THE PLANETARY TRUTH
CHALLENGE

Commentary #017

November 19, 2006

 

 

 

As you know, I do get E-mail, at least what the secrecy agenda appears to allow through to me. Some comments are so articulate, so expressive, and so representative of the frustration and incredulity of so many of us that I just have to share it with you along with my own response and little more. I suspect many of you can identify with this man's highlighted comments below.

Is the population of this planet being kept in deliberate ignorance concerning the true nature of our Solar System? Is this merely a facet of a more widespread, malign, conspiracy to keep the people from thinking beyond their habitual diet of consumption and greed? I am at a loss to how the scientific establishment can hold ranks over these startling revelations from the Red Planet. Are all scientists part of some giant cover-up? It seems hardly likely, surely?

Yours, truly baffled.

Now below is my highlighted E-mail response to him. However, upon reflection, I note that I wasn't exactly quite precise or complete enough as to his observations on scientists and so I'll have some additional comments following my below original response.

It's not really that confusing ______, if one contemplates human nature. I suspect the current reason is different than the original reason of decades past.

The old Brookings Report commissioned by NASA in the late 1950s indicated that the public couldn't handle such knowledge and especially the science communities, so secrecy got its start there. This also fit in with the post World War II very paranoid cold war covert psychology of the time (I grew up in that) and was willingly adopted by them to keep the public out of their hair and demanding answers they just didn't have at that time.

Now it is a bit different. Now they know a lot more information but I suspect that, after decades of lies and secrecy and with a public artificially conditioned to think in a completely different direction, for the public to now alter that direction significantly, they would not be happy campers. They may in fact be looking to blame and for someone's head to roll and that's not good from the secrecy point of view.

I suspect that now days secrecy is more about self preservation and avoiding the uncertainties of judgment day as long as possible while at the same time still not having sufficient answers to what they know the public will be demanding. After all, like most knowledge gained, the more you learn, the greater the complexity revealed and the more questions arise. In other words, the more you know, the more you realize how little you really know and you realize that your great plan was no viable plan at all.

It's also like digging a hole too deep and forgetting in the process that you still have to climb out of that hole at the end. They just don't know how to climb out of the too deep hole they've dug for themselves and keep their survival and leadership intact. So avoidance and secrecy develops a life of its own in their ranks now controlling them rather than them controlling it.

As I say, it is ever the way of human nature.

My response wasn't too bad in general but then the viewer was also referring more specifically to the scientific establishment. In truth, when he refers to the scientific establishment, the descriptive word "establishment" is key. One of the meanings for this word in my dictionary is "...the existing power structure in society; institutional authority." So we are not just referring to a scientist, a group of scientists, or even planetary physicists, we are referring to institutionalized authority and social structure. Further, it should be noted that there is little real difference between most scientists and academics and so academics would also be included in this social power structure. Accumulatively they are a collective in a institutionalized social construct that has an existence all its own.

When is the last time you know of a "institution" of any kind, whether corporate, social, political, or religious being flexible in its makeup or outlook? They are ruled by slow to respond to change consensus and rarely by true leaps of truth or creativity. Consensus and peer pressure is the mega force shaping the internal structure of the institutionalized construct in order to facilitate efficiency within it. In the science and academic communities, advanced formal education is the combining adhesive they share. However, their advanced "education" is also disseminated downward by "institutions" with all of the baggage that also goes with that. Where institutions are involved, rigidity and compliance are major factors and are communicated all down the line. The science and academic communities are no exception to this.

When it comes to advanced educational institutions, the general theme is that new information (whether right or wrong) is disseminated downward from them into underlying masses and rarely accepted upward from those great unwashed masses. New information (again whether right or wrong) is accepted and gained in the institutionalized construct only via accepted and unfortunately all too often compliant members of the created peer mass as the only ones considered "qualified" to obtain such information. Rebel members with too much independence within the peer mass are irritating to it and quickly either rejected or set aside in isolation as being spin interpretation labeled too "wild," "undisciplined," and "irresponsible." If the peer mass and leadership can help it, no information is allowed upward and inside from "unqualified" lower level sources no matter if the evidence has merit.

In other words, the institutional body and its members evolves into much more of a social thing than it is true science or obtaining real objective knowledge thing. In such social constructs, new information struggling to be heard is regarded as a potential threat to the social construct if it comes from "unapproved" and "unqualified" non compliant sources, especially if it deviates too much from the peer mass accepted consensus norm and especially if it appears as though it might have some real merit and potential for producing change. You would think that just the smell of such new course direction turning information on the wind was the plague incarnate. Yes the herd instinct is alive and well in the Earth human experience.

A very famous brilliant scientist otherwise legitimately deserving of much respect and so representative of the best of the science and academic mainstream, popularized the debunking tactical saying that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence as he pandered to his peers and disseminated such exalted information down to the rest of us. However, sadly, when actually faced with the extraordinary evidence that merited further examination, it was just ignored by him and his peers.

That is what is happening here with the current day science and academic mainstream peer mass, they are just ignoring this mounting evidence hoping beyond hope that the public will not become galvanized and demand its objective examination and that it will just quietly collapse and go away. After all, if the offending evidence was legitimately examined and if it actually proved to have merit, as it appears it very well might here in this case of this anomalous evidence, the peer mass would have much to answer for and explain how they could have dropped the ball so badly and for so long stretching back over decades.

When all this kind of additional insight into the muddy water of the science and academic establishment is taken into consideration, it should not come as any surprise that the old Brookings Report commissioned by NASA and presented in 1960 well over 40 years ago identified on page 225 that the hide bound (my term, not theirs) science establishment would be among the groups worst affected by the kind of knowledge we are dealing with here in this website anomalous evidence record. Those think tank types were recognizing and speaking to the ingrained inflexible rigidity of the science and academic institutional structure. Worse, this potential has been further exploited and entrenched in the worlds of science and academia by decades of secrecy and artificial manipulative disinformation indoctrination capitalizing on and promoting this factor within these institutional constructs.

So you see, when we're talking about scientists or academics, we're not just talking about about a scientist or a group of scientists working on a project, we're also talking about a institutionalized social power structure with a science/academic peer group collective identity and psychology that exerts tremendous compliance force on its members and who see themselves as exalted leaders only disseminating information downward into the masses. The moment (and perhaps even long before) they entered college as a lowly know very little freshman to ultimately travel up the advanced educational ladder, they also started being indoctrinated into this psychology of elitism, compliance, and the compulsion to fully identify with and protect the peer mass social construct in order to achieve membership and then a higher level of success within it. It is in fact their measure of life success.

It's the same with the institutionalized medical profession and its members or for that matter political leaders, religious leaders, and many other institutionalized social constructs as well as even celebrities. When it comes to just celebrities, as I suspect any groupie might tell you, sex with a celebrity of choice is so much better than with any one else. Can you say NOT but it is still incredibly their psychological perception! Because of our sometimes unrealistic social perceptions, we are all a part of facilitating this social psychology as we put these people and groups in specialized capacities on higher pedestals than is perhaps correct for them to be on. Ultimately, it isn't fair to them or to us. Some may be among the best of us in their specialized areas but they are after all just human and fallible like the rest of us as are the systems that produced them. It is in fact our collective failure where we've all dropped the ball creating and enabling unfortunate elitism cultures that corrupt.

If all of this mostly self made muddy social water in the world of institutions and their rigidity isn't enough of a handicap to human endeavor and advancement, it is actually worse than that. Why? Because by far the great majority of scientists and science projects are funded and influenced either directly or indirectly by government. For example, here in the USA, the same fallible government calling the shots that sometimes spends $500+ for a simple $5-$35 hammer or toilet seat with impunity and also doles out freebie pork to favored special interests with the same impunity that can result in massive nearly insurmountable debt saddling without apparent care our children and the generations to come with our sloppy behavior. Can you identify where the yellow streak is? Did anybody hear a chicken squawking in the dark as blind self interest in the here and now reigns supreme?

Okay, I digress but, for a little insight on physicist scientists and their psychology and who most of them work for, check out this article titled "80% Of Physicists In N. America Work For The Military" by Professor Denis Rancourt who is himself a physicist teaching physicists but clearly breaking ranks and calling the system and his peers to task. Remember to that he is referring just to the military and not the government in general or the percentage would be higher. Worse, the really cutting edge scientific research, especially with respect to space exploration, is almost always funded and controlled to some major extent by government and/or military intelligence with of course an emphasis on secrecy and the involvement of plentiful black opts organizations that are often themselves surrounded by super intense secrecy.

For secrecy to be effective, it must have direct involvement and fairly absolute control. Therefore it should come as no surprise that productive science/academic organizations like NASA, JPL, etc. as well as the many institutional corporate contractors and university systems associated with their planetary exploration efforts are riddled from top to bottom with everything from secrecy agents to otherwise legitimate but compliant scientists and academics cooperating with or otherwise at the very least pretending to ignore secrecy agenda influence or goals and everything else in between. If you want to be a top level scientist working on top level cutting edge science projects, then compliance and cooperation, uh excuse me "discretion," are essential or you get to slide right back down the ladder of success. It is how the standard of success is measured in this field and, if you are a participant, it becomes the unquestioned norm in your work and your everyday life.

Naivety must be avoided here and that means that we need to not be naive about government intelligence and particularly military intelligence's involvement in what is suppose to be civilian science space exploration. For example, years ago in an apparent power play, the then publicly revealed (probably to his eventual detriment) the previously nearly unknown (secret) presence of Admiral Bobby R. Inman chairing the Cal-Tech oversight committee overseeing JPL and space exploration.

You should be aware that JPL is actually the primary entity controlling most space (especially Mars) exploration rather than NASA itself. Now Admiral Inman is a very bright, competent and I might add rich individual but also one of this nation's most famous super spooks having served among many other important positions as Director of Naval Intelligence, Vice Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Director of the NSA (National Security Agency), and Deputy Director of the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) as well as a senior trustee of Cal-Tech itself. I would call that litany of simple facts a serious clue about intelligence pervasiveness in the world's premier space exploration efforts.

But, it doesn't stop there. Another solid clue is that before him General Lew Allen, Jr. served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force as well as Director of the NSA and retired in 1991 as a Vice President of Cal-Tech, Director of JPL, and a member of the first President Bush's PFIAB or President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. Are you beginning to get the involvement of intelligence and particularly military intelligence picture yet and how it clearly permeates everything associated with what is suppose to be civilian space exploration and its issues including very much the world of science and scientists?

Is secrecy's prevalence in and permeation of this field beginning to be better understood yet? Not sure? Still can't understand why scientists balk at attempting to deal with this, then consider this hypothetical put yourself in the other fellow's shoes scenario.

If legitimate satellite data signals from an orbiter around Mars is encrypted, received, processed, and then a doctored version bounced back off of the satellite to feed back into legitimate science group's code and possession for their processing, who's to know or even suspect in the excitement of going over massive new incoming data from another world? If the data itself looks a little too poor in quality or even altered arousing some basic suspicion, where is the proof and how far is that ever going to go? Without proof and a lot of it, there is nothing but conjecture. Even if you could get the impossible proof, it might be worth your life and at the very minimum your career and your family's welfare to merely allude to its existence.

Worse, do you believe that the public mainstream heavily indoctrinated faithful going in a interesting but ultimately nice comfortable safe direction, even if false, wants to willingly face such a potential radical (perception) shift in direction truth and its complexity, especially with all of its implications for real personal impact in their lives, and greet you and "your" information with open arms of acceptance? So where is the incentive for this hypothetical already fairly well respected scientist or academic to rebel, to dare risk everything dear to him or her, and face the defensive adversarial fire storm sure to follow that may last for years? Such Newton or Galileo dig in going against the establishment grain courage challenging massive establishment money and power is not unknown in history but, let's face it, extremely rare in the human experience.

Faced with all this, is it any wonder that so many scientists and academics with reputations to loose or future ones to gain researching the science data would not very seriously think forty plus times before voluntarily and openly challenging any of its correctness and/or their peer consensus and leadership already stated positions? For a scientist to even privately entertain the idea inside oneself is to quickly experience uncertainty and stress and is something to be avoided. It is much easier, and especially safer, to merely go with the flow. Just simply ignore it all as well as the anomalous evidence that suggests such a stressful direction. Did I actually see that? No it couldn't really be! It has to be imaging problems, CO2 ice, sand dunes, dark CO2 sublimation eroded areas, etc., etc. just as my peers and powerful leadership says it is. If I absolutely have to, I'll just deal with it on the morrow that never comes.

The bottom line is that socially accepted and artificially entrenched denial continues to be the name of the game in this tightly controlled world of science and academics and objective information input from below (as their leadership sees it) as a consideration meets a huge deeply ingrained wall of resistance. It is sad but it is the reality we must deal with. It has happened over and over again in our Earth human history as dramatically new direction shifting information has butted up against this always deeply entrenched wall of human nature, social institutional constructs, and hidden manipulation.

Some famous instances are very well known and I'm sure you can think of examples like Galileo and Newton without me drawing it out for you. Rather, take a look at the ever ongoing Scientific Revolution to learn more about the history of new information as it struggles to gain a foothold in mainstream awareness. Rest assured that it will be and is no different here in this time and place.

The question is are you just going to sit back and wait for the science and academic leadership or the other institutional constructs to step up to the plate on this gigantic issue of life other than our own in our planetary environment? Perhaps the politicians? Perhaps the mainstream media? Perhaps the corporate world? Perhaps mainstream religion? Surely, if you've come this far, you now know better than to hope for must less expect the necessary open mindedness and mental flexibility out of such "institutions" and their propensity for inertia in the face of any real new direction shifting information with real potential for change?

No, if planetary environmental truth is to have a chance to enter more deeply into mainstream Earth human consciousness, it will have to come from a increasingly numerous core of truly independent thinking individuals like you and I from all walks of life getting others galvanized to the critical need for increased awareness of this issue and the need to obtain better planetary exploration truth. As more and more come onboard supporting the quest for truth and demanding it, the secrecy and denial will be forced out of the shadows into the light where you can bet it really doesn't want to be.

We are all now at the nexus point. The corner approaches. The fulcrum is coming into place to effect change. Do you sense it? One way or the other, fundamental change is on the wind. It is driven relentlessly by our own accelerating and unavoidable technological advancements steadily undermining centralized control of information and the secrecy that goes with it. Where will this change find you? Will you choose truth and reality or pretense and avoidance? It, as always, is your choice. But, just remember this, choosing not to choose is also a very clear choice, also with its very own consequences.

What comes is nothing less than a fundamental paradigm shift of the science, social, technological, and Earth human experience of this age that respects no self imposed boundaries or pretense. There will be no bystanders or unimpacted spectators. So, don't just be prepared, consider becoming involved in trying to help shape and influence the change and your own future and all our collective destiny. If not for yourself, then for your children, for your children's children, and for our Earth human presence and posterity. What comes in the future will one day be the history that you and I will write here in these days and in this time and place.

I'm writing it now and this writing is available to all of us. What will you do? Believe me, you are more than welcome onboard this epic tale and journey of the human experience.