weather warning

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

A Freudian View of Global Warming

The current hysteria over the prospect of a warmer earth and ice-free poles is like the defense mechanism of a patient in psychotherapy who fears that which he should logically most welcome. It is due to reactivating the inherited trauma of the terrifying experience of the meteor bombardment which nearly wiped out life on earth. The descendents of the survivors of the climate-changing catastrophe, are suffering from a form of collective amnesia which causes them to react with dread to the thought of the return to the pre-catastrophe state, when the earth was a warmer and more pleasant place to live.

But the environmentalists, who are in other situations the people most in touch with their instincts and feelings for life, are here being betrayed by that very closeness to emotional health. The mainstream human population is far more out of contact with their instincts and feelings and do not feel the same overwhelming anxiety about climate normalization because they are farther from health than the environmentalists are and the feelings are more repressed in them.

So the environmentalists are squandering effort on futile attempts to convert more repressed people to fear of the ancient catastrophe. Only the environmentalists are close enough to remembering the catastrophe to fear the memory of it. That is why people become environmentalists in the first place. Normal people, those in whom the ancient events are more deeply buried, have no fears of global disaster because they have repressed it too deeply, so they will never become environmentalists.

Meanwhile, real climate disasters, those being caused by the increasing oranurization of the earth by nuclear/electrical technology, are being ignored by the environmental movement and attention focused on unreal "threats" like melting polar ice packs.This is a perfect example of what Reich called "the evasion of the essential".

Dealing with Doubters

There is no point in the constant re-
> hashing of the same old thing over and over again.

>
> It is way past time to move beyond the issue of the existence of orgone

and deal with orgone the way other
> sciences deal with their subject matter, learning more about it as
> time goes on, not constantly stuck in trying to justify the existence
> of their science.
>
> Nobody asks astronomers to prove stars exist, or pesters nuclear
> physicists to prove radioactivity exists. Nobody keeps asking
> biologists to show that cells exist or demands that pathologists
> demonstrate the existence of germs every time they mention them.
> Anyone who brings up the question of if orgone really exists or not
> is not ever going to accept it no matter how much evidence is
> presented because the reason for compulsive doubting is defense, not
> lack of evidence.
>
> Anyone who keeps demanding more evidence and ignores that which has
> already been presented is suffering from a form of mental illness
> that ought to be called 'Stoicaism" after Ovidu Stoica, a compulsive doubter.
>
> So I refuse to get bogged down in trying to convert anyone. I
> am not a missionary for orgonomy or trying to save souls for Reich.
> If someone does not believe orgone exists I will talk to someone
> else. This blog should be for the people who know something about the
> subject to discuss advanced matters concerning it and for those who
> do not know much about it to learn.

Doubting

> If a modern Spaniard said he was going to sail across the Atlantic
> to find out if Columbus was right and there really is land on the
> other side, he would be considered a fool. He would be ignoring the
> testimony of all the Europeans who have been to America and
> returned, and the 10,000 American tourists who arrive at Madrid
> airport every day. It is the same with anyone who thinks it is
> necessary to replicate any of Reichs' experiments to "see if he was
> right". The evidence was all in decades ago. To doubt it now, after
> so much confirmation, is irrational.
>
> I have never seen Antarctica. I am convinced it exists because so
> many reliable people claim to have seen it that the chance that they
> are all lying or delusional is very slight. The evidence for orgone
> is a lot stronger than that for Antarctica. If I were to refuse to
> believe in orgone it would make no sense to believe in Antarctica,
for which there is less evidence.

> The question to ask anyone who doubts the published evidence for
> orgone energy is, do you believe Antarctica exists? If so, why?

Why are published reports of Antarctical sufficient to get you to believe them,

while published reports of orgone energy are not?

Chembuster Video Review

I simply do not see what you are saying you see in this video. The device shown is an orgone shooter, as described by Reich in the 1940s. It consists of a small orgone accumulator with several hollow tubes leading from it. The ends of the tubes are pointed at the sky instead of at a patient, but that is the only difference.

It would be expected to have a small short-range effect on small clouds for a limited period of time, until the atmosphere got used to the stimulus and quit reacting to it. The effect on the cloud depicted in the video is not the same as the effect of a cloudbuster, though there is a superficial resemblence that might look the same to someone who was not familiar with the orgonomic understanding of how a cloudbuster works.

The cloudbuster works by DRAWING energy down the tubes, and into the water the cloudbuster is grounded into. If it is aimed directly at a cloud, the cloud will break up because the energy is withdrawn from it. The draw is due to the attraction of water for orgone.

What is shown in this video is the over-excitation of a cloud by energy being drawn INTO it from the device because the cloud is MORE STRONGLY charged than the small accumulator at the end of the pipes. The orgonomic potential is at work here; the highly-charged water in the cloud DRAWS the orgone through the pipes into the cloud.

The charge of the cloud INCREASES from the addition of charge until it exceeds the capacity of the small amount of water in the cloud. Then the expansion-causing tendency of orgone causes the water droplets to move apart, breaking up the cloud.

The cloud draws energy from the bucket via the pipes, and gets over-excited. It therefore breaks up from OVER-EXPANSION, not from withdrawal of energy. The resemblence is superficial.

The allegations of a beneficial effect on a DOR-atmosphere cannot be substanciated. Adding charge to a stagnant, DOR-infested area of the sky will not recycle the DOR into mobile OR. It will, however, if continued long enough, get the stagnant area so overcharged that a discharge will result.

This discharge might take the form of heat, lightning, or a circulatory motor force, known popularly as a tornado. If heat waves, thunderstorms, or tornados were being caused very frequently by these devices, someone among the many hobbyists indulging in this sport would have noticed it by now, unless they are all so blinded by their implausable belief-system that none of them can see the connection.

But while that is certainly a possibility that must be kept in mind, the more likely reason none of them has noticed any such result is that these devices are not strong enough to have that much of an effect -at least not too much of the time.

The device depicted is not a cloudbuster, and would not have the effects of a cloudbuster. The confusion arises from the name, "cloudbuster" , and the common misperception that the function of a cloudbuster is to "break up clouds". It is not important that a common effect of a cloudbuster draw is the breaking up of a cloud. That is only one possible effect, and not even one of the most important ones.

If the cloudbuster was called an Orgone Drawing Device, or an Orgone Attractor, or an Orgonomic Atmospheric Modulator, or some other name that did not give people unfamiliar with it the impression that breaking up clouds is what it is for, this kind of error would not happen.

But the name "cloudbuster" is there for historical reasons having to do with how it came to be invented, not what it does or what it is used for. And the people fooling around with these devices are not aware of that because they have no interest in learning orgone physics. They are interested in a role-playing game, and calling their devices "cloudbusters" and pretending they re-mobilize DOR is part of the game to them, just like pretending DOR is some chemical being sprayed out of airplanes is a part of the game they are playing.

And while they indulge themselves in such fantasies, people who want to know what is happening to the atmosphere and what to do about it are being tricked into getting involved in silly role-playing games instead of being able to learn the facts.

And that makes these people who play these silly games part of the problem.

More On Trevor Constable

In 1969-1972, Trevor Constable was employed by the ACO as their West Coast cloudbuster operator, doing many orops under ACO auspices, with their funding. He was nominally under Blasbands supervision, and was helped by a woman named Mary Poe, who was in therapy with Dr. Albert Duvall.

On one occasion, while Blasband was visiting, Constable did an operation to demonstrate a new cloudbusting technique he had developed. The success of the operation was documented by the news report next day: Storm Hikes State Death Toll To 67 on Rain-slicked Freeways.

On another occcasion, one of his orops was similiarly documented by a news headline: 9-year-old Boy Swept Out To Sea By Sudden, Unexpected Storm. Both of these news headlines were known to Blasband at the time, but there is no record that he ever raised any objection to this murder by cloudbuster with ACO funding and suport.

When I met Constable, in Dec., 1971, he told me Reich was not the real inventor of the cloudbuster, he was a re-incarnated Atlantean who remembered how the Atlanteans had used cloudbusters. He told me the cloudbuster used by the Atlanteans was exactly the same design, and they had fought a war with them which sank Atlantis. When I asked how he knew all this, he Said, "I'm clairvoyant" .

Constable told me he was an ocultist, urged me to read Rudolph Steiner, and said Reich was "blocked against mysticism". More to the point, he also said the way to convince people cloudbusting worked was to go for breaking the rainfall record everytime he operated. He said he was going to "bring storms into Los Angeles that would turn the place inside out".

Later, when I obtained documentation in the form of a letter in which he said the exact same thing, I showed the letter to Jerome Eden, who got very excited and sent it to Ellsworth Baker. The ACO had an emergency Board of Directors meeting and Constable was fired, but over the strong objections of Blasband, who argued that Constable did good work. Baker told me a short time after that, "I'm worried about Dr. Blasband".

Constable, according to his book, Loom of the Future, had been a campaign worker for the 1968 presidential campaign of George Walace, who ran on a racial segegation platform. That, along with his mysticism, was known to Blasband at the time.

Constable had formed a bad impression of me when I visted him because a Black friend of mine, Larry Diggs, a well-known San Francisco disk jockey, had gone along with me to see him. Constable was friendly and polite, but afterwards sent a letter to several orgonomists warning them I was "associating with Black magicians".

Mary Poe has told me that Constable had figured out how to direct a lightning strike with a cloudbuster and had demonstrated the technique. A short time later, when she had an argument with Constable and quit as his assistant, there was a tremendous unforecast thunderstorm that night, with numerous lightning strikes right near her home and none anywhere else. She is convinced he was trying to kill her. Since I have tested out the technique and confirmed that it works, I am inclined to believe her.

At the time Constable got fired from by the ACO, Blasband offered to resign from the ACO and go into the commercial cloudbusting business with him, but Constable told him to stay with the ACO so he could keep Constable informed of what the ACO was doing. In other words, Blasband was to become a spy in the ACO for Constable.

Blasband was angry at me for blowing the whistle on his friend, and when I asked him why he had not, as an orgonomist, considered Constables mysticism pathological, he said that Constable does good work and I was a biggot to hold the mans religion against him. It is not surprising that Blasband later became involved with another mystical guru, Levashov, and has come to believe in a mystical theory of the functioning of the cloudbuster instead of the orgonomic theory of Reich.

That a mystical.minded person like Constable could be accepted by the ACO as fit to do cloudbusting is enough to raise questions about their competence as psychiatrists in itself, but that they had accepted for a highly responsible position, a position in which the lives of unsuspecting members of the public could be put at risk, a man who had worked for the election of a presidential candiate whose main issue was racial segregation, says all I need to know about the ACO. One must be very far to the right indeed to consider racism a respectable political position.

At the time, I was told by Ellsworth Baker that the next issue of the Journal of Orgonomy would contain an article explaining why Trevor Constable was no longer working for them. I am still waiting for that article. The ACO has never formally repudiated Constable, leaving people who do not have access to personal conversations with insiders to assume he is still connected with the ACO.

Radioactivity And Climate Disruption

RADIOACTIVITY AND CLIMATE DISRUPTION

It simply is not possible for BOTH Reich and the mainstream scientists to be right, and since I have seen overwhelming evidence that there is something going on in the atmosphere in relation to radioactivity that orthodox science cannot explain and orgonomic science can, until the scientists get their heads out of the sand and come up with an explanation that better fits the facts, instead of just denying the facts, I will have no choice but to go on thinking Reich was right and orthodox science is wrong.

I am quite familiar with the mainstream theory of radioactivity, and I just do not buy it. I cannot, because I have seen solid evidence that radioactivity does not work the way physics say it does.

The reason I consider nuclear power intolerably dangerous is that it is something completely different from what orthodox physics thinks it is. The physicists think, as a result of a flawed experiment done by the French Academy in 1900, that radioactive material is unstable, is breaking down internally, and little bits of atoms are being shot out of it. They think that if one of these little bits of an atom hits a cell it can cause damage by breaking a little part of the cell. They think the effects of radioactivity can be shielded by a thick containment vessel of steel or concrete. All these ideas are wrong. In fact, there is no such thing as radioactivity in the sense orthodox science thinks there is.

The real source of the energy involved is not internal, but external, in the ether around the radioactive substance. So-called "radioactive" materials are IRRITANTS that irritate the surrounding orgone (ether) into a state of abnormal excitation. This excited state (oranur), produces effects which can be divided into primary effects and secondary effects. The secondary effects are the ones that can be blocked by shielding and detected by ordinary instruments. The primary effects cannot be blocked by any amount of any known material and are usually not detected by the instruments physicists use.

These effects can slow down the pulsation of orgone, which in the slowed down state is called DOR, and this DOR is toxic to all living organisms, but the symptoms are so widely variable that there is no consistent symptom picture for orthodox medical science to notice. There is only a generalized decrease in biological functioning, which then causes each individual to react differently, depending on individual predisposition.

The slowing down of the normal pulsation of the orgone surrounding the reactor, which takes place whether there is a containment vessel or not, also has effects on the weather. Since it is the same energy in both atmosphere and organism, the weather reacts the same way a living body does. It suffers a diminution of pulsation and vitality.

Since these primary effects of radioactive irritation of the surrounding field are not subject to the inverse square law, there is no real limit to the distance from a reactor at which the effects can show up.

When I did my oranur work in Massachusetts I was keeping a close eye on the world weather maps. There were effects clearly caused by my work as far west as Oregon and as far east as Sweden. The conclusion was inescapeable: Any strong source of oranur excitation has a global effect.

EVERY NUCLEAR REACTOR AFFECTS THE WHOLE PLANET!! It is this, not the possible "escape" of some radioactive gases or particulates, that is the real threat from nuclear power.

NO nuclear reactor of any design is safe and no nuclear reactor of any design can ever be made safe. The oranur effect cannot be contained and there is no limit to how far it can reach. It has nothing to do with the reasons the mainstream anti-nuke movement presents to the public for being against nuclear power.

I have talked with many in the anti- nuke movement, including some of the well-known leaders of the movement. Some of them were open-minded enough that I was able to explain my ideas on the subject without too much negative reaction. But they all would then go on to explain that if they tried to take on the scientific establishment on the issue of basic nuclear physics, they would not only lose, but discredit themselves as total flakes. They have no choice but to try to argue their cause on conventional physics grounds. Being known as crackpots would not help them win in the arena of practical politics.

They are correct in this ascessment, but from within the framework of conventional science, they are wrong to be opposed to nuclear power; if one beleives the theories of the mainstrream scienrtists, nuclear power is perfectly safe, or at least can be made safe. IF YOU BELIEVE THE THEORIES OF CONVENTIONAL PHYSICS! But I don't. Do you? If so, why?

The global warming/greenhouse gases theory as currently constructed, is nothing but a public relations scam to legitimize nuclear power. I see no other reason for it. It is just a way for the nuke industry and the U.S. military machine, which wants the reactor products for weaponry, to scam the public into accepting nukes as cleaner and safer than burning coal or oil.

The so-called science behind the global warming myth is so flawed that I do not see how anyone could take it seriously. But there really IS a serious and dangerous atmospheric crisis going on in the atmosphere of this planet and it really IS manmade, not part of any natural cycle or due to any natural causes.

The weather is losing its stability, patterns are breaking down and weather is going to extremes, with alternating drought and floods, heat waves and cold waves. Abnormally severe weather events are becoming more common.

The atmosphere is becoming more unreliable and unpredictable. This randomness is giving the impression that there is something to the "global warming" scenario, and the greenhouse gases theory it is based on. The climate is changing, there is no doubt about that, but it is not changing in any one particular direction. And the changes that are happening have nothing to do with CO2.

The current wave of concern over global warming is based on the theory that the atmosphere is a "heat engine" driven by differences in temperature. The belief that heat from the sun is the moving force of the atmosphere leads to the belief that trapping of more heat by so-called greenhouse gases will lead to changes in weather and climate. The trouble with the heat engine theory is there is no way for it to explain why a set of pipes grounded into water would have any effect at all on weather, let alone such powerful and widespread effects as have regularly been observed to occur from cloudbusting operations.

The effective functioning of the cloudbuster leads directly to the conclusion that the atmosphere MUST be driven by charge, discharge, pulsation, flow and alternating expansion and contraction of the energetic field of the earth, a field within which the atmosphere exists and upon which it depends for its maintenance.

If one has once become convinced that a cloudbuster can indeed affect weather, it is a logical impossibility to go on accepting that the heat engine theory of the atmosphere is correct. On the other hand, there is indeed ample evidence that there is SOMETHING strange going on with the weather. There ARE changes in climate underway. So, if the cause is NOT a greenhouse effect from greenhouse gases, what is it?

The orgonomic theory is that the changes in weather and climate going on are due to alterations in the pulsation and flowing of the energetic "atmosphere" of the earth. These changes are known to be caused by the burden of radioactivity released into the environment by the nuclear industry/weapons programs since 1945. The oranur experiment done by Reich in 1951 and numerous other observations since by a number of people, including my own experimental work, lead to the conclusion that it is the radiation burden and not the greenhouse gases causing the changing climate.

These two theories of the atmosphere are not competing on even ground. The heat engine theory has the support of almost all scientists, all governments, and most of the public. The orgonomic theory has the support of only a handful of people, most of whom have no resources or influence.

A further handicap is that the cultish atmosphere that has grown up around Reich’s findings, especially his orgone findings, has caused many people who are blatantly mystical, paranoid or otherwise lacking in credibility to be attracted to orgonomy and their presence and obvious irrationality tends to discredit the ideas which they have espoused.

The nuclear physicists think they know all about radioactivity but their ideas about it are wrong. They consider radioactivity a property of the radioactive material itself, while the orgonomic view is that it is the surrounding energetic continuum that reacts to the presence of that material with an excitation that shows up on instruments and damages flesh.

The "internal disintegration" theory of radioactivity is so strongly entrenched in the thinking of the physics community that anyone with even a grammar school education knows about it, and almost all of the population believes it. And this theory has no way to fit in the observations by Reich and many others following his lead, that radioactivity can indeed affect the weather.

The public relations campaign over global warming and greenhouse gases has reached a fever pitch. It has become one of the two biggest public events of our time, (along with the take-over of the United States by a Fascistic dictatorship, an event that is not unrelated). The sales campaign to sell the world’s public on the need to reduce greenhouse gases has largely succeeded. The major practical result has been to make nuclear power look green and clean by comparison.

The major nations of the world are getting ready to build a very large number of new nuclear reactors to take the place of burning coal and oil for power production. The world will probably not survive the existence of so many nuclear reactors. Ironically, it is the environmentalists, demanding a reduction in burning of relatively harmless coal and oil, who are driving us ever-closer to extinction by their ignorance of the real facts of atmospheric functioning and their well-ment, but ill-founded fear of greenhouse gases.

Religion, Nukes, And Psychology

The economy is not the main reason for nuclear power. The main reason for building nuclear reactors is that they kill the life energy.

The more sexually repressed a person or culture is, the more they feel threatened by the life energy, and the more pro-nuclear they will therefore be. Such people regard the earth as dangerously infested with living organisms, and see nuclear reactors, and ultimately, nuclear war, as a way to make it sterile and therefore safe.

This is the real reason for the existence of a nuclear technology on this planet, and all the talk about the economics of the nuclear industry is a smoke screen to hide their real motivations from themselves. This is why the Christians want a nuclear Armagedon in the Middle East. They plan to make their bible tales come true because they think that fantasy is the only way to immortality.

The environmentalists fail to realize the deep psychological motivations of the nuclear industry, and keep on wasting effort trying to refute economic and (mechanistic) scientific arguments, when in fact, those arguments are a rationalization for a deep-seated desire to wipe out life on earth.

Likewise, the peace movement acts as if it were possible to reason with Christians whose main interest is to releive their sexual tension by causing a planetary catastrophe to take the place of the orgastic discharge that is missing from their lives. The nuclear industry and Christianity are both part of an unconcious conspiracy to kill off the earth. Arguing with them on their own premises is a waste of time.