The 21st century is predicted to be the Century of Biology, a shift from the previous century dominated by physics. It seems fitting, then, to begin the century by turning the universe outside-in and unifying the foundations of science, not with imaginary strings that occupy equally imaginary unseen dimensions, but with a much simpler idea that is rife with so many shocking new perspectives that we are unlikely ever to see reality the same way again.
In the past few decades, major puzzles of mainstream science have forced a re-evaluation of the nature of the universe that goes far beyond anything we could have imagined. A more accurate understanding of the world requires that we consider it biologically centered. It’s a simple but amazing concept that Biocentrism attempts to clarify: Life creates the universe, instead of the other way around. Understanding this more fully yields answers to several long-held puzzles. This new model — combining physics and biology instead of keeping them separate, and putting observers firmly into the equation — is called biocentrism. Its necessity is driven in part by the ongoing attempts to create an overarching view, a theory of everything. Such efforts have now stretched for decades, without much success except as a way of financially facilitating the careers of theoreticians and graduate students.
Seeking the Third Story – 59 minutes
From: Thunderbolts website
Author David Talbott suggests that all of human history can be seen as just two stories. First, came the story of ancient mythology, when towering gods were said to have ruled the world. Then came the story of science, emerging from a growing distrust of the myths and a new emphasis on direct observation and reason.
But a third story is possible, according to Talbott, one that sees the underlying provocation of the myths in extraordinary electrical events occurring close to the Earth. That discernment will lead to a new perspective on modern science as well. Today, a third story IS possible. But it requires a reconsideration of both human stories—that of myth and that of “settled science”—seeing both through the fresh lens of the Electric Universe.”
A scientific revolution in the theories of the nature of comets, solar system formation and astronomical phenomena in general is long overdue. For example, the impossibilities and contradictions inherent in the "dirty snowball comet model" and the "nebular collapse" theory of the origin of the solar system are legion. The theories fall short of explaining observed phenomena, but you'll never hear the scientists promoting them admit as much. Unfortunately, it seems that in all their mental excavations, the mass-produced scientists of our time have dug themselves into a trench of dreary proportions, carried along by the inertial stream of their cherished professors' naïve opinions. In fact, they can't even tell how deep they are in it, or that their theories are as woefully outdated as the mastodon fossils of which they catch passing glimpses. And thanks to James McCanney's work over the last thirty-odd years, they find themselves plunged, in the words of Mullah Nasr Eddin, "into the deepest galoshes that have ever been worn on sweaty feet."
Aaron O'Connell PhD is the first person to experimentally induce and measure quantum effects in the motion of a human made object, bridging the quantum and classical worlds. His breakthrough provides the most astounding evidence in history (outside of faith that is) that our reality isn’t what we’ve been told to believe, but is, in fact, something far more wonderful.
Growing up reading philosophy, playing guitar, and generally not thinking about science, Aaron O’Connell never expected to revolutionize the world of physics. But an inspiring stuffed-monkey-shot-from-a-cannon demonstration and a series of positive research experiences as an undergraduate propelled him to graduate school at UCSB.
While there, in an experiment remarkable both for its conceptual simplicity and technical difficulty, O’Connell was the first person to measure quantum effects in an object large enough to see with the naked eye. Named Breakthrough of the year by Science Magazine, the experiment shattered the previous record for the largest quantum object, showing decisively that there is no hard line between the quantum and everyday worlds.
Physicists are used to the idea that subatomic particles behave according to the bizarre rules of quantum mechanics, completely different to human-scale objects. In a breakthrough experiment, Aaron O'Connell has blurred that distinction by creating an object that is visible to the unaided eye, but provably in two places at the same time. In this talk he suggests an intriguing way of thinking about the result.
From: The Daily Bell – Wednesday, October 13, 2010 – by Staff Report
I can see all of you scratching your heads out there and I know exactly what it is that you are thinking: "Why the hell are we taking this detour to the Moon? What happened to Laurel Canyon? Have you completely lost your mind?" ... I found a new source of inspiration when my wife e-mailed me the recent story about the fake Dutch Moon rock, which I and many others found quite amusing, and which also reminded me that I had a lot of other bits and pieces of information concerning the Apollo project that I had collected over the nine years that have passed since I first wrote about the alleged Moon landings. After taking that first look, back in 2000, I was pretty well convinced that the landings were, in fact, faked, but it was perfectly obvious that the rather short, mostly tongue-in-cheek post that I put up back in July of 2000 was not going to convince anyone else of that. So I contemplated taking a more comprehensive look at the Apollo program. Toward that end, I pulled up my original Apollo post along with various other bits and pieces scattered throughout past newsletters, threw in all the newer material that had never made it onto my website, and then combed the Internet for additional information. In doing so, I realized that a far better case could be made than what I had previously offered to readers. I also realized that a far better case could be made than what is currently available on the 'net. – Center for an Informed America
Dominant Social Theme: You have lived your life at an excellent time and more excitement is to come.
Free-Market Analysis: We stated the other day that it "seemed" the US moon-landings were real and immediately a feedbacker sent us a link to the Center for an Informed America, which is run by David McGowan. As a result of reading McGowan's extensive dozen-part series called "Wagging the Moondoggie," we have a much harder time believing NASA or its astronauts went anywhere at all, other than to some sort of lunar-look alike Hollywood set. Dominant social theme: "America's pioneering spirit brought us to moon, and that's all you need to know!"
From: The Daily Bell – Friday, July 01, 2011 – by Staff Report
The Electric Comet: The Elephant in NASA's Living Room? ... This interpretation of comet and asteroid formation is supported by the experimental work of plasma physicist C J Ransom at Vemasat Laboratories. Ransom subjected a bed of hematite to an electric arc, creating a number of fused spheres alongside occasional double-lobed configurations. The latter were remarkably similar to the incongruous shapes of numerous comets and asteroids ... In light of this extraordinary comparison ... activists's relentless demands for mathematical quantification grow more absurd. Institutionalized astronomy, with its massive advantages in the forms of billions of dollars of funding, biased educational and peer review systems and the uncritical support of science media, has failed to resolve the "mysteries" of comets. In contrast, a few plasma experimentalists working with virtual pocket change have delivered findings that can and should revolutionize comet science. – Thunderbolts
Dominant Social Theme: Gravity makes the universe run. Einstein said so.
Free-Market Analysis: This article excerpted above, "Electric Comet: The Elephant in NASA's Living Room?" by Michael Goodspeed of the blogsite Thunderbolts, provides us with a seemingly excellent example of a concise argument for an electrical universe. The article appears to be the most recent, though its commentary refers to Comet Holmes that made its problematic appearance several years ago.