is necessary to be take seriously this higher light in order to bring forth a clear and mathematically rigorous spiritual scientific synthesis. Such a synthesis would do a lot more than provide us new sources of energy - although it will do that as well. It will enable us to heal a deep epistemological and psycho-spiritual split in our culture that has crippled the unfoldment of our greater human potential, individually and collectively for centuries.
A new physics of light can provide the basis for a spirit based science that will help move us into new new degrees of awareness and cooperation . The us vs.them paradigm is a bankrupt old notion that only polarizes and weakens our effectiveness . We must develop a new disposition relative to our planetary predicament that transcends the polarization that has characterized our efforts to change in the past. We need to develop inclusive strategies for conversion to a clean and sustainable infrastructure that involves everyone. Even if some people and corporations are greedy and misguided, we need to acknowledge that we are all rowing together in the same planetary lifeboat and must focus on ways to engender cooperation and collaboration in the vast project of converting and re-designing our energy infrastructure to be non-polluting and sustainable. This is an enormous job and there is a place for everyone to help and participate in bringing about the necessary changes.
Many of the problems we face in this movement are rooted in the interpersonal sphere. Our human dissonance needs to dissolve. We need to wake up from the lies we tell ourselves and take a fearless moral inventory of our own lives. We need to be courageous enough to self-reflect and work on our own issues and unconscious patterns.
This nascent movement needs to learn to come into phase and really co-operate together. We are not separate; we are expressions of the unified field. We don't have an energy shortage. We have an integrity shortage. We have a love and compassion shortage. We need to be the change we want to see in this world. We need to be the human technology of love and abundance expressed in our very way of being in relationship with each other before we will be able to build an external technological infrastructure that generates and supports any kind of real shared collective abundance.
We must also re-design the monetary system and create a just economy to reflect the values of an emerging sustainable and bio-regionally distributed energy system. We need to realize that we are in the process of envisioning and designing a completely new kind of society, A new form of planetary civilization is beginning to emerge based upon an entirely new set of values. The commitment to generating all of our electricity in clean and sustainable ways symbolizes a new human covenant with the Earth. We need to build new living communities that are local in their economies and their energy infrastructure. We are beginning to see the emergence of a distributed model of power sharing and power distribution that is more like the internet than centralized power distribution form utilities. Distributed power is the new paradigm. We are literally creating an energy internet that can upload and download power into the grid making decentralized power a natural feature of the new energy infrastructure.
We are living in economic slavery. We need to regenerate and rebuild an economic democracy which, as Thomas Jefferson warned, is crucial for helping us maintain our liberty. If we allow the form of our economy to be dictated to us rather than decided by the collective will of the people, we give up our power over our own destiny and invite tyranny. That is exactly what we have now, an economic dictatorship that is corrupt in the extreme.
It is no wonder that we are having difficulty growing a new just and sustainable energy infrastructure when the underlying economic soil, so to speak, is so rotten and leached of vital nutrients. The power to redesign the architecture of the economy is something that we need to take back into our own hands. A good example of what I am speaking about is articulated in the Solari Model of bioregional place-based economics. See www.solari.com as well as www.whereisthemoney.org for more on this critical economic factor.
Stephen Kaplan
November 2004
- New Energy Movement Mission Statement
The New Energy Movement is dedicated to gaining public support for research and development of new energy technologies that can be rapidly deployed in commercial and consumer markets. The movement was launched at a public forum in Portland, Oregon September 25-26, 2004, entitled "New Energy: The Courage to Change". The conference was dedicated to the memory of Dr.Eugene Mallove, a dedicated champion of new energy R&D, whose untimely death was mourned by all in attendance.
Three hundred people listened to and interacted with some of the field's most prominent advocates. Speakers included The New Energy Movement's founder Dr.Brian O'Leary, astrophysicist, new science pioneer and author of Miracle in the Void and Re-Inheriting the Earth; Jeane Manning, a leading new energy journalist and author of The Coming Energy Revolution; Dr. Tom Valone, Director of the Integrity Research Institute and author of seminal new energy books; Dr.Steven Greer, founder of both the Disclosure Project and Space Energy Access Systems (SEAS), a new energy R&D firm; Mark Comings, founder of Dynamis, a new energy R&D incubator firm, and a physicist with a gift for depicting converging trends in physics and mysticism.
The audience also heard from Martin Burger, CEO of Blue Power, on Tidal Power R&D; Win Lambertson, the inventor of the E-Dam device, on solid-state zero-point energy devices and Ken Rauen, a former research colleague of Eugene Mallove, on both water-borne fusion technologies and advanced thermodynamics.
While participants eagerly absorbed the latest information and insights provided by the major speakers, they also had a chance to enter their own comments and ask questions during two panel discussions, the first dealing with promises and obstacles and the second with how to make the transition to a sustainable economy, with a particular focus on the role of The New Energy Movement.
A highlight of the conference was the singing of Shawn Gallaway, a singer-songwriter, whose music helped to elevate and inspire the gathering, illustrating the power of that old/new form of energy called Love. His song "I Choose Love" easily won common endorsement as the anthem of the movement.
What is the importance of this movement and how is it likely to evolve in the future? The New Energy Movement was created because of the long-felt need of its leaders for citizen support to change the status quo and existing paradigm in the energy field. Because of the resistance of much of the scientific community, the indifference or even hostility of government and the press, new energy advancements are largely unknown and unsupported by the general public. And because of this, it is extremely difficult to get the funds needed for R&D from angel investors. These funds are critical for moving many promising devices from "proof of concept" to prototypes ready for production.
Something in the overall equation has to shift, and the one approach that has not yet been fully utilized is educating and mobilizing public support at the grassroots. If such support is built, it will make it more likely that investors will come on board or that innovative funding arrangements can be created. Moreover, in some scenarios of bringing out new energy devices public support will be an essential safeguard against possible suppression by hostile forces. Of course, once working devices are publicly demonstrated or go into production, market forces will become the most potent way to spread the new technologies widely.
The highlight of the two-day gathering was the energy and spirit displayed by conference participants. Participants eagerly absorbed the knowledge and inspiration passed on by the major speakers and panelists, and when it came time for them to ask questions or voice their views, many were eager to step to the mikes provided for that purpose. Also visible was enthusiastic informal networking. We plan to allow even more time for such networking at future meetings, using innovative ways to share networks and the results flowing from them in public sessions.
Cooperation among all parties interested in the new energy field is essential if progress is to be made. As was expressed by many the rise in consciousness required to bring such cooperation into being will come about simultaneously with development of the new devices and processes. As if to underscore this realization, many stepped forward to volunteer their services, filling out information giving us an idea of their interests, talents, skills and resources. Already it is clear we have the nucleus of what will be a growing movement for change.
As we raise the funds needed to put The New Energy Movement on a solid and stable footing, we will be able to spread information and guidance for expanding the movement to other parts of the United States and the world. We are beginning this effort by supporting chapters of The New Energy Movement now being set up in cities in the U.S, Canada, Ecuador, Costa Rica and South Africa.
The New Energy Movement's board and members are considering the best ways both to grow the movement and approach both the promise and obstacles to creating a free energy economy. How much attention should be put on reaching out to national leadership, both public and private, at a time when vested interests are so powerful and so resistant to new solutions? How much should we concentrate on building up the capacity of local communities to create a sustainable future, as larger societal structures become less and less able to meet human needs? How can we best help inventors be creative and productive? How can we use the internet to reach out to potential members in a way that mobilizes support rapidly and effectively? How do we create and support grass-roots New Energy Movement chapters? These are just of a few of the issues to be resolved as The New Energy Movement plants its roots and grows. We welcome input from all who want to participate.
As we at The New Energy Movement look toward the future, we hold fast to the words of Margaret Mead on the power of the few:
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
MAJOR SPEAKERS - SUMMARIES
The following summaries of talks given by the major speakers have been drawn largely from those prepared by Susan Carter and T.Cullen of Pure Energy Systems News. Their summaries have been edited by me and include some new wording. The original versions can be found at the Pure Energy Systems website -pureenergysystems.com/events/conferences/2004/NewEnergyMovement/index.html Audio and video tapes of the speakers' presentations, as well as transcripts, are available through www.newenergymovement.org.
Dr.Brian O'Leary
Dr. Brian O'Leary could be described as author, astronaut, college professor or political energy advisor, but the best title to give him is iconoclast. Excommunicated from the priesthood of science for his study of New Energy, he is the founder of the New Energy Movement organization and was the opening speaker for their flagship conference in Portland, Oregon, Sept 26th and 27th. He also opened the second day of the meeting.
Starting out with the quote "Society honors its live conformists and dead troublemakers." Dr. O'Leary was visibly moved while honoring Gene Mallove, murdered in May. Mallove, a fearless and tireless champion of cold fusion and other new energy innovations, lived with full and fruitful awareness of the New Energy Movement's motto:
We recognize that the single most highly leveraged opportunity for advancement toward solving complex global problems lies in a transformation in the way human civilization generates and utilizes energy.
Dr. O'Leary, listing broad global challenges such as war, pollution and population growth, declared we must "muster the courage to change" and that the valid solutions to our gravest problems will arise out of a broad based social movement. Warming to his theme and true to his iconclastic nature he said, "We must dissolve the myths that hold us back as a civilization. There are NO laws in physics. There is NO Second Law of Thermodynamics. There are only theories, and the theories need to be changed to match the facts."
O'Leary went on to list other myths that must be done away with, such as, "If New Energy were real, we'd have it by now," and "We must await the commercial magic bullet". He challenged the oft-repeated assertion that "extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof", asserting "they need reasonable proofs like any other theory".
The major myth he wished to dissolve is that the US government is going to do the research and development needed to solve the energy problems. Quoting Bertrand Russell, he said, "The resistance to a new idea increases as the square of its importance."
Dr. O'Leary pointed out that the average citizen's trust in the free market to introduce energy solutions on a timely basis is unjustified. "The market hasn't done this, and it won't until the people clamor for it."
Dr. O'Leary was cheered as he threw down his final gauntlet, "Let's have a positive 'terra-ist' attack and let's planet together!" Brian O'Leary's fiery delivery and in-your-face attitude was a perfect opener for the New Energy Movement which dares to take on the biggest icon of all - the oil industry.
Opening the second day of the conference, Dr.O'Leary proclaimed the truism that if we keep going in the direction were going, we will get there. . Instead, we need to determine new goals and move towards a more conscious future. "To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men," he said, quoting Abraham Lincoln.
O'Leary stated that our goal is the introduction of "energy sources which are clean, affordable, decentralized, benign. feasible and reliable and that are accountable to the public." To reach that goal, he offered a number of social and personal action steps, which were a mix of science and spirituality. He advocated a Manifesto for Sustainability and a Global Green Democracy. Spiritually we need to recognize that the world is a reflection of our inner self, and until we clean up our own inner and outer spaces, the world will not be harmonious.
"We resonate with ZPE," he avowed, claiming that spoon bending experiments he has demonstrated show our influence on the biosphere. "Human intentions can influence the universe." Dr O'Leary pointed to additional evidence such as Cleve Baxter's experiments showing how plants respond to human thought and feeling, and Dr.Masaru Emoto's research on the hidden messages of water, which reveal the harmonic and orderly crystalline form of clean water and the deformed and disharmonic form of polluted water.
O'Leary acknowledged that there are environmentalists who will oppose powerful new energy technologies because they fear their use will lead to over-consumption instead of a more pristine environment. He held we need to bring this and other issues out in the open and have intelligent social and political debates about energy options.
Dr. O'Leary also suggested we adopt a broad, holistic Manifesto for Sustainability. "Together we need to create a new science of consciousness that includes quantum physics, parapsychology and alternative healing as well as zero-point energy research." Most of all, he claimed we need to get beyond materialism, reductionism and self-determination and consider the effect of all our thoughts and actions on the whole world.
O'Leary firmly stressed that the solution to our energy problems lies in social activism and joint advocacy along with altruistic and public funding from citizens. He advocated strength in numbers as a counter-weight to corporations that rape the planet for their own selfish gains.
Jeane Manning
Jeane Manning, New Energy Movement board member and author of The Coming Energy Revolution and Energie, said her goal was to make the New Energy field user friendly for the public.
She compared the clean-energy field to a continent with a great divide. On one side of the mountain are typical "renewables" from solar to wind, and on the other side is a vast uncharted territory called New Energy. The high ground between them is the point where explorers looking to the frontier glimpse an untapped Sea of Energy.
Manning said many new technologies are based on resonance. Walter Russell's scientific art such as "In the wave lies the secret" provides a visual reflection of this and other principles. Current technologies emphasize explosion reactions and heat, while New Energy emphasizes implosion and cool technologies.
Manning gave an overview of the many emerging technologies, showing many solutions to our fossil fuel addiction. Her presentation introduced:
Blacklight Power - Randell Mill's hydrino technology
Hydrogen on Demand - different ways to produce hydrogen that are less expensive and safer than current methods
Carbon Arc technology
Sonofusion - a method of using sound waves to create heat in a fuel-less furnace
Cold Fusion and Light Element Fusion - "while cold fusion was said to be buried back in 1989, it is still very much alive"
Exotic Vacuum Objects - research by Ken Shoulders with the goal of direct electrical output from ZPE. He intends to create ball lightning that can be harnessed to do work
New Heat Engines - in which table-top experiments turn conventional heat theory up-side-down
Resonance Amplifiers - many researchers, including Stan Meyer, have claimed excess energy through amplifying resonance effects, similar to a child on a swing using low-power nudges to amplify into big results. Xogen is one company Manning mentioned that gets energy from water resonance.
Electrostatic devices - can get energy directly from atmospheric charge
Aetheric Energy - which can be captured or accumulated
The E-Dam - made by Win Lambertson, another conference speaker who showed a device which is 153% efficient
Shape Power - special geometric shapes concentrate energy. Researchers' goal is obtaining useable power
Vortex Energy and Viktor Schauberger's work - devices which imitate nature's vortices and spirals, including very efficient pumps, twister pipes and wavy plate disks.
No-Fuel Steam Generators - which use a small amount of mechanical energy to generate excess heat
Spiraling Fluid Drives - by D. Hinrich are not overunity but do demonstrate Schauberger principles
Radiant Energy - a different kind of electricity discovered by Tesla and developed by Ed Grey, T. H. Moray, John Bedini and others, which meters can't yet detect. Today's fast electronic switching aids such approaches.
New Superconductors - such as those developed by Mark Goldes
Solid State Devices of various kinds - including new advances by John Hutchison which he says produce 1.3 volts per centimeter
Lifter Technology - like those promoted by Tim Ventura and JLN labs
Manning acknowledged the suppression of these new forms of energy, yet she rallied the crowd and gave them hope in her final slide: two simple light switches, one turned off and one turned on. "Let's turn off the power of corruption and turn on the power of people," she pleaded. Manning proclaimed that en masse, people, unafraid of new technology, can start using "small-is-beautiful" technologies and save the world. Her overview of the field made it possible to believe that people really can do just that.
Dr. Tom Valone
Tom Valone, President of Integrity Research Institute (IRI), was a powerhouse of knowledge and facts and gave a thorough overview of where we are currently at with energy needs and where we could go in the future to meet those needs.
His first blockbuster fact caught the audience's attention immediately; 85% of energy today comes from the combustion of dead fossils, forcing the world's atmosphere to overheat. We are likely seeing the results of global warming in our weather such as the four hurricanes in Florida experienced in 2004.
Valone commented that Hubbard's Peak - the peak of oil production - is right on the projected mark for the US. Most alarming is that the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is at three hundred parts per million (ppm), the highest it has been in 400,000 years and may reach six hundred ppm by 2050.
Further evidence of global warming are the liquid lakes at the North Pole. The ice cap is rapidly disappearing, which effects the reflected solar radiation, causing other global weather changes. Valone warned ominously that a sixth to eighty percent reduction in carbon emissions is required to stop global warming.
The most frustrating fact of all, he stated, was that two thirds of all the electricity produced in the US is wasted.
Integrity Research Institute (IRI) is researching the following energy solutions: 1) Atmospheric electricity, 2) Nuclear, 3) Quantum vacuum zero point, 4) Space propulsion energy, 5) Magnetic motors.
Atmospheric Electricity
Ben Franklin almost had it clear back in the 1700's. Electrostatic motors have been known about since the beginning of this country. One motor has been operating for eighty-six years and counting. Reference was made to the American Journal of Physics, 1971, pg. 778, regarding the 200 Gigawatt potential in the atmosphere.
The most promising technology has been known about nearly one hundred years: Tesla's Wardencliff tower and scalar waves. Valone has researchers that have analyzed every part and verified each component of Tesla's system to broadcast power worldwide. IRI is currently working to rebuild a Wardencliff tower.
Nuclear
Nuclear power is about more than just nuclear power plants. Valone told the The New Energy Movement audience about nuclear batteries and the work by Betavoltaics and Nuclear Solutions, (see "The Daintiest Dynamos", IEEE Spectrum, September,1004, p.36.
A very promising development of Paul Brown's is the photo-remediation of nuclear waste, using low energy gamma rays to transmute it to short-lived isotopes). Furthermore, he mentioned Paul Brown's patents for extracting energy safely from radioactive materials without nuclear power plants The studies in this field are showing one Megawatt in produces twenty Megawatts out. Valone reported that advances in this field have confirmed Brown's predictions. Recently, "Laser-driven photo-transmutation of I-129 - a long-lived nuclear waste product" was achieved with a table-top intense gamma ray laser, with accelerating gradients of 1000 times higher than conventional technology that Brown proposed. The 15 million year half life parent isotope was transmuted to a 25-minute daughter isotope I-128. The four-page article from J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 36, L79, 2003 is a free download from the UK Institute of Physics, www.iop.org/EJ/article/0022-3727/36/18/L01/d3_18_L01.pdf , and well worth reading.
Proton - Boron fusion was mentioned, where a high-voltage reaction with decaborane produces four Helium in the form of alpha particles with no neutron radioactivity. Dense plasma is focused in a unique device which produces the 1 billion degrees (100 keV) necessary to make Hydrogen and Boron-11 fuse together into Helium without high energy neutrons being released. A garage-sized fusion reactor would produce energy at three times the output of the Tokamak Reactor, with its old-fashioned deuterium confinement method. (See www.focusfusion.org for more information).
Quantum Vacuum Zero Point
Valone next spoke about the controversial quantum vacuum and zero point energy, pointing out that zero-point energy is NOT conserved. The energy density of zero-point energy is debatable but the quantum vacuum is the ultimate open system.
Many areas in this field are being studied: the Casimir Force, electron-positron production, electron charge cluster technology, toroidal fields, solid state diodes, and other devices. Electron charge clusters are showing nine times over unity. Electric Arc Discharge Accelerators also have more potential energy out than electrical energy in. We may someday rectify thermo-electric noise with diode circuits
On the positive side of this debate, over unity (and its synonyms) are being mentioned in mainstream literature. Dr. Peter Graneau is getting 150% efficiency outputs and flaunts the overunity claim in a peer-reviewed journal: "Arc-liberated chemical energy exceeds electrical input energy" (J. Plasma Physics, 2003, Vol. 63, Part 2, p.115). Pinto actually mentioned "free energy" in his article published in Physical Review Rev. B, 60 21, 1999 p. 4457. He uses micro lasers which affect the dielectric constant of nanosurfaces to get huge improvements in the Casimir force (yielding a projected one kilowatt per meter squared).
Valone further mentioned that Feigel is the first physicist to use ZPE to satisfy energy conservation. Alexander Feigel proved that virtual particles can be induced to travel in a preferred direction and transfer momentum, if they are in an electric field of at least 100 kV and a perpendicular magnetic field of 17 Tesla (10 kG), thus proving that the ZPF can cause motion of a dielectric fluid of 50 nm/sec (Feigel, A. "Quantum vacuum contribution to the momentum of dielectric media." Physical Review Letters, Vol. 92, p. 020404, 2004). Interestingly, the March 2004 issue of Aviation Week magazine was cited since it has an article called "To the Stars" that refers to zero point energy as the only possible power for future space travel.
Space Propulsion Energy
Quantumfields.com discusses a hydrodynamic model of vehicle interactions with zero-point energy which it loses its drag as the vehicle flies in a medium such as outer space whose temperature approaches absolute zero. Valone described the works of Paul H. Hill on inertial control, and how the apparent 90 degree right hand turns by UFOs can be explained with knowledge of classical physics and inertia. A discussion on space propulsion energy would not be complete without discussing the gravity work of T.T. Brown and John Searl (Valone is the author of a book on T.T. Brown called Electrogravitics Systems).
Valone briefly mentioned his own past work on homopolar generators, and its connection to the current work by Roshchin and Godin (http://integrityresinst.crosswinds.net/Roshchin_Godin.pdf). He reminded the group that the Roshchin and Godin machine produces a seven-degree drop in temperature in the area around the electrical generator as it operates, suggesting an unusual fulfillment of an energy conservation modality.
Magnetic Motors
Valone is currently most interested in a magnetic motor design by South African, Mike Brady. Because he could not find any patent information, he said he supposed the design is public domain. (See www.pureenergysystems.com for more information about Mike Brady). Valone hopes to have his own replication of this motor done within a few months.
Other magnetic motor designs were covered such as the Hartman Patent #4,215,330, a Spiral Magnetic Motor and a flywheel vehicle power project. He referred to the June 1979 issue of Popular Science which shows the original design of a spiral magnetic motor by the Kure Tekko company.
All of the magnetic motor designs presented work on the principle of a "magnetic gradient" which Valone said is the one gradient that has been ignored for energy transduction. Temperature, voltage, gravity, pressure, and chemical gradients, for example, have all been historically exploited for human power applications.
Conclusion
Tom Valone concluded by making the point that there is no reason to depend so heavily on fossil fuels; from Franklin to Tesla we have had all the technology we needed. With new energy inventions there are even fewer excuses to continue in our old, 20th century habits. The travesty is that global warming, and its associated effects that we are now experiencing, has largely been unnecessary.
Dr.Steven Greer
Dr. Steven Greer presented a high-powered, emotional presentation of the suppression of New Energy and the forces to reckon with as oil is supplanted by cleaner and cheaper technology. He claimed that before the end of World War II, we had technologies to eliminate the need for all fossil fuels. Since 1955, with the emergence of antigravity technologies, we would have had no need for roads by now, but that technology has been sequestered in highly secret, compartmentalized black budget projects
What we as a people are doing is a crime against nature, Dr.Greer stated flatly, and he warned of the consequences of doing nothing. He lamented that we have become a nation of passive cows that want to be fed while the world is falling apart. While discussing the people in power who are fighting disclosure of the available technologies, he concluded by saying that about 50% of those in in the upper realms of power are now favoring disclosure.
Dr.Greer said the world situation is all about centralized power and who is in the captain's seat running it. Certain people are addicted to power and are dragging the earth down with them. It is our responsibility to help them get over their addiction.
Dr. Greer, founder and CEO of Space Energy Access Systems, Inc. (SEAS), outlined the methodology he is using to unveil technologies and declared its kingpin to be public disclosure. He asserted repeatedly that his powerful contacts and black ops connections protect his team and inventors, but that his greatest insurance is the public.
Greer entertained, cajoled, chastised and enlivened the crowd with his stories of CIA intrigue and power structure threats. He warned that "they" will continue to threaten and intimidate until the public stands up to their machinations. He offered his organization to inventors as a safety net in a vast minefield.
He said there are four categories of unfruitful technology/inventors: 1) frauds, 2) people who have things in the early development stage, 3) people with inventor's paranoia or think the world isn't ready for it yet, and 4) people who took the $10 Million buyout thereby burying their technology.
"We can't keep letting old inventors take their inventions to the grave," Greer declared.
Greer began the quest for a workable new energy technology following 911. He spoke of difficulties cropping up with every new and promising technology. Obstacles aside, he claimed that SEAS is poised to be a corporate leader in the new energy field.
With 313 billionaires now in the world, the problem is not finding money to support the development of these technologies. The problem is finding a real technology and an inventor willing to trust his or her invention to a cooperative team effort.
Mark Comings
Mark Comings, a physicist, inventor and theorist, says we don't have an energy shortage, we have an integrity shortage. What we need is the will and courage to embrace and adopt plentiful, non-polluting energy sources that currently exist and move forward integrating these existing new systems into our existing infrastructure. We also need to accelerate our efforts to bring new highly efficient innovations into the marketplace. The enormity of the ambient energy that presently exists and is circulating throughout the environment of the planet in the form of Solar, Wind, Tidal and Heat etc. is such that these forms of energy alone could easily supply all of humanity's energy needs if intelligently utilized.
"The scientific community is aware of the Biospheric crisis, but the media are not doing enough to communicate the actual nature and severity of the ecological crisis to the people," Comings asserted. "The media is like an dysfunctional nervous system that is not accurately reporting what is actually going in the body of the Earth to the human cells of that very body". "The Biosphere is a singular and unitary life form; a macro-organism of which humanity is but a small part. Other species are not destroying and desecrating the Biosphere; humanity is unique in its destructive capacity." "We as humans are responsible to develop an energy generating infrastructure that is sustainable and harmonious with the biosphere in the long term". He added pointedly that corporations that only look out only for their bottom line of quarterly profits function like cancer tumors in the body of humanity and the body of the Earth. The corporate hegemony has metastasized, and it is up to all of us to stop its cancerous growth and redesign how corporations operate. After all, corporations are simply groups of humans operating according to certain programs and protocols. By changing these protocols and re-envisioning how corporations can operate with a primary recognition that fundamentally they are part of the Biosphere and must give back to the living fabric that they, and all life, ultimately depends upon. We can then begin to see corporations actually having a positive and even regenerative impact on the Earth's ecology.
"The vacuum of space is anything but a vacuum," he said. "It is enormously dense with geometrodynamic potential which is dynamically imbedded in the very fabric of space". John Wheeler postulates that space has an energy density of 10 to the 94th power grams per cubic centimeter. To call space a "vacuum" or the "quantum vacuum" is a misnomer because everything that we know about space indicates that it is not empty. It is not a vacuum but rather a plenum - an absolute fullness, characterized by nearly infinite energy density and boundless luminosity. Space is literally efflorescing with virtual photons and electron-positron pair production. It is not dead, empty or inert but radiant and shimmering with energetic potential.
We need to re-envision the foundations of physics. Our fundamental concepts of Space, Time, Light, Mass, Force etc are limited and are in the process of being dramatically re-visioned. "The so-called laws of physics are special case limits of reality; they are maps which do not necessarily fully represent the actual nature of the territory" .
The best science taking place at the leading edge of fundamental physics tells us that the fabric of reality is made of pure infinite potential and that energetic scarcity is a lie. Scarcity is therefore a false mental fiction. However, when it is believed and operated out of as a working assumption, it propagates and fulfills that expectation, thus creating an outer semblance of scarcity (through the behaviors of hoarding, centralized control and selling of energy). Thus, the false premise of scarcity is justified and reinforced, creating a vicious cycle that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Energetic scarcity is a fear-based human mental construct that has informed and continues to inform and impoverish the very structure of our social, political and economic systems thus impoverishing our collective psychological condition along with them.
All mass and matter arises dynamically out of this plenum of infinite potentiality and yet is paradoxically utterly continuous with, and is in fact a dynamic expression of, this plenum. This all pervading continuum or unified field has the features and qualities of what indigenous people called the Great Spirit. The infinite potential of the plenum is our potential. We are one with the quantum plenum!
Our bodies are piezo-electric bio-crystals, resonant transducers of living light and life force. We have the potential to increasingly become the human bio-crystalline technology of love and abundance. We can thereby learn to live in-phase and in resonant harmony with each other without fear, and the fear based projections that create unnecessary limitation and lack. We have unlimited access to the radiant field of consciousness which is infinite active universal intelligence, We all have direct and immediate access to that field which has been referenced by the spiritual traditions as the Divine Being.
"There is more to light than meets the eye. We need to articulate a deeper understanding of light which will engender a deeper understanding of ourselves and the nature of reality." "Maxwell's equations are not actually Maxwell's; they are a truncated and simplified vector form created by Heaviside and Gibbs for engineers. This form leaves out an entire oscillatory component of light, the longitudinal component." Comings declared. " It is quite significant as well as symbolic that twentieth century physics has been operating on a truncated and incomplete model of light. Light has more to it than we have generally suspected, Light is not just electro-magnetic."
Science been involved in a kind of Electromagnetic reductionism that does not do justice to the fullness of light. We must go into higher dimensions to better understand the nature of light. These greater dimensions of light have been described by the mystics of all traditions as the inner light, love, spirit, and consciousness. It is necessary to be take seriously this higher light in order to bring forth a clear and mathematically rigorous spiritual scientific synthesis. Such a synthesis would do a lot more than provide us new sources of energy - although it will do that as well. It will enable us to heal a deep epistemological and psycho-spiritual split in our culture that has crippled the unfoldment of our greater human potential, individually and collectively for centuries.
A new physics of light can provide the basis for a spirit based science that will help move us into new new degrees of awareness and cooperation . The us vs.them paradigm is a bankrupt old notion that only polarizes and weakens our effectiveness . We must develop a new disposition relative to our planetary predicament that transcends the polarization that has characterized our efforts to change in the past. We need to develop inclusive strategies for conversion to a clean and sustainable infrastructure that involves everyone. Even if some people and corporations are greedy and misguided, we need to acknowledge that we are all rowing together in the same planetary lifeboat and must focus on ways to engender cooperation and collaboration in the vast project of converting and re-designing our energy infrastructure to be non-polluting and sustainable. This is an enormous job and there is a place for everyone to help and participate in bringing about the necessary changes.
Many of the problems we face in this movement are rooted in the interpersonal sphere. Our human dissonance needs to dissolve. We need to wake up from the lies we tell ourselves and take a fearless moral inventory of our own lives. We need to be courageous enough to self-reflect and work on our own issues and unconscious patterns.
This nascent movement needs to learn to come into phase and really co-operate together. We are not separate; we are expressions of the unified field. We don't have an energy shortage. We have an integrity shortage. We have a love and compassion shortage. We need to be the change we want to see in this world. We need to be the human technology of love and abundance expressed in our very way of being in relationship with each other before we will be able to build an external technological infrastructure that generates and supports any kind of real shared collective abundance.
We must also re-design the monetary system and create a just economy to reflect the values of an emerging sustainable and bio-regionally distributed energy system. We need to realize that we are in the process of envisioning and designing a completely new kind of society, A new form of planetary civilization is beginning to emerge based upon an entirely new set of values. The commitment to generating all of our electricity in clean and sustainable ways symbolizes a new human covenant with the Earth. We need to build new living communities that are local in their economies and their energy infrastructure. We are beginning to see the emergence of a distributed model of power sharing and power distribution that is more like the internet than centralized power distribution form utilities. Distributed power is the new paradigm. We are literally creating an energy internet that can upload and download power into the grid making decentralized power a natural feature of the new energy infrastructure.
We are living in economic slavery. We need to regenerate and rebuild an economic democracy which, as Thomas Jefferson warned, is crucial for helping us maintain our liberty. If we allow the form of our economy to be dictated to us rather than decided by the collective will of the people, we give up our power over our own destiny and invite tyranny. That is exactly what we have now, an economic dictatorship that is corrupt in the extreme.
It is no wonder that we are having difficulty growing a new just and sustainable energy infrastructure when the underlying economic soil, so to speak, is so rotten and leached of vital nutrients. The power to redesign the architecture of the economy is something that we need to take back into our own hands. A good example of what I am speaking about is articulated in the Solari Model of bioregional place-based economics. See www.solari.com as well as www.whereisthemoney.org for more on this critical economic factor.
Stephen Kaplan
November 2004
New Energy in the "Free Market" Age: Will large corporations really be able to help us?
I read with interest an op-ed article "The Courage to Develop Clean Energy" by Jeffrey Immelt and Jonathan Lash in the 21 May 2005 Washington Post. The title seemed to come right out of the theme of the NEM conference in September 2004 in Portland, Oregon entitled "New Energy: The Courage to Change" Without yet identifying the authors of such a seemingly prophetic piece, I read on.
"After inventing the light bulb", the essay begins, "Thomas Edison was asked where he grew inspiration from. ,I find out what the world needs', Edison replied, ,then I proceed to invent.'"Who are these enlighted beings, I asked, that were able to speak our language (and Edison's) and be able to break through into the mainstream media as well, denied to us for such a long time?
Eagerly, I read more. Immelt and Lash proposed that three ingredients were necessary for developing clean energy: "(1) the brainpower to develop new technology, (2) a market that makes clean technologies profitable, and (3) a strong dose of American will." Innert and Lash then argued we had the first two ingredients in place, but we needed to develop the third. I don't agree. The requirement for profit, under some conditions, might actually eliminate many promising options which are either not ready yet or are intrinsically cheap. Hence Corporate America's emphasis on more mundane and massively deployed technologies which could quickly turn in the profit. Hmmm, who were these authors anyway?
My eyes then flashed down to the authors' biographies. Jeffrey Immelt is chairman and CEO of General Electric Company and Jonathan Lash is president of the World Resources Institute. Heavy hitters...
What can we learn from their statement? In my opinion we all have a lot in common, except for the profit "requirement". What kinds of profits? Who decides how much profit is enough? To satisfy shareholders, any company like GE must turn in a humongous profit in the energy and war machinery fields to grow and thrive. All this assumes, then, that any kind of new energy must come under a private capitalistic umbrella. The implication here is that, if a new energy technology were basically free, then it might not be worth GE's or any other large corporation's while to press forward with the technology. They would pass. Or tap into the long sordid history of promising new technologies being buried to maintain a profitable status quo.
This leads to a more fundamental question: what if a given commodity which was highly polluting but profitable (e.g., oil, coal, gas and nuclear power) could be replaced by a very cheap clean technology which would turn in very low profits? Would GE be happy if it had to give up its nuclear and gas turbine power plants for this? Dubious. The article clearly implied that no large corporation accountable to its shareholders could give up their profits for something less profitable. In fact, the authors gloss over the rationale for their profit requirement and making the profit motive axiomatically true for all energy technologies at all times. They then shift the blame for our poor energy track record to what they see as the lack of the third ingredient: a strong dose of American will. I would argue, to the contrary, that the first and third ingredients are there but latent, and that the capitalistic axiom is what is blocking us.
Some of us have examined in other essays on this website objections to a new energy future posed by scientists, environmentalists, and the U.S. government But this one recent article coming from the bowels of the U.S. corporate Establishment, while giving lip service to innovation, can effectively veto concepts that cannot turn in sufficient profits. New energy would appear to be a candidate for a veto. Meanwhile, the CEO class can blithely blame the American people for their lack of will. Very tricky, and dishonest...
Think about it. I believe that some corporations have become so powerful, they have set our energy policies purely out of the profit motive and have joined at the hip with the U.S. government through power brokering and fighting resource wars . But this issue so affects the global commons to let wars and privatized resource grabs and conventional power generation to dominate our decisions. When it comes to energy, war and water, the public will need to learn how to take its power back, to awaken so we can steer the ship of state away from catastrophe. That process is now well underway here in Latin America and needs to enter the consciousness of the American people at this critical juncture.
Of course, in the real world, the "profit axiom" does dominate and may be the greatest source of the suppression of new energy. Not that we shouldn't make profits from new energy developments. But profits cannot be the pacing item in bringing in new energy. Alas, many of us in the U.S. particularly look at the world through the fuzzy filter of privatization as a panacea to world economic challenges. But can we trust the testimony and rationales of those now in power? Or do we truly have the courage to address fallacious assumptions about future policies that would require turning in huge profits?
The corporatization of basic human activities have made a mockery of Adam Smith's original thinking about free markets. Instead it has led to the dangerous accumulation of private power warned about by so many former U.S. presidents including Jefferson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts and Eisenhower. The CEO of General Electric can wax eloquently about clean energy innovation and blame the American people for their lack of will, but does GE have the courage to tame (I'm not saying eliminate) the profit motive in the event of significant new energy breakthroughs?
I have an open question for Mr. Immelt. Hypothetically, what if GE were to be invited to manufacture 10 billion clean 10-kilwatt new energy power packs to be sold to the whole world for $10 apiece, turning in only a small profit, certainly not on the scale of GE's conventional power plant systems? Would GE do it or pass or maybe suppress the new technologies? What other corporations would want to be involved and and how? Is this not a question of cooperation trumping competition?
Answering this question could give us a key to our collective survival. And if Mr. Immelt or any other CEO's answer perchance were to be yes, then profits truly could combine with ethics and I'd like to collaborate. I'd also like access back to the media which has effectively blacked out new energy activities. Meanwhile, we can be very wary of making much progress with the capitalists, and I know much of this would seem heretical to the Amerian way. But we need to create a new context for change that transcends the optimization of profits. That's only a part of the picture and has held us in its grips for much too long. The New Energy Movement is in search of more discussion of these pressing issues.
Brian O'Leary, Ph.D
July 2005
"After inventing the light bulb", the essay begins, "Thomas Edison was asked where he grew inspiration from. ,I find out what the world needs', Edison replied, ,then I proceed to invent.'"Who are these enlighted beings, I asked, that were able to speak our language (and Edison's) and be able to break through into the mainstream media as well, denied to us for such a long time?
Eagerly, I read more. Immelt and Lash proposed that three ingredients were necessary for developing clean energy: "(1) the brainpower to develop new technology, (2) a market that makes clean technologies profitable, and (3) a strong dose of American will." Innert and Lash then argued we had the first two ingredients in place, but we needed to develop the third. I don't agree. The requirement for profit, under some conditions, might actually eliminate many promising options which are either not ready yet or are intrinsically cheap. Hence Corporate America's emphasis on more mundane and massively deployed technologies which could quickly turn in the profit. Hmmm, who were these authors anyway?
My eyes then flashed down to the authors' biographies. Jeffrey Immelt is chairman and CEO of General Electric Company and Jonathan Lash is president of the World Resources Institute. Heavy hitters...
What can we learn from their statement? In my opinion we all have a lot in common, except for the profit "requirement". What kinds of profits? Who decides how much profit is enough? To satisfy shareholders, any company like GE must turn in a humongous profit in the energy and war machinery fields to grow and thrive. All this assumes, then, that any kind of new energy must come under a private capitalistic umbrella. The implication here is that, if a new energy technology were basically free, then it might not be worth GE's or any other large corporation's while to press forward with the technology. They would pass. Or tap into the long sordid history of promising new technologies being buried to maintain a profitable status quo.
This leads to a more fundamental question: what if a given commodity which was highly polluting but profitable (e.g., oil, coal, gas and nuclear power) could be replaced by a very cheap clean technology which would turn in very low profits? Would GE be happy if it had to give up its nuclear and gas turbine power plants for this? Dubious. The article clearly implied that no large corporation accountable to its shareholders could give up their profits for something less profitable. In fact, the authors gloss over the rationale for their profit requirement and making the profit motive axiomatically true for all energy technologies at all times. They then shift the blame for our poor energy track record to what they see as the lack of the third ingredient: a strong dose of American will. I would argue, to the contrary, that the first and third ingredients are there but latent, and that the capitalistic axiom is what is blocking us.
Some of us have examined in other essays on this website objections to a new energy future posed by scientists, environmentalists, and the U.S. government But this one recent article coming from the bowels of the U.S. corporate Establishment, while giving lip service to innovation, can effectively veto concepts that cannot turn in sufficient profits. New energy would appear to be a candidate for a veto. Meanwhile, the CEO class can blithely blame the American people for their lack of will. Very tricky, and dishonest...
Think about it. I believe that some corporations have become so powerful, they have set our energy policies purely out of the profit motive and have joined at the hip with the U.S. government through power brokering and fighting resource wars . But this issue so affects the global commons to let wars and privatized resource grabs and conventional power generation to dominate our decisions. When it comes to energy, war and water, the public will need to learn how to take its power back, to awaken so we can steer the ship of state away from catastrophe. That process is now well underway here in Latin America and needs to enter the consciousness of the American people at this critical juncture.
Of course, in the real world, the "profit axiom" does dominate and may be the greatest source of the suppression of new energy. Not that we shouldn't make profits from new energy developments. But profits cannot be the pacing item in bringing in new energy. Alas, many of us in the U.S. particularly look at the world through the fuzzy filter of privatization as a panacea to world economic challenges. But can we trust the testimony and rationales of those now in power? Or do we truly have the courage to address fallacious assumptions about future policies that would require turning in huge profits?
The corporatization of basic human activities have made a mockery of Adam Smith's original thinking about free markets. Instead it has led to the dangerous accumulation of private power warned about by so many former U.S. presidents including Jefferson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts and Eisenhower. The CEO of General Electric can wax eloquently about clean energy innovation and blame the American people for their lack of will, but does GE have the courage to tame (I'm not saying eliminate) the profit motive in the event of significant new energy breakthroughs?
I have an open question for Mr. Immelt. Hypothetically, what if GE were to be invited to manufacture 10 billion clean 10-kilwatt new energy power packs to be sold to the whole world for $10 apiece, turning in only a small profit, certainly not on the scale of GE's conventional power plant systems? Would GE do it or pass or maybe suppress the new technologies? What other corporations would want to be involved and and how? Is this not a question of cooperation trumping competition?
Answering this question could give us a key to our collective survival. And if Mr. Immelt or any other CEO's answer perchance were to be yes, then profits truly could combine with ethics and I'd like to collaborate. I'd also like access back to the media which has effectively blacked out new energy activities. Meanwhile, we can be very wary of making much progress with the capitalists, and I know much of this would seem heretical to the Amerian way. But we need to create a new context for change that transcends the optimization of profits. That's only a part of the picture and has held us in its grips for much too long. The New Energy Movement is in search of more discussion of these pressing issues.
Brian O'Leary, Ph.D
July 2005
President Chavez's Speech to the United Nations
By: President Hugo Chavez
Your Excellencies, friends, good afternoon:
The original purpose of this meeting has been completely distorted. The imposed center of debate has been a so-called reform process that overshadows the most urgent issues, what the peoples of the world claim with urgency: the adoption of measures that deal with the real problems that block and sabotage the efforts made by our countries for real development and life.
Five years after the Millennium Summit, the harsh reality is that the great majority of estimated goals- which were very modest indeed- will not be met.
We pretended reducing by half the 842 million hungry people by the year 2015. At the current rate that goal will be achieved by the year 2215. Who in this audience will be there to celebrate it? That is only if the human race is able to survive the destruction that threats our natural environment.
We had claimed the aspiration of achieving universal primary education by the year 2015. At the current rate that goal will be reached after the year 2100. Let us prepare, then, to celebrate it.
Friends of the world, this takes us to a sad conclusion: The United Nations has exhausted its model, and it is not all about reform. The XXI century claims deep changes that will only be possible if a new organization is founded. This UN does not work. We have to say it. It is the truth. These transformations – the ones Venezuela is referring to- have, according to us, two phases: The immediate phase and the aspiration phase, a utopia. The first is framed by the agreements that were signed in the old system. We do not run away from them. We even bring concrete proposals in that model for the short term. But the dream of an ever-lasting world peace, the dream of a world not ashamed by hunger, disease, illiteracy, extreme necessity, needs-apart from roots- to spread its wings to fly. We need to spread our wings and fly. We are aware of a frightening neoliberal globalization, but there is also the reality of an interconnected world that we have to face not as a problem but as a challenge. We could, on the basis of national realities, exchange knowledge, integrate markets, interconnect, but at the same time we must understand that there are problems that do not have a national solution: radioactive clouds, world oil prices, diseases, warming of the planet or the hole in the ozone layer. These are not domestic problems. As we stride toward a new United Nations model that includes all of us when they talk about the people, we are bringing four indispensable and urgent reform proposals to this Assembly: the first; the expansion of the Security Council in its permanent categories as well as the non permanent categories, thus allowing new developed and developing countries as new permanent and non permanent categories. The second; we need to assure the necessary improvement of the work methodology in order to increase transparency, not to diminish it. The third; we need to immediately suppress- we have said this repeatedly in Venezuela for the past six years- the veto in the decisions taken by the Security Council, that elitist trace is incompatible with democracy, incompatible with the principles of equality and democracy.
And the fourth; we need to strengthen the role of the Secretary General; his/her political functions regarding preventive diplomacy, that role must be consolidated. The seriousness of all problems calls for deep transformations. Mere reforms are not enough to recover that “we” all the peoples of the world are waiting for. More than just reforms we in Venezuela call for the foundation of a new United Nations, or as the teacher of Simón Bolívar, Simón Rodríguez said: “Either we invent or we err.”
At the Porto Alegre World Social Forum last January different personalities asked for the United Nations to move outside the United States if the repeated violations to international rule of law continue. Today we know that there were never any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The people of the United States have always been very rigorous in demanding the truth to their leaders; the people of the world demand the same thing. There were never any weapons of mass destruction; however, Iraq was bombed, occupied and it is still occupied. All this happened over the United Nations. That is why we propose this Assembly that the United Nations should leave a country that does not respect the resolutions taken by this same Assembly. Some proposals have pointed out to Jerusalem as an international city as an alternative. The proposal is generous enough to propose an answer to the current conflict affecting Palestine. Nonetheless, it may have some characteristics that could make it very difficult to become a reality. That is why we are bringing a proposal made by Simón Bolívar, the great Liberator of the South, in 1815. Bolívar proposed then the creation of an international city that would host the idea of unity.
We believe it is time to think about the creation of an international city with its own sovereignty, with its own strength and morality to represent all nations of the world. Such international city has to balance five centuries of unbalance. The headquarters of the United Nations must be in the South.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are facing an unprecedented energy crisis in which an unstoppable increase of energy is perilously reaching record highs, as well as the incapacity of increase oil supply and the perspective of a decline in the proven reserves of fuel worldwide. Oil is starting to become exhausted.
For the year 2020 the daily demand for oil will be 120 million barrels. Such demand, even without counting future increments- would consume in 20 years what humanity has used up to now. This means that more carbon dioxide will inevitably be increased, thus warming our planet even more.
Hurricane Katrina has been a painful example of the cost of ignoring such realities. The warming of the oceans is the fundamental factor behind the demolishing increase in the strength of the hurricanes we have witnessed in the last years. Let this occasion be an outlet to send our deepest condolences to the people of the United States. Their people are brothers and sisters of all of us in the Americas and the rest of the world.
It is unpractical and unethical to sacrifice the human race by appealing in an insane manner the validity of a socioeconomic model that has a galloping destructive capacity. It would be suicidal to spread it and impose it as an infallible remedy for the evils which are caused precisely by them.
Not too long ago the President of the United States went to an Organization of American States’ meeting to propose Latin America and the Caribbean to increase market-oriented policies, open market policies-that is neoliberalism- when it is precisely the fundamental cause of the great evils and the great tragedies currently suffered by our people. : The neoliberal capitalism, the Washington Consensus. All this has generated is a high degree of misery, inequality and infinite tragedy for all the peoples on his continent.
What we need now more than ever Mr. President is a new international order. Let us recall the United Nations General assembly in its sixth extraordinary session period in 1974, 31 years ago, where a new International Economic Order action plan was adopted, as well as the States Economic Rights and Duties Charter by an overwhelming majority, 120 votes for the motion, 6 against and 10 abstentions. This was the period when voting was possible at the United Nations. Now it is impossible to vote. Now they approve documents such as this one which I denounce on behalf of Venezuela as null, void and illegitimate. This document was approved violating the current laws of the United Nations. This document is invalid! This document should be discussed; the Venezuelan government will make it public. We cannot accept an open and shameless dictatorship in the United Nations. These matters should be discussed and that is why I petition my colleagues, heads of states and heads of governments, to discuss it.
I just came from a meeting with President Néstor Kirchner and well, I was pulling this document out; this document was handed out five minutes before- and only in English- to our delegation. This document was approved by a dictatorial hammer which I am here denouncing as illegal, null, void and illegitimate.
Hear this, Mr. President: if we accept this, we are indeed lost. Let us turn off the lights, close all doors and windows! That would be unbelievable: us accepting a dictatorship here in this hall.
Now more than ever- we were saying- we need to retake ideas that were left on the road such as the proposal approved at this Assembly in 1974 regarding a New Economic International Order. Article 2 of that text confirms the right of states to nationalizing the property and natural resources that belonged to foreign investors. It also proposed to create cartels of raw material producers. In the Resolution 3021, May, 1974, the Assembly expressed its will to work with utmost urgency in the creation of a New Economic International Order based on- listen carefully, please- “the equity, sovereign equality, interdependence, common interest and cooperation among all states regardless of their economic and social systems, correcting the inequalities and repairing the injustices among developed and developing countries, thus assuring present and future generations, peace, justice and a social and economic development that grows at a sustainable rate.”
The main goal of the New Economic International Order was to modify the old economic order conceived at Breton Woods.
We the people now claim- this is the case of Venezuela- a new international economic order. But it is also urgent a new international political order. Let us not permit that a few countries try to reinterpret the principles of International Law in order to impose new doctrines such as “pre-emptive warfare.” Oh do they threaten us with that pre-emptive war! And what about the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine? We need to ask ourselves. Who is going to protect us? How are they going to protect us?
I believe one of the countries that require protection is precisely the United States. That was shown painfully with the tragedy caused by Hurricane Katrina; they do not have a government that protects them from the announced nature disasters, if we are going to talk about protecting each other; these are very dangerous concepts that shape imperialism, interventionism as they try to legalize the violation of the national sovereignty. The full respect towards the principles of International Law and the United Nations Charter must be, Mr. President, the keystone for international relations in today’s world and the base for the new order we are currently proposing.
It is urgent to fight, in an efficient manner, international terrorism. Nonetheless, we must not use it as an excuse to launch unjustified military aggressions which violate international law. Such has been the doctrine following September 11. Only a true and close cooperation and the end of the double discourse that some countries of the North apply regarding terrorism, could end this terrible calamity.
In just seven years of Bolivarian Revolution, the people of Venezuela can claim important social and economic advances.
One million four hundred and six thousand Venezuelans learned to read and write. We are 25 million total. And the country will-in a few days- be declared illiteracy-free territory. And three million Venezuelans, who had always been excluded because of poverty, are now part of primary, secondary and higher studies.
Seventeen million Venezuelans-almost 70% of the population- are receiving, and for the first time, universal healthcare, including the medicine, and in a few years, all Venezuelans will have free access to an excellent healthcare service. More thatn a million seven hundred tons of food are channeled to over 12 million people at subsidized prices, almost half the population. One million gets them completely free, as they are in a transition period. More than 700 thousand new jobs have been created, thus reducing unemployment by 9 points. All of this amid internal and external aggressions, including a coup d’etat and an oil industry shutdown organized by Washington. Regardless of the conspiracies, the lies spread by powerful media outlets, and the permanent threat of the empire and its allies, they even call for the assassination of a president. The only country where a person is able to call for the assassination of a head of state is the United States. Such was the case of a Reverend called Pat Robertson, very close to the White House: He called for my assassination and he is a free person. That is international terrorism!
We will fight for Venezuela, for Latin American integration and the world. We reaffirm our infinite faith in humankind. We are thirsty for peace and justice in order to survive as species. Simón Bolívar, founding father of our country and guide of our revolution swore to never allow his hands to be idle or his soul to rest until he had broken the shackles which bound us to the empire. Now is the time to not allow our hands to be idle or our souls to rest until we save humanity.
Translated by Néstor Sánchez
Your Excellencies, friends, good afternoon:
The original purpose of this meeting has been completely distorted. The imposed center of debate has been a so-called reform process that overshadows the most urgent issues, what the peoples of the world claim with urgency: the adoption of measures that deal with the real problems that block and sabotage the efforts made by our countries for real development and life.
Five years after the Millennium Summit, the harsh reality is that the great majority of estimated goals- which were very modest indeed- will not be met.
We pretended reducing by half the 842 million hungry people by the year 2015. At the current rate that goal will be achieved by the year 2215. Who in this audience will be there to celebrate it? That is only if the human race is able to survive the destruction that threats our natural environment.
We had claimed the aspiration of achieving universal primary education by the year 2015. At the current rate that goal will be reached after the year 2100. Let us prepare, then, to celebrate it.
Friends of the world, this takes us to a sad conclusion: The United Nations has exhausted its model, and it is not all about reform. The XXI century claims deep changes that will only be possible if a new organization is founded. This UN does not work. We have to say it. It is the truth. These transformations – the ones Venezuela is referring to- have, according to us, two phases: The immediate phase and the aspiration phase, a utopia. The first is framed by the agreements that were signed in the old system. We do not run away from them. We even bring concrete proposals in that model for the short term. But the dream of an ever-lasting world peace, the dream of a world not ashamed by hunger, disease, illiteracy, extreme necessity, needs-apart from roots- to spread its wings to fly. We need to spread our wings and fly. We are aware of a frightening neoliberal globalization, but there is also the reality of an interconnected world that we have to face not as a problem but as a challenge. We could, on the basis of national realities, exchange knowledge, integrate markets, interconnect, but at the same time we must understand that there are problems that do not have a national solution: radioactive clouds, world oil prices, diseases, warming of the planet or the hole in the ozone layer. These are not domestic problems. As we stride toward a new United Nations model that includes all of us when they talk about the people, we are bringing four indispensable and urgent reform proposals to this Assembly: the first; the expansion of the Security Council in its permanent categories as well as the non permanent categories, thus allowing new developed and developing countries as new permanent and non permanent categories. The second; we need to assure the necessary improvement of the work methodology in order to increase transparency, not to diminish it. The third; we need to immediately suppress- we have said this repeatedly in Venezuela for the past six years- the veto in the decisions taken by the Security Council, that elitist trace is incompatible with democracy, incompatible with the principles of equality and democracy.
And the fourth; we need to strengthen the role of the Secretary General; his/her political functions regarding preventive diplomacy, that role must be consolidated. The seriousness of all problems calls for deep transformations. Mere reforms are not enough to recover that “we” all the peoples of the world are waiting for. More than just reforms we in Venezuela call for the foundation of a new United Nations, or as the teacher of Simón Bolívar, Simón Rodríguez said: “Either we invent or we err.”
At the Porto Alegre World Social Forum last January different personalities asked for the United Nations to move outside the United States if the repeated violations to international rule of law continue. Today we know that there were never any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The people of the United States have always been very rigorous in demanding the truth to their leaders; the people of the world demand the same thing. There were never any weapons of mass destruction; however, Iraq was bombed, occupied and it is still occupied. All this happened over the United Nations. That is why we propose this Assembly that the United Nations should leave a country that does not respect the resolutions taken by this same Assembly. Some proposals have pointed out to Jerusalem as an international city as an alternative. The proposal is generous enough to propose an answer to the current conflict affecting Palestine. Nonetheless, it may have some characteristics that could make it very difficult to become a reality. That is why we are bringing a proposal made by Simón Bolívar, the great Liberator of the South, in 1815. Bolívar proposed then the creation of an international city that would host the idea of unity.
We believe it is time to think about the creation of an international city with its own sovereignty, with its own strength and morality to represent all nations of the world. Such international city has to balance five centuries of unbalance. The headquarters of the United Nations must be in the South.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are facing an unprecedented energy crisis in which an unstoppable increase of energy is perilously reaching record highs, as well as the incapacity of increase oil supply and the perspective of a decline in the proven reserves of fuel worldwide. Oil is starting to become exhausted.
For the year 2020 the daily demand for oil will be 120 million barrels. Such demand, even without counting future increments- would consume in 20 years what humanity has used up to now. This means that more carbon dioxide will inevitably be increased, thus warming our planet even more.
Hurricane Katrina has been a painful example of the cost of ignoring such realities. The warming of the oceans is the fundamental factor behind the demolishing increase in the strength of the hurricanes we have witnessed in the last years. Let this occasion be an outlet to send our deepest condolences to the people of the United States. Their people are brothers and sisters of all of us in the Americas and the rest of the world.
It is unpractical and unethical to sacrifice the human race by appealing in an insane manner the validity of a socioeconomic model that has a galloping destructive capacity. It would be suicidal to spread it and impose it as an infallible remedy for the evils which are caused precisely by them.
Not too long ago the President of the United States went to an Organization of American States’ meeting to propose Latin America and the Caribbean to increase market-oriented policies, open market policies-that is neoliberalism- when it is precisely the fundamental cause of the great evils and the great tragedies currently suffered by our people. : The neoliberal capitalism, the Washington Consensus. All this has generated is a high degree of misery, inequality and infinite tragedy for all the peoples on his continent.
What we need now more than ever Mr. President is a new international order. Let us recall the United Nations General assembly in its sixth extraordinary session period in 1974, 31 years ago, where a new International Economic Order action plan was adopted, as well as the States Economic Rights and Duties Charter by an overwhelming majority, 120 votes for the motion, 6 against and 10 abstentions. This was the period when voting was possible at the United Nations. Now it is impossible to vote. Now they approve documents such as this one which I denounce on behalf of Venezuela as null, void and illegitimate. This document was approved violating the current laws of the United Nations. This document is invalid! This document should be discussed; the Venezuelan government will make it public. We cannot accept an open and shameless dictatorship in the United Nations. These matters should be discussed and that is why I petition my colleagues, heads of states and heads of governments, to discuss it.
I just came from a meeting with President Néstor Kirchner and well, I was pulling this document out; this document was handed out five minutes before- and only in English- to our delegation. This document was approved by a dictatorial hammer which I am here denouncing as illegal, null, void and illegitimate.
Hear this, Mr. President: if we accept this, we are indeed lost. Let us turn off the lights, close all doors and windows! That would be unbelievable: us accepting a dictatorship here in this hall.
Now more than ever- we were saying- we need to retake ideas that were left on the road such as the proposal approved at this Assembly in 1974 regarding a New Economic International Order. Article 2 of that text confirms the right of states to nationalizing the property and natural resources that belonged to foreign investors. It also proposed to create cartels of raw material producers. In the Resolution 3021, May, 1974, the Assembly expressed its will to work with utmost urgency in the creation of a New Economic International Order based on- listen carefully, please- “the equity, sovereign equality, interdependence, common interest and cooperation among all states regardless of their economic and social systems, correcting the inequalities and repairing the injustices among developed and developing countries, thus assuring present and future generations, peace, justice and a social and economic development that grows at a sustainable rate.”
The main goal of the New Economic International Order was to modify the old economic order conceived at Breton Woods.
We the people now claim- this is the case of Venezuela- a new international economic order. But it is also urgent a new international political order. Let us not permit that a few countries try to reinterpret the principles of International Law in order to impose new doctrines such as “pre-emptive warfare.” Oh do they threaten us with that pre-emptive war! And what about the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine? We need to ask ourselves. Who is going to protect us? How are they going to protect us?
I believe one of the countries that require protection is precisely the United States. That was shown painfully with the tragedy caused by Hurricane Katrina; they do not have a government that protects them from the announced nature disasters, if we are going to talk about protecting each other; these are very dangerous concepts that shape imperialism, interventionism as they try to legalize the violation of the national sovereignty. The full respect towards the principles of International Law and the United Nations Charter must be, Mr. President, the keystone for international relations in today’s world and the base for the new order we are currently proposing.
It is urgent to fight, in an efficient manner, international terrorism. Nonetheless, we must not use it as an excuse to launch unjustified military aggressions which violate international law. Such has been the doctrine following September 11. Only a true and close cooperation and the end of the double discourse that some countries of the North apply regarding terrorism, could end this terrible calamity.
In just seven years of Bolivarian Revolution, the people of Venezuela can claim important social and economic advances.
One million four hundred and six thousand Venezuelans learned to read and write. We are 25 million total. And the country will-in a few days- be declared illiteracy-free territory. And three million Venezuelans, who had always been excluded because of poverty, are now part of primary, secondary and higher studies.
Seventeen million Venezuelans-almost 70% of the population- are receiving, and for the first time, universal healthcare, including the medicine, and in a few years, all Venezuelans will have free access to an excellent healthcare service. More thatn a million seven hundred tons of food are channeled to over 12 million people at subsidized prices, almost half the population. One million gets them completely free, as they are in a transition period. More than 700 thousand new jobs have been created, thus reducing unemployment by 9 points. All of this amid internal and external aggressions, including a coup d’etat and an oil industry shutdown organized by Washington. Regardless of the conspiracies, the lies spread by powerful media outlets, and the permanent threat of the empire and its allies, they even call for the assassination of a president. The only country where a person is able to call for the assassination of a head of state is the United States. Such was the case of a Reverend called Pat Robertson, very close to the White House: He called for my assassination and he is a free person. That is international terrorism!
We will fight for Venezuela, for Latin American integration and the world. We reaffirm our infinite faith in humankind. We are thirsty for peace and justice in order to survive as species. Simón Bolívar, founding father of our country and guide of our revolution swore to never allow his hands to be idle or his soul to rest until he had broken the shackles which bound us to the empire. Now is the time to not allow our hands to be idle or our souls to rest until we save humanity.
Translated by Néstor Sánchez
Former Canadian Defense Minister Speaks Out!
Former Canadian Defense Minister Speaks Out on Extraterrestrial Visitors & Government Secrecy.
On September 25, 2005, Hon Paul Hellyer, the former Canadian Minister for National Defense gave a speech in Toronto at an event titled: "Exopolitics Toronto: A Symposium on UFO Disclosure and Planetary Direction" (www.exopoliticstoronto.com) . Hellyer described his time as Minister for Defense from 1963 - 1967 where the occasional UFO sighting report crossed his desk.
He claims to never have had time for what he considered to be a "flight of fancy", but nevertheless retained an interest in the UFO phenomenon. While Minister for Defense, he was guest of honor at the opening of the world's first UFO landing pad at
Alberta, Canada in 1967.
He thought it an innovative idea from a progressive Canadian community willing to pay for his helicopter ride, but did not give much thought to UFOs as having serious policy implications. He also describes a private UFO sighting he later had with family and guests, but once again attributed it to a 'flight of fancy' rather than anything having serious policy implications.
Hellyer's position on UFOs dramatically changed after watching the late Peter Jennings documentary special, "Seeing is Believing" in February 2005. Hellyer decided to read a book that had been idly sitting on his book shelf for two years. Philip Corso's, The Day After Roswell, sparked intense interest for Hellyer in terms of its policy implications. Corso named real people, institutions and events in his book that could be checked. Intrigued by the policy implications, Hellyer decided to confirm whether Corso's book was real or a "work of fiction".
He contacted a retired United States Air Force General and spoke to him directly to verify Corso's claims. The unnamed General simply said: "every word is true and more". Hellyer then proceeded to discuss the "and more =85" with the general and claimed he was told remarkable things concerning UFOs and the extraterrestrial hypothesis that interplanetary visitors have been here since at least 1947. Finally convinced that the UFO phenomenon was real Hellyer decided to come forward and speak at Exopolitics Toronto about some of the "most profoundly important policy questions that must be addressed." The policy questions Hellyer addressed in his talk are both profound and vitally important for citizens of every nation of Earth.
First, Hellyer claimed that evidence concerning UFOs is the "greatest and most successful cover up in the history of the world". He confirmed that senior political officials even at the rank of Minister of Defense, a position he himself occupied, are simply out of the loop when it comes to information concerning UFOs and visiting extraterrestrials. From a democratic perspective, that raises many concerns about oversight, transparency and accountability of those in control of the
information, technology and projects concerning the extraterrestrial visitors.
A second profound policy question concerns the designation by the U.S. military of visiting extraterrestrials as an 'enemy'. According to Hellyer, this had led to the development of "laser and particle guns to the point that they can be used against the visitors from space." It is this targeting of visiting extraterrestrials that concerns Hellyer, and he asks "is it wise to spend so much time and money to build weapon systems to rid the skies of alien visitors?" Hellyer poignantly raises the key policy question: "Are they really enemies or merely legitimate explorers from afar?" Hellyer's question raises profound importance in understanding the relationship between visiting extraterrestrial civilizations and world peace.
The third policy question arose from the recent decision by President Bush to build a base on the moon. Hellyer believes this is the activation of a plan first launched by Col Corso's mentor, Lt General Arthur Trudeau to build a base from which visiting extraterrestrials could be monitored and possibly targeted as they approach the Earth. Hellyer outlined his opposition to the weaponization of space, something that the liberal government of Canada is currently opposed to. The weaponization of space remains a key policy issue clearly has profound policy issues from the perspective of extraterrestrial visitors to Earth.
Finally, Hellyer declared that the "time has come to lift the veil of secrecy" and to have an "informed debate about a problem that doesn't officially exist." Understanding the evidence concerning the UFO phenomenon is vital to fully preparing citizens around the world for the truth concerning extraterrestrials, despite official denial and secrecy by those "in the loop". He calls for major global initiatives to fully prepare global citizenry for the truth. He endorses a position taken by key exopolitical researchers such as Alfred Webre to prepare for a "Decade of Contact" where humanity is prepared for the truth about extraterrestrial visitors through informed debate and education.
Paul Hellyer is the first senior politician to openly come out and declare the truth about the extraterrestrial presence. He is blazing a trail that many other senior politicians are destined to take. It will be wise if the world's senior politicians quickly learn more about this remarkable Canadian statesman and heed his important advise about data on extraterrestrial visitors and the "profoundly important policy questions that must be addressed."
Note: The Hon Paul Hellyer has been invited to attend the forthcoming "Extraterrestrial Civilizations and World Peace Conference from June 9-11, 2006, on the Big Island of Hawaii. For more information and the list of confirmed speakers that include Brig General Steven Lovekin, Alfred Webre, J.D. and Michael Salla, Ph.D. please visit: www.etworldpeace.com
Video Stream
Hon. Paul Hellyer's address (31 mins)
http://www.jerrypippin.com/UFO_Files_toronto_exopolitics_symposium.htm
On September 25, 2005, Hon Paul Hellyer, the former Canadian Minister for National Defense gave a speech in Toronto at an event titled: "Exopolitics Toronto: A Symposium on UFO Disclosure and Planetary Direction" (www.exopoliticstoronto.com) . Hellyer described his time as Minister for Defense from 1963 - 1967 where the occasional UFO sighting report crossed his desk.
He claims to never have had time for what he considered to be a "flight of fancy", but nevertheless retained an interest in the UFO phenomenon. While Minister for Defense, he was guest of honor at the opening of the world's first UFO landing pad at
Alberta, Canada in 1967.
He thought it an innovative idea from a progressive Canadian community willing to pay for his helicopter ride, but did not give much thought to UFOs as having serious policy implications. He also describes a private UFO sighting he later had with family and guests, but once again attributed it to a 'flight of fancy' rather than anything having serious policy implications.
Hellyer's position on UFOs dramatically changed after watching the late Peter Jennings documentary special, "Seeing is Believing" in February 2005. Hellyer decided to read a book that had been idly sitting on his book shelf for two years. Philip Corso's, The Day After Roswell, sparked intense interest for Hellyer in terms of its policy implications. Corso named real people, institutions and events in his book that could be checked. Intrigued by the policy implications, Hellyer decided to confirm whether Corso's book was real or a "work of fiction".
He contacted a retired United States Air Force General and spoke to him directly to verify Corso's claims. The unnamed General simply said: "every word is true and more". Hellyer then proceeded to discuss the "and more =85" with the general and claimed he was told remarkable things concerning UFOs and the extraterrestrial hypothesis that interplanetary visitors have been here since at least 1947. Finally convinced that the UFO phenomenon was real Hellyer decided to come forward and speak at Exopolitics Toronto about some of the "most profoundly important policy questions that must be addressed." The policy questions Hellyer addressed in his talk are both profound and vitally important for citizens of every nation of Earth.
First, Hellyer claimed that evidence concerning UFOs is the "greatest and most successful cover up in the history of the world". He confirmed that senior political officials even at the rank of Minister of Defense, a position he himself occupied, are simply out of the loop when it comes to information concerning UFOs and visiting extraterrestrials. From a democratic perspective, that raises many concerns about oversight, transparency and accountability of those in control of the
information, technology and projects concerning the extraterrestrial visitors.
A second profound policy question concerns the designation by the U.S. military of visiting extraterrestrials as an 'enemy'. According to Hellyer, this had led to the development of "laser and particle guns to the point that they can be used against the visitors from space." It is this targeting of visiting extraterrestrials that concerns Hellyer, and he asks "is it wise to spend so much time and money to build weapon systems to rid the skies of alien visitors?" Hellyer poignantly raises the key policy question: "Are they really enemies or merely legitimate explorers from afar?" Hellyer's question raises profound importance in understanding the relationship between visiting extraterrestrial civilizations and world peace.
The third policy question arose from the recent decision by President Bush to build a base on the moon. Hellyer believes this is the activation of a plan first launched by Col Corso's mentor, Lt General Arthur Trudeau to build a base from which visiting extraterrestrials could be monitored and possibly targeted as they approach the Earth. Hellyer outlined his opposition to the weaponization of space, something that the liberal government of Canada is currently opposed to. The weaponization of space remains a key policy issue clearly has profound policy issues from the perspective of extraterrestrial visitors to Earth.
Finally, Hellyer declared that the "time has come to lift the veil of secrecy" and to have an "informed debate about a problem that doesn't officially exist." Understanding the evidence concerning the UFO phenomenon is vital to fully preparing citizens around the world for the truth concerning extraterrestrials, despite official denial and secrecy by those "in the loop". He calls for major global initiatives to fully prepare global citizenry for the truth. He endorses a position taken by key exopolitical researchers such as Alfred Webre to prepare for a "Decade of Contact" where humanity is prepared for the truth about extraterrestrial visitors through informed debate and education.
Paul Hellyer is the first senior politician to openly come out and declare the truth about the extraterrestrial presence. He is blazing a trail that many other senior politicians are destined to take. It will be wise if the world's senior politicians quickly learn more about this remarkable Canadian statesman and heed his important advise about data on extraterrestrial visitors and the "profoundly important policy questions that must be addressed."
Note: The Hon Paul Hellyer has been invited to attend the forthcoming "Extraterrestrial Civilizations and World Peace Conference from June 9-11, 2006, on the Big Island of Hawaii. For more information and the list of confirmed speakers that include Brig General Steven Lovekin, Alfred Webre, J.D. and Michael Salla, Ph.D. please visit: www.etworldpeace.com
Video Stream
Hon. Paul Hellyer's address (31 mins)
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
