Now They Want To Mask TWO YEAR OLDS And In Oregon They Want To Make Masks PERMANENT

We have reached the tipping point where covid tyranny has become a crime against humanity.

It’s no longer about protecting “public health” — and it never was, of course — it’s now about enslaving and exterminating as many human beings as possible under the cover of COVID-19.

now they want to mask two year old and in Oregon they want to make masks permanent (sick fuckers)

now they want to mask two year olds and in oregon they want to make masks permanent

The latest insanity comes from Michigan, where we are told that infants from two to four years old must now be forced to wear masks.

It’s all about cruelty against children and mask indoctrination at a young age, of course.

There is zero evidence that masks reduce infections, and zero evidence that 2-4 year old infants are at any real risk from the coronavirus.

There is tremendous evidence, however, [that masks are filled with carcinogens and other toxic chemicals,] and there is evidence that masking and socially distancing children is horrifyingly bad for their mental health and social development.

These children are being essentially tortured by a corrupt medical establishment that seeks to inject pregnant women with experimental gene-altering medical treatments, all while denying them knowledge of vitamin Dzinc and other preventative interventions that carry almost zero risk.

In Oregon, they’re trying to make masks permanent so that the fascism Oregon health officials can demonize people for not wearing a mask, even five years from now. It’s pure insanity and it’s a crime against humanity.

The mask pushers, vaccine pushers and covid pushers have all become Holocaust-class criminals against the human race, and they can’t wait to achieve their goals of mass extermination and widespread infertility.

Today’s Situation Update podcast covers the truth of how all the covid vaccines used in America cause blood clots, too.

And it covers Maxine Waters and her direct incitement of politically motivated violence, as well as NASA’s hilarious claim that they have a helicopter flying on Mars — a planet which NASA claims has only 0.6% of Earth’s atmosphere. It’s an incredible moment in history, for sure, when NASA claims to have flown a helicopter on a planet with virtually no atmosphere (which is obviously required for the helicopter rotor to produce lift).

Hear the full, hilarious podcast here:

https://www.brighteon.com/embed/5c725da2-f4d4-4eec-a30a-781cc949410b

Sources: AFinalWarning.comBrighteon.com

Heliocentric theory is wrong

Is the Solar System Really a Vortex? - Universe Today

There are four pieces of solid evidence that heliocentric theory is wrong (that I know of). The first one requires a bit of visualization but is very difficult to explain otherwise. Three others are 99.99% certain bordering on the ridiculous. You would literally have to make stuff up to try and counter them (and they have!). So without further ado, let’s begin.

Exhibit A – Where is the constant wind?
Exhibit B – Hovering, flying and falling
Exhibit C – Hardly any stellar parallax
Exhibit D – Scientific experiments
Conclusion

Exhibit A – Where is the constant wind?

The density of the Earth has been calculated at 5,515 kg/m3 (whether accurate or not is unknown). The density of air is 1.204 kg/m3 at room temperature, 4580 times less dense than the Earth.

A denser solid object does not carry a less dense gas along with it when it moves. This is self-evident as it is the basis of aerodynamics as shown in the video below.

dog out window

A moving solid object (100km/h car) leaves a gas (air) behind, creating a 100km/h wind in the perceived opposite direction of the moving car.

When the solid planes are more perpendicular, it will push gas (such as air) away from the solid object, such as a fan. The Earth, although a spinning squashed globe, would push a little air out into space due to its slight undulations but by and large it would be very aerodynamic, as this man spinning a basketball shows.



spinning ball
A very aerodynamic globe.

Heliocentric theory states that the Earth rotates at 1675km/h at the equator, 1049km/h in London, and 231km/h in Alert, northern Canada. This rotation would cause winds of almost equal speeds on the Earth’s surface… constantly.

The fastest wind speed known to man is a F5 Incredible tornado with wind speeds of 420-511 km/h. The tornado in Oklamohma in 1999 which killed 38 people and destroyed 8000 homes traveled at 486km/h; the devastation of which we can see below.

Tornado- Oklahoma
If 486km/h winds did this, what would 1675km/h do?

There is nowhere on Earth that has a constant wind speed of between 1675km/h and 231km/h. If there were, nobody living below Greenland could venture outside. We would be all living underground in caves.

Sometimes there are days of no wind, sometimes a mild breeze. The wind travels in all kinds of directions, sometimes changing by the second. Clouds move with the wind and can travel in any direction, but mostly go from West to East. This contradicts heliocentric theory as the Earth is supposed to rotate West to East, which would create winds going in the opposite direction East to West. Oops!

Another piece of self-evident incredulity. There’s more.

Exhibit B – Hovering, flying and falling

Even more obvious is the fact that the Earth does not rotate under hovering objects. A helicopter which hovers above the ground at ANY height from 1 meter all the way to its upper limit of around 8000 meters NEVER experiences the ground traveling 231km/h to 1675km/h West to East, or in any direction in fact.


hovering1
Nope, the Earth is not moving.
hovering2
Still not moving. Who’d a thunk it.

The same applies to those machines which traverse the sky, such as airplanes. The only differential between a one-way and return flight is changes in wind speed and direction.

the rotation of the Earth has no effect on the travel time of an aircraft… it is the headwinds and tailwinds that cause the change in travel times… a mere 65 mph wind is more than enough to cause a difference in travel time of five hours when you are traveling long distances!

Let’s check a flight along the equator just to be sure. Maldives to Singapore and back fits the bill. Singapore Airlines has two flights come up. Maldives to Singapore (West to East) takes 4 hours 45 minutes for both flights and Singapore to Maldives (East to West) takes 4 hours 30 minutes and 4 hours 25 minutes respectively.

The Earth is supposed to rotate at 1675km/h West to East at these locations which are 3388km apart. A Boeing 777 travels at 885km/h at 10,675m. Do I really need to do the math?

Flying from Singapore to the Maldives would take about an hour (including take off and landing) if the Earth were rotating under the plane. Going the other way, it is worse as the plane can only fly half as fast as a rotating 1675km/h Earth and so you would have to continue flying all the way around the globe East to West just to get back to Singapore. This is an obvious fallacy.


asia_ref_2000
Singapore to Maldives is a one-way trip with a rotating Earth.

So, we have gone from 8000m to 10,675m altitude and still the Earth does not move under our feet. If we go any higher there won’t be many air molecules left to be magically Velcroed to the solid Earth’s surface by a mystical and yet unknown force which there must be for heliocentric theory to exist. But let’s go higher anyway.

As mentioned in my first post on the mysterious disappearing stars at high altitude, amateurs can now send weather balloons up into the stratosphere as high as 36,000m. At these heights only about 1% of the air is left, but these few air molecules must also magically stick to the solid surface of the Earth. All these different densities and all somehow staying with the Earth.

Look at the time these balloons are in the air and the difference in distance between landing and take-off. Here’s the first one: Launched at 13:07:38, hit the ground at 16:04:40, highest altitude 29.78Km, distance from launch 108.4 Km! Launched in Maine, USA would give a rotating Earth speed of 1181km/h (45° latitude). That means the Earth should have moved 3500km under the balloon making it land in the middle of USA, but it did not. (The second example on that website page is even worse!)

Let’s go higher. Felix Baumgartner on his world record free-fall jump reached 38,969m altitude and spent 2 and a half hours ascending, 4:19 minutes falling to the ground, and 7 minutes parachuting the rest of the way down. His distance from launch:


Felix-Baumgartner-Landing
70.5km!

So, the 1% of surface air density and all the other air densities on the way to the ground and Felix himself being obviously heavier than air all moved with the rotating Earth in tandem, by some magical mystical force unknown to man. At what height would Felix have experienced the Earth rotating below him? 50km? 70km? 100km? The heliocentric advocates will have to make up a magic number. Why not, it is all fantasy after all.

Let’s continue.

Exhibit C – Hardly any stellar parallax

The stars revolve 360° in 24 hours in an anti-clockwise fashion around the north polar star in the northern hemisphere, and clockwise around the southern star in the southern hemisphere. Photographers take photos with very long shutter speeds to show this effect.


startrails
Rotating stars in the sky at night.

This, you may think, is a good case for a rotating Earth; but on it’s own it is also a good case for a geocentric one, as it demonstrates that either the Earth is moving or the heavens.

However, after 6 months, those EXACT same stars are at the EXACT same location, as can be seen with the naked eye, at which they had been 6 months previously. The annual change in the position of stars in the sky is called stellar parallax. You can demonstrate this lack of parallax by following this experiment devised by Samuel Rowbotham of Zetetic Astronomy.

Take two carefully-bored metallic tubes, not less than six feet in length, and place them one yard asunder, on the opposite sides of a wooden frame, or a solid block of wood or stone: so adjust them that their centres or axes of vision shall be perfectly parallel to each other. Now, direct them to the plane of some notable fixed star, a few seconds previous to its meridian time. Let an observer be stationed at each tube and the moment the star appears in the first tube let a loud knock or other signal be given, to be repeated by the observer at the second tube when he first sees the same star. A distinct period of time will elapse between the signals given. The signals will follow each other in very rapid succession, but still, the time between is sufficient to show that the same star is not visible at the same moment by two parallel lines of sight when only one yard asunder. A slight inclination of the second tube towards the first tube would be required for the star to be seen through both tubes at the same instant. Let the tubes remain in their position for six months; at the end of which time the same observation or experiment will produce the same results–the star will be visible at the same meridian time, without the slightest alteration being required in the direction of the tubes: from which it is concluded that if the Earth had moved one single yard in an orbit through space, there would at least be observed the slight inclination of the tube which the difference in position of one yard had previously required. But as no such difference in the direction of the tube is required, the conclusion is unavoidable, that in six months a given meridian upon the Earth’s surface does not move a single yard, and therefore, that the Earth has not the slightest degree of orbital motion.

Traditionally, stellar parallax has been notoriously difficult to measure with even the best of modern equipment.

The angles involved in these calculations are very small and thus difficult to measure. The nearest star to the Sun (and thus the star with the largest parallax), Proxima Centauri, has a parallax of 0.7687 ± 0.0003 arcsec.

There are 3,600 arcseconds in 1 degree, 180 of which cover the sky at night. No wonder we can’t see any movement with the naked eye. Even so, movement for only a tiny fraction of the stars can be measured at all even by modern equipment!

In 1989, the satellite Hipparcos was launched primarily for obtaining parallaxes and proper motions of nearby stars, increasing the reach of the method tenfold. Even so, Hipparcos is only able to measure parallax angles for stars up to about 1,600 light-years away, a little more than one percent of the diameter of the Milky Way Galaxy. The European Space Agency’s Gaia mission, due to launch in 2013, will be able to measure parallax angles to an accuracy of 10 microarcseconds, thus mapping nearby stars (and potentially planets) up to a distance of tens of thousands of light-years from Earth.


There are an estimated 100 to 200 billion galaxies in the universe (which is bunk, as there are no galaxies) each with up to 100 trillion stars! So being able to detect movement in 1% of the stars of our own galaxy is a miniscule amount. We also know about our space agencies’ weird and wonderful orbiting machines, so even this 1% is unlikely to be true.

This is a big problem for heliocentric theory which states that every 24 hours the Earth rotates on its axis at 1675km/h, revolving around the Sun at 107,000km/h, which in turn moves around the center of the galaxy at 900,000km/h, which moves in the universe at 2,160,000km/h!

Apart from the atmosphere disappearing at these speeds, how is there no stellar parallax, especially considering that all the other stars and galaxies are revolving around each other and the Earth as well. The sky must be a right mess! Each new day must bring a brand new unique constellation in the sky at night with some new stars getting nearer so they can be seen with the naked eye and some traveling further away and disappearing never to return for thousands or millions of years.

Before we move on, this lack of stellar parallax is the reason why advocates of heliocentric theory give the unbelievably enormous distances the heavenly bodies must be from Earth. They can’t measure it! The stars must be thousands and millions of light years away (with the Milky Way 100,000 light years across, 1 light year being 9.46 trillion kilometers!) because there is no (or little) detectable stellar parallax; otherwise heliocentric theory would be definitely wrong.

It is clear from Euclid’s geometry that the effect would be undetectable if the stars were far enough away, but for various reasons such gigantic distances involved seemed entirely implausible: it was one of Tycho Brahe’s principal objections to Copernican heliocentrism that in order for it to be compatible with the lack of observable stellar parallax, there would have to be an enormous and unlikely void between the orbit of Saturn and the eighth sphere (the fixed stars).

Not only is there no evidence for such astronomical distances, but we have now proven that the stars are approximately 4000 miles away!

Does making stuff up to support a theory lacking any observational or experimental evidence sound like science to you?

Speaking of which…

Exhibit D – Scientific experiments

How do we know it is not the heavens or “space” which moves above us, instead of the Earth, which causes both the rotation of the stars and any of their hard-to-detect parallax. We now know it is the former, thanks to an experiment in 1871 by Astronomer Royal, George Airy; which is this:

If stellar parallax is too small to see with the naked eye, then why not artificially increase it. If the Earth rotates at the same speed constantly, then by slowing the light down (by filling the telescope with water), the angle of star movement would increase. If stellar parallax increased then the telescope would have to be tilted more to see the same star and prove a rotating Earth once and for all.

And guess what? As confirmed by others, the most careful measurements gave the same angle for a telescope with water as for one filled with air. This is called “Airy’s failure”. It proved the rotation of the heavens, not Earth, which moves stars.


airy1
The angle stayed the same, proving that the Earth does not rotate.

The heliocentric advocates were now desperate. What was needed was another observable experiment to still offer the possibility of a rotating Earth. Enter Foucault’s pendulum in 1885. This pendulum swings back and forth, each swing moving slightly to the right in the northern hemisphere and to the left in the southern hemisphere until, at the poles, one full circle is achieved in 24 hours. It doesn’t move left or right at all at the equator.


California_Academy_of_Sciences_Foucault_Pendulum_Clock
Foucault Pendulum in California
Foucault

Not to scale, but illustrating the movement.

As you have noticed, this is the same phenomenon as the stars rotating every 24 hours around the polar star, which was proved not to be caused by a rotating Earth thanks to George Airy. Unfortunately for the heliocentric supporters, Foucault’s pendulum also had a problem. In 1954 and 1959, Maurice Allais noticed that during a solar eclipse, which lasted 2 and a half hours, the angle of the pendulum changed dramatically by 13.5°. This has been repeatedly observed with positive results on most of the subsequent eclipses, which obviously means that the pendulum isn’t registering the Earth’s rotation, but the motion of something else instead.

With Airy’s failure proving that the Earth does not rotate, the heliocentric theorists needed to quickly show with no further doubt that the Earth rotated. Enter two staunch supporters of heliocentricity, Albert Michelson and Edward Morley, who in 1887 set up a device which split up light: one beam in the direction of the Earth’s rotation, and one at right angles. The two light beams then recombined and hit a photographic plate. The difference is speed of the two beams would create an interference pattern. They expected to measure a speed of 30 km/s as that was the speed of the Earth’s supposed rotation, but instead registered a variable difference of between 1 and 10 km/s each time the experiment was repeated. They called this a “null” result. This proves that the Earth is not rotating and at the same time proved the existence of the ether.


M-M experiment
Gosh, the traveling light wasn’t rotating with the Earth. Who’d a thunk it?

It didn’t stop there, Georges Sagnac, and Henry Gale conducted similar experiments, but on a rotating platform, which again demonstrated the existence of the ether, already proved by default in 1871 and 1885 by combining the results from George Airy and Foucault’s pendulum, and also in 1887 by the Michelson-Morley experiment.

How do you think the advocates of heliocentric theory responded? Why, they made something up of course! What else could they do but invent another wild theory to play down these experimental results and lead us further into the cesspit of fallacy. Enter showbiz academic of the 20th century, Einstein and the special theory of relativity.


albert-einstein-colorized
Enter the clowns.

Special relativity was invented to make sure all these experiments still gave heliocentric theory a chance of being correct. It needed objects to shrink to a specific size in direct proportion to its speed. These objects weren’t measured! The concept had never been observed at all. It was metaphysical only. But it had to be correct, otherwise the unthinkable would be true.

The rescue operation was performed by means of a purely metaphysical concept lifted directly from Professors Fitzgerald and Lorentz, who had also been trying to explain the results of the Michelson-Morley experiment, and renamed by him the Special Theory of Relativity. What was suggested was that if the dimensions of an object in motion were assumed to shrink exactly in proportion to the speed at which it was traveling by exactly the necessary amount, mathematical calculations could be made to show that the Earth was in motion after all. No one has ever seen an object shrink as a result of being in motion, and indeed one of the world’s leading authorities on relativity, Dr. Herbert Dingle, was later to dismiss the theory of relativity as metaphysical nonsense with no basis on what could be observed.

Making up a new branch of mathematics to explain the results of experiments that disagrees with your worldview does not a proof make! As a J.J. Thomson once said:

We have Einstein’s space, de Sitter’s space, expanding universes, contracting universes, vibrating universes, mysterious universes. In fact the pure mathematician may create universes just by writing down an equation, and indeed if he is an individualist he can have a universe of his own.

However, when you make stuff up not based on anything in the real world, it is bound to run into trouble.

Ironically, when Special Relativity failed due to its internal contradictions, Einstein had to invent General Relativity to shore up the façade, and in the process he had to take back the very two foundations he had discarded in Special Relativity, namely, (a) that nothing can exceed the speed of light and (b) the existence of ether. In the end, Einstein’s theories were a mass of contradictions which are covered over by obtuse mathematical equations.

Despite this nonsense, the heliocentric “authorities” pushed it through with all their media power and academic might so that once this new mathematics was firmly established, they had carte blanche to sneak in other bad “science” when experimental observations went against them, like black holes, dark matter, wormholes and other such unobservable and unverifiable nonsense. The worst offence though was trying to tie in the Coriolis effect of a rotating Earth with observable atmospheric phenomena. The Coriolis effect is an optical illusion whereby an object traveling in a straight line is seen to be moving in a curved one instead because the observer is on a rotating platform.


wikipedia_coriolis_effect
The Coriolis optical illusion. You are the red dot. Below is what you observe. Above is what actually happens.
the-coriolis-effect

This is the complete pattern and scale of ANY Coriolis effect on the Earth. If something in the real world doesn’t match this, it can NOT be the Coriolis effect!

They say it is this effect which causes moving objects to be deflected in a clockwise direction in the northern hemisphere and anti-clockwise in the southern hemisphere; an example of which are large cyclones. This is obviously false. The Coriolis effect is NOT a force, it is an optical illusion. It cannot cause objects to be deflected; their trajectories remain the same, which is straight. Cyclones do not “travel in straight lines, but just appear to be curved because we are on the surface of a rotating sphere”. Their size ranges from under 222km to over 888km making their curves far too tight and localized. Plus there are very high altitude images looking down on cyclones from above. Is the camera rotating with the Earth to get this curved perspective?


cyclone from above
Is the camera rotating with the Earth? How can a cyclone twisting on itself be a straight line? Is this image even real?
cyclone - Australia

A tropical cyclone in Australia twisting down to Earth is not a straight line.

And what about smaller vortex phenomena like Tornadoes which average only 150m across. Where is the Coriolis effect now?


tornado1
A 150m wide tornado is really a straight line!

If you wish to study further the fallacy of linking the Coriolis effect with atmospheric phenomena then Miles Mathis‘ work is a must. Otherwise, those inclined to understand cyclones and tornadoes would do well to study the relationship between gravity and electromagnetism, and vortex dynamics instead, as even physicists admit that the Coriolis “effect” and electromagnetism is eerily similar. (What a surprise!)

Conclusion

So far we have proved that:

  • The Earth does not tilt.
  • The Earth does not rotate.
  • The Sun moves, not the Earth.
  • The heavens move, not the Earth, which means that:
  • “Space” or the ether moves and not the Earth.
  • “Space” moves in a circular motion (and is probably a vortex).

All Planets Fit Between The Earth And The Moon, As Per NASA

By Luis Torres

Some quoted diameters sum to around 390,000 km2, which larger than the 384,000 km or so usually quoted as the Earth-Moon distance.

But if you neglect the off 6,000 km then yes, all the Planets fit between the Earth and the Moon.

Earth compared to Jupiter - Stock Image - C011/4667 - Science Photo Library

Jupiter has a volume of 1.43128 x 1015 cubit kilometers. 🤔

Photobomb! Satellite catches moon crossing Earth's face - CBS News

live footage (supposedly) from the Epic Satellite, 1,000,000,000 miles away… 🤔 Again, supposedly.

Picture from the Cassini Satellite orbiting Saturn. 🤔 8.2713×1014 km3 (1.9844×1014 cu mi)

Picture of the Moon from Earth.

Volume of the other “Planets” (Wandering Stars)

Uranus/Neptune
Uranus 6.833 x 1013
Comparative sizes of planets and stars — Astronoo
Neptune 6.254 x 1013
Venus Compared to Earth - Universe Today
Venus 9.2843 x 1011
Mars -- a nice place to visit?
Mars 1.6318 x 1011
How Big is Mars? | Size of Planet Mars | Space
Mercury 6.083 x 1010
Pluto 7.15 x 109
Breaking: Pluto the Dog Has Been Found on Pluto – Dogster
By the way, Planet Pluto and Pluto the Dog, we’re discovered/created the same year (1930)

Of course something it’s not right 🤔

Think For Yourself.

‘Moon Rock’ Given To Holland By Neil Armstrong And Buzz Aldrin Is Fake

A moon rock given to the Dutch prime minister by Apollo 11 astronauts in 1969 has turned out to be a fake.

Curators at Amsterdam’s Rijksmuseum, where the rock has attracted tens of thousands of visitors each year, discovered that the “lunar rock”, valued at £308,000, was in fact petrified wood.

Xandra van Gelder, who oversaw the investigation, said the museum would continue to keep the stone as a curiosity.

“It’s a good story, with some questions that are still unanswered,” she said. “We can laugh about it.”

'moon Rock' Given To Holland By Neil Armstrong And Buzz Aldrin Is Fake

The rock was given to Willem Drees, a former Dutch leader, during a global tour by Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin following their moon mission 50 years ago.

J. William Middendorf, the former American ambassador to the Netherlands, made the presentation to Mr Drees and the rock was then donated to the Rijksmuseum after his death in 1988.

“I do remember that Drees was very interested in the little piece of stone. But that it’s not real, I don’t know anything about that,” Mr Middendorf said.

Nasa gave moon rocks to more than 100 countries following lunar missions in 1969 and the 1970s.

The United States Embassy in The Hague is carrying out an investigation into the affair.

Researchers Amsterdam’s Free University were able to tell at a glance that the rock was unlikely to be from the moon, a conclusion that was borne out by tests.

“It’s a nondescript, pretty-much-worthless stone,” said Frank Beunk, a geologist involved in the investigation.

Source: Telegraph.co.uk

THE REALITY IS THAT WE HAVE NEVER BEEN TO THE MOON….WAKE UP!

Wake Up!

Inventor of ‘Free Energy’ Generator: ‘I’ve Been Poisoned Several Times’

 

What is a ‘free energy’ machine? It doesn’t mean ‘free’ as in the monetary sense, but more so ‘free’ as in the resource being extracted to produce the energy, as Nikola Tesla once said, is available in “unlimited quantities.” 

It’s not like extracting oil from the Earth, and using that oil to power our planet because we know, first of all, that it’s destroying our planet; secondly, it’s not a limitless source of energy.

New developments in all areas of science, especially ones that don’t seem to fit the frame, always receive harsh criticism, and are dealt blows to their progress and acceptance with labels like ‘pseudoscience.’

This is discouraging, as non-material science seems to be the next catalyst for a scientific revolution, which is why hundreds of scientists from around the world are coming together to emphasize this.

“The day science beings to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.” – Nikola Tesla.

Tesla also once said that,

“Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point in the universe. This idea is not novel…We find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who derives power from the earth; we find it among subtle speculations of one of your splendid mathematicians….

“Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static, or kinetic? If static our hopes are in vain; if kinetic – and this we know it is, for certain – then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheel work of nature.” – Nikola Tesla (source)

This is exactly what I am talking about here, and why legendary quantum physicist John Wheeler told the world that “No point is more central than this, that space is not empty, it is the seat of the most violent physics.”

More Advanced Than Current ‘Clean Energies’

The truth is that there are developments which are far more advanced than wind, solar, and other clean energy initiatives that could completely transform our planet and change the world forever. Imagine if everyone on the planet had access to clean, free, limitless amounts of energy, for an unlimited period of time?

If they do exist, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that they do, then we are sitting on developments that can revolutionize our planet. The question is, where are they? Why is there so much red tape, and why does it take decades for a revolutionary idea and or technology to hit the mainstream?

As it turns out, it’s not the technology that will change our world, but the consciousness and intention behind our technological developments.

37 Years To Grant Patent

One great example (out of many) of delayed patent applications come from Dr. Gerald F. Ross. He filed a patent application for a new invention he had devised to defeat the jamming of electromagnetic transmissions at specified frequencies. It was not until June 17, 2014 (almost 37 years later) that this patent was granted.

The program delaying patent applications is called the Sensitive Application Warning System (SWAS).

Usually, when an application is submitted for a patent approval it requires a couple of examiners who work with the Patent office to go through their process of approval. This process usually takes approximately 1 to 2 years, but applications that are filed in SAWS must be approved by several people and can be delayed for a number of years.

It’s also important to note (as reported by the Federation of American Scientists; see article linked below for sources) that there were over 5000 inventions that were under secrecy orders at the end of the Fiscal Year 2014, which marked the highest number of secrecy orders in effect since 1994.

The Invention Secrecy Act

This is all thanks to an act many people are unaware of. It’s called the “Invention Secrecy Act” and it was written up in 1951. Under this act, patent applications on new inventions can be subject to secrecy orders. These orders can restrict their publication if government agencies believe that their disclosure would be harmful to national security.

So what type of technology is under restriction under the Invention Secrecy Act? We don’t really know, but a previous list from 1971 was obtained by researcher Michael Ravnitzky. Most of the technology listed seems to be related to various military applications. You can view that list HERE, but this is what Steven Aftergood from the Federation of American Scientists said about it:

“The 1971 list indicates that patents for solar photovoltaic generators were subject to review and possible restriction if the photovoltaics were more than 20% efficient. Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction if they offered conversion efficiencies in “excess of 70-80%.” (source)

Closed Path Homopolar Generator

Adam Trombly and colleague Joseph Kahn designed and applied for patents for the Closed Path Homopolar Generator, a potentially revolutionary design for super-efficient generation of electrical power. In June of 1982, International Letters of Patent were published by the International Patent Cooperation Treaty Organization. You can view that patent here.

The difference between the international patents and the US patent system is that in the US the material of the patent is secret until the patent is granted, while overseas the application itself is the basis of the patent, which stands until challenged by a third party.

The abstract for the patent reads as follows:

“A co-rotating generator homopolar has a rotor (12) comprising a driver disc (30) and the co-rotating co-axial electro-magnets (32a and 32b) on each side, and has an improved operation using a magnetic return circuit low reluctance for the magnetic flux which passes through the driver disc (30). The low reluctance circuit allows the electro-magnets (32a and 32b) to produce a high intensity field with a value of the excitation current of the relatively low coil.

“Therefore, overheating is eliminated and the total potential of zero sequence generator is obtained. The low magnetic reluctance return circuit (220) is preferably formed by a co-rotating enclosure of relatively high permeability (with halves of speakers (37a and 37b) of sufficient radial and axial dimensions for holding the electromagnets and the driver disc of the rotor. the driver disc (30) is constructed preferably with a material of high permeability, low resistivity, such as iron, and may of course be integral with the cores of the electromagnets (35a and 35b).”

You can view the full patent application here.

The Casimir Effect

The Casimir Effect is a proven example of the free energy that cannot be debunked. The Casimir Effect illustrates zero point or vacuum state energy, which predicts that two metal plates close together attract each other due to an imbalance in the quantum fluctuations(source), (source).

You can see a visual demonstration of this concept here. The implications of this are far-reaching and have been written about extensively within theoretical physics by researchers all over the world.

Today, we are beginning to see that these concepts are not just theoretical, but instead very practical; the only reason they are not being widely utilized today is simply that they have been suppressed.

“There is significant evidence that scientists since Tesla have known about this energy, but that its existence and potential use has been discouraged and indeed suppressed over the past half century or more.” – Dr. Theodor C. Loder III, Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans and Space, University of New Hampshire

Vacuums generally are thought to be voids, but Hendrik Casimir believed these pockets of nothing do indeed contain fluctuations of electromagnetic waves. He suggested that two metal plates held apart in a vacuum could trap the waves, creating vacuum energy that could attract or repel the plates.

As the boundaries of a region move, the variation in vacuum energy (zero-point energy) leads to the Casimir effect. Recent research was done at Harvard University, Vrije University in Amsterdam and elsewhere has proved the Casimir effect correct.

“These concepts have been proven in hundreds of laboratories throughout the world and yet they have not really seen the light of day. If these technologies were to be set free worldwide, the change would be profound, it would be applicable everywhere. These technologies are absolutely the most important thing that have happened in the history of the world” – Dr. Brian O’leary, former Princeton Physics Professor & NASA Astronaut.

Harold E. Puthoff is an American Physicist and Ph.D. from Stanford University and researcher at the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin, Texas. He published a paper in the journal Physical Review A, atomic, molecular and optical physics entitled “Gravity as a zero-point-fluctuation force.”

His paper proposed a model in which gravity is not a separately existing fundamental force, but is rather an induced effect associated with zero-point fluctuations of the vacuum, as illustrated by the Casimir force.

Another astonishing paper entitled “Extracting energy and heat from the vacuum,” by the same researchers, this time in conjunction with Daniel C. Cole, Ph.D. and Associate Professor at Boston University in the Department of Mechanical Engineering was published in the same journal (source).

“Relatively recent proposals have been made in the literature for extracting energy and heat from electromagnetic zero-point radiation via the use of the Casimir force. The basic thermodynamics involved in these proposals is analyzed and clarified here, with the conclusion that yes, in principle, these proposals are correct.

So, as you can see, these are not new ideas.

“These are not just fringe scientists with with science fiction ideas. They are mainstream ideas being published in mainstream physics journals and being taken seriously by mainstream military and NASA type funders… I’ve been taken out on aircraft carries by the Navy and shown what it is we have to replace if we have new energy sources to provide new fuel methods.” – Dr. Puthoff

Paramahamsa Tewari

What’s interesting about the story from Trombly, is the fact that he mentions Paramahamsa Tewari. Tewari has also lectured with him and attended multiple conferences with Trombly. There is no shortage of videos from Trombly.

Out Of The Void (AUS DEM NICHTS) is a film that recently premiered in Austria. it’s a docudramaabout Tesla’s vision and the work of Paramahamsa Tewari. You can view footage of the machine in the film and trailer (below), which has been built and independently tested as high as 250% efficiency.

In fact, a prototype of the machine was tested by  Kirloskar Electric, a manufacturer of electrical generators in India. There, it exhibited 165% efficiency (over-unity).

Below is a picture with, from right, Paramahamsa Tewari, Executive Director Nuclear Power Corporation, Ret., Murlidhar Rao, Technical Director, Karnataka Power Corporation, Ret., Chief Engineer, electrical engineer, a mechanical engineer. From Left, Vice President of Kirloskar Rotating Machines Group, General Manager Hubli facility.

Must-read: Multiple Scientists Confirm Free Energy – The Evidence

That’s over-unity!

Tewari was successful in eliminating the back torque of the generator. What happens when you do that? He explains it on his website, where you can find more resources about him, his machine and his work.

Unfortunately, he recently passed away, and I was glad to see one of his papers recently published in Physics Essays. The full version is available on his website. Much of his work has been copied, stolen and published by many others.

You can see footage of Tewari’s machine HEREHere is the actual video of the machine in action, taken from the film. The over unity test results are confirmed at the Kirloskar factory (India)  where the vice president, factory manager, and lead electrical engineer discuss their replication of the device and over unity test results.

Below is a great picture of Tewari discussing his breakthroughts with fomrer NASA astronaut and Princeton Physics professor, Dr. Brian O’Leary:

Why am I mentioning Tewari? Because Trombly believes in Tewari’s work. According to Trombly,

“As the eighties progressed, copies of the Closed Path Homopolar Generator Patent had circulated throughout the world. One scientist, Paramahamsa Tewari, who was then Head of Quality Control for the Tarapore Atomic Power Station in Trombay, India, received permission to carry out experiments with the design.

“In 1986, Tewari (with the blessing of the late Prime Minister Rajeev Gandhi) published results of experiments carried out with a crude facsimile of the machine described in the patent. In the American Industrial Journal Magnets, Tewari wrote, ‘The test results have shown an efficiency of the machine above 250%.” It was the first time in human history that claims of greater than 100% output had been independently verified by a bona fide third party using the description of the art provided by a patent document.”

A prototype of TEWARI’S (from his own mind, not influenced by anyone, he influenced others in the field, he is an originator) machine was tested by  Kirloskar Electric, a manufacturer of electrical generators in India. There, it exhibited 165% efficiency (over-unity).

The Economic Times of India seemed to be the only media outlet, other than Collective Evolution, to pick up the story.

Below is a Discussion of test results during the filming of AUS DEM NICHTS (Out of the Void), with the device in the Kirloskar facility, where again, it demonstrated over-unity efficiency.

Below is a picture with, from right, Paramahamsa Tewari, Executive Director Nuclear Power Corporation, Ret., Murlidhar Rao, Technical Director, Karnataka Power Corporation, Ret., Chief Engineer, electrical engineer, a mechanical engineer. From Left, Vice President of Kirloskar Rotating Machines Group, General Manager Hubli facility.

I could not find the study that was referenced by Trombly, but again, the powerplant mentioned and the linked story about it shows it’s validity. Before Tewari’s passing, we were in contact with him for multiple years and were helping to fund his prototype. We have no doubts about Tewari’s legitimacy.
Testimony Of Violent Suppression

Below are a couple of clips of Adam taken from the Thrive documentary. There are multiple videos and lectures by him up on Youtube, so if interested, I suggest you check it out.

 


“Lord Kelvin’s statements bare with it the voice of paradigms past… We knew that the Earth was flat, we knew that we were the center of the universe, and we knew that a man-made heavier than air piece of machinery could not take flight. Through all stages of human history, intellectual authorities have pronounced their supremacy by ridiculing or suppressing elements of reality that simply didn’t fit within the framework of accepted knowledge.

“Are we really any different today? Have we really changed our acceptance towards things that won’t fit the frame? Maybe there are concepts of our reality we have yet to understand, and if we open our eyes maybe we will see that something significant has been overlooked.” – Terje Toftenes (Via documentary, The Day Before Disclosure)

All The Planets Fit Between The Earth And The Moon As Per NASA… Really?

By Luis Torres

download

Some quoted diameters sum to around 390,000 km, which is larger than the 384,000 km or so usually quoted as the Earth-Moon distance.

But if you neglect the odd 6,000 km, then yes, all the planets can more-or-less fit between the Earth and the Moon.

download (3)

Jupiter has a volume of 1.43 x 10^15 cubic kilometers. Are you sure?

 

download (1)

Picture from Epic Satellite at 1,000,000 miles away

images (1)

 

Picture from The Mars Rover…

 

images (2)

Picture from Cassini Satellite orbiting Saturn.

 

download (2)

Picture of the Moon from Earth, of course  its Obvious, something it’s not right…

Think for yourself