Ufology – How ships from the stars got buried on Earth, in a pile of…

September 10, 2016

I saw this article and thought I would share it.

It’s an interesting read. I agree that Ufology is dying, it lies buried in a pile of “1000’s of clearly fraudulent and hoaxed UFO images and videos,” to say nothing of non-scientific ‘entertainment as history’ like ‘Ancient Aliens’ and the UFO conspiracy hub, the highly secretive ‘Area 51’.

I sympathize with the writer. Ufology did used to be a serious scientific movement, but that is now a very long time ago. UFOs appeared to be a phenomenon, so why not study them? However, Ufology quickly became the natural home of the freakish, the stupid, the ignorant and the delusional. A huge mass of ‘information’ appeared. Hundreds of UFO books flooded the market. I admit I read most of them, hoping to find the truth, but the truth was not out there. I admit I even read Von Daniken et al. However, I got to the point that I realized that I had read SO much, yet KNEW nothing. There were too few facts and too much misrepresentation, misinformation, made up shit and out right cynical lies, but let’s not dwell on ‘Ancient Aliens’. I think that because Science did not find any evidence that UFOs exist, people now think Science is just covering up the evidence!

Also, we now know that although there are probably millions of inhabited planets out there the chances of anyone coming here from any of them is almost impossibly remote, basically because of the mindboggling distances involved… and why the hell would they bother, even if they could? If there ARE ‘flying ships’ in the skies I think a slightly less far-fetched possibility is that they are travellers from our own future. Yeh, ridiculous, but probably slightly less ridiculous than alien tourists.



June 13, 2015

Yep, several countries are on the cusp of introducing a ‘Unconditional/Universal Basic Income’, which will go to everyone to cover the cost of housing and food, everything ‘earned’ is on top of this.

Many Economists and Philosophers on the left and right have written at great lengths in support of UBI, including Thomas Paine, Friedman, Freidrick Hayek, etc, etc.  Left leaning economists see UBI eradicating poverty. Right leaning economists see UBI as providing the billions of people who will shortly lose their jobs to cheaper machines with income to buy the products these cheaper machines will produce more cheaply!  Without UBI the vast proportion of the population will have NO money to buy products… and the system will crash.

UBI will be funded by scrapping most social benefits and by placing a more realistic tax system in place, i.e. the greatest proportion of tax is currently raised from those on low income, whilst billionaires pay little if any tax.

Moving from ‘providing money to buy products’ to just ‘supplying products free’ is then not a very big step. We will move into a ‘moneyless society’ which will be based on ‘Resource Based Economy’ (RBE).  The Earth will be declared the inheritance of the entire human race.  A global audit and computerized system management will provide products to meet needs, NOT to create profit. The math has been done and under RBE everyone on the planet can have a better lifestyle than all but the current billionaires (who will unfortunately have to be taxed back to being mere millionaires).

Please check out Home – The Venus Project who’s founder, Jacque Fresco, invented RBE.

This is for YOUR information.  The answers to the many questions you may have are out there. I don’t wish to debate any naysayers, the argument is already being soundly won.  If anyone is interested in learning more then ‘Google’ is your friend.   ‘Universal Basic Income’ will take us on the first steps towards the ‘moneyless society’ of a future ‘Star Trek’ Earth.

“Make it so!” 


January 6, 2015

david-attenborough-e1359327784336There is too much ‘over population’ propaganda coming from too many people who really should know better.  Yes, people like you David Attenborough.  ‘We are a plague on the Earth’???  Is that what you think of humanity?


The ‘Network for Church Monitoring’ (see above link) promote the mantra that ‘religions’ are causing over-population and that poor people MUST stop breeding!  Yes, some religions are stupid, some promote breeding to increase their numbers, but they aren’t the main reason people have big families. The main reason is poverty. Parents NEED many hands to forage, grow plants, tend flocks, look after them in their old age, etc, etc.. it is the desperation of poverty that drives population.

More successful countries with better social provision create populations that are not driven by desperation and need less children. To underscore this correlation look at third world countries that begin to prosper and provide, equality, security, social support and you will see that a reducing population follows. Some EU countries are experiencing NEGATIVE population growth and without immigration their economies would COLLAPSE!

The ‘stop breeding’ proponents amongst us have simply swallowed the lies of the 1%, who now own nearly 50% of the world’s resources. They buy up resources, to create artificial scarcity, to ramp up prices to create more profit.  Meanwhile, the poorest 50% of the world must try to survive on 1% of the world’s resources! The 1% and their corporate oligarchy are THE major cause of starvation. The 1% starve millions of people to DEATH every year.

TAX the 1% back to being mere millionaires and give the poorest half of the world THEIR half of the planets resources, so they are no longer desperate… and watch the population growth fall.

Humanity is NOT a ‘plague’, we are simply ‘infected’… but THAT is curable.


If you are self-sufficient you can ‘retire’ from the outside world… but should you?

December 8, 2014

I am sharing here an interesting article by Matilda A. Juliette called “How I retired at 25”. I find myself being attracted to her ideas, but it seems ultimately to be a cop out and extremely “self” centred.


I had to retire early from my government job, due to ill health and I now have to be more self sufficient. I do think self-sufficiency is cool, we should probably all be more self-sufficient, but I think people need to do something for ‘others’ too. There is something called social responsibility, unless we are going to deny that we are a member of a large species and part of a wider thing called ‘Life’.

As a model for life, self-sufficiency cannot achieve what co-operation can. It does not produce life-saving medical advances, it does not produce what we NEED ‘now’ by way of food, drinking water, or housing and education for the world’s growing population. It won’t help us migrate to other planets, when this world is full.

If you are ‘self-sufficient’ but use ANY technology, i.e. computer, fridge, cooker, car, bus, aircraft, ship, your lifestyle is only possible because of the existing infrastructure that millions before us have strived to create, so that WE can have the choice of paying back to society, paying forward to society, or copping out of paying into society at all.

At the end of our days if we look back and we have been ‘self sufficient’ but done nothing to move humanity forward, then we have betrayed our ancestors and wasted the opportunity to be more than just ‘self’.

Yes, we could live in a cave with a great view and survive on nuts and berries, but a monkey could do that. We are each capable of greatness. We may not achieve all that we attempt, but I think we should at least try. Don’t you?

Why a massive tax on the richest will benefit everyone. Even the Billionaires!

August 5, 2014

- - - semina-in-piena-terraWe should tax the billionaires much more. Most actually pay little or no tax. The billions of workers on lower wages pay the bulk of the tax raised.

Capitalism works, but it doesn’t stop working, it keeps on working and will continue to work, funneling money to the top, until there is no more money left to pay back into the system.

At the moment the workers must work for money, to keep the system going. Soon, because of automation, there will be hardly any jobs, so people will have no money to pump into the system. At this point the system will crash.

Billionaires need to get their heads around this and regularly release capital back into the system, via higher taxation. Norway has a high rate band of 76%.  What do billionaires ‘need’ that millionaires can’t afford?

We should tax billionaires back to being mere millionaires, put this ‘hoarded’ money into a monthly ‘Unconditional Basic Income’ for everyone on the planet and people will spend the money back into the economy. Reducing hoarding and increasing circulation, by pumping regular cash into the system, will ensure continuing profit for the 1%… the excess of this profit will feed back into the system through the tax into UBI… and so on…until we grow enough mentally to be able to accept the notion of a moneyless society, where automation satisfies the 100%’s need, rather than the 1%’s greed.

Meanwhile, we must tax the billionaires.  You can’t reap a crop of cash profit, if you don’t plant cash seeds.

Was Jesus a martyr?

May 25, 2014

The rule of Rome in Judea was long and grim. Many Jewish rebel leaders came and went (to their deaths). There were many people referred to as Jesus Christ.

This is a title, not a family name. Jesus Christ means ‘Savior Messiah’. So the definition of ‘Christian’ is actually ‘a messianic’, ‘someone who believes someone will come to free Judea from Rome’.

Did Christianity free Christians from the rule of Rome? The opposite can be demonstrated to be trmyselfue.

A word that is NOT generally used for Christianity’s ‘Savior Messiah’ is ‘martyr’. Were all the ‘Savior Messiahs’ not martyrs for their cause? Was ‘Jesus Christ’ another martyr? Is his death any more tragic than that of any of the previous Savior Messiahs? If he was God, or sent by God, would God choose to come down, or send him down, to be just another in a long line of failed Savior Messiahs?

I think it is telling, that the supposed ‘uniqueness’ of his (self) sacrifice, is actually nothing of the sort. It has been spun via the Roman gospels as ‘substitutionary atonement’ and so somehow His death becomes a more important and more painful death than any other Savior Messiah before him. I don’t buy it.

I think the word ‘martyr’ has been consciously avoided by the Roman Church, because it would provide a more logical alternative to their dogma of substitutionary atonement. As a ‘martyr’ Jesus would just be like thousands of other martyrs, who were willing to die for their cause. I can respect a martyr, I cannot respect a cynical ploy by the Roman Catholic Church to engender guilt in humanity for their ‘sins’.

A sin is a ‘bad choice’. An omniscient God would know, in advance of creating us, that we were going to make these ‘bad choices’ so He would NOT punish us for them. Would a ‘real’ father kill his son, or ANY of his children, regardless of their ‘sins’? Surely not.

If Jesus was a real man, he was simply a martyr for his cause; He DIED. He was not a suicidal god; because a god cannot die. If He did die, but rose again (because he was a god), then he rose because He could NOT die, so he did NOT die for our sins. If he DID die, he was NOT God, if he was NOT God then Christianity is a lie. QED.

UKIP Farage resorts to chain (e)mails

December 3, 2013

Today I received, from a well meaning friend, a chain e-mail that he obviously felt make a lot of sense. It had originated from United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) leader Nigel Farage himself and was, as you might expect, full of lots of unwise, cynical, inaccurate and misleading information. All disguised as a ‘We want our country back’ themed piece of extreme right wing rhetoric and urging the receiver to pass it on to ten friends.

Farage talks about how everyone in Britain should buy British products and wear British clothes. People should not be receiving ‘socialist’ benefits at the expense of the working class. He inexplicably refers to our soldiers dying for Britain in Iraq and Afghanistan and admits he talks about fearing God and wants to take Britain back to ‘the good old days’. Oddly he forgets to mention in the chain mail that he wants us out of the EU. Has he finally realized that the reason d’etre of UKIP is untenable and potentially disastrous, as most of our our trade is with EU.  I doubt it.

Saying our soldiers died in Afghanistan and and Iraq for ‘Britain’ is asinine.NIGEL

Only (or even mostly) buying British products would mean buying them ‘even if cheaper imports were available’, so we would need MORE money OR have a LESSER lifestyle. This is also known as ‘protectionism’ and would impact our exports to countries we would no longer buy from, as they would reciprocate to ‘protect’ their home market from us! This is on top of the loss of EU business I mentioned.

Telling people to wear ‘British’ clothes is fascist… banning full-face burkas may be a different matter… they should be worn only during religious observance. Likewise, full face ski masks and helmets should be banned, unless the wearer is skiing or biking…. and what if fashion changed, as it regularly does and Britains wanted to wear foreign clothes? Are clothes from the EU like French Fashion also to be banned?

Playing the God-Fearing card is stupid, because only 6% of Brits go to church at any time other than Christmas, funerals or weddings. What about all the Brits who follow other religions, or none?

Farage speaks as if something is wrong with socialism. It’s not just about making sure unemployed or disabled don’t starve to death or are made homeless, or making sure the children of single Mum’s are fed and clothed. Free education, free health service, free fire service, free policing, etc, etc, is all socialism too. Without social provision, paid for from progressive and proportionate taxation, thousands would starve and become homeless and crime would rise as people stole to feed themselves and their children, just as they did in ‘the good old days’ of Dickensian England that Farago wishes to take us back to. Perhaps the starving children could start going back up chimneys? Or maybe he would reintroduce child prostitution?

Does he think everyone who doesn’t vote UK Independence Party is not proud of their country? Dr Samuel Johnson said “Patriotism is the last resort of a scoundrel.” Farage is the very definition of a cynical, opportunist scoundrel. I am surprised he did not add that he had heard that someone who had received this chain mail but not passed it on to ten friends had died the very next day!  Then suggest that you should pass it on to ten friends immediately, because if you did not then the same fate might befall you!  The ConDems and Labour are certainly far from perfect… but Farage is about as far from perfect as is humanly possible!

Never thought it would come to this… ROUX RENARD vs NEIL DE GRASSE TYSON

August 5, 2013

On Neil de Grasse Tyson’s video rant above where he says he is an agnostic, not an atheist –

An agnostic what???

Theism is about ‘belief’, atheism is about ‘no belief’. Gnosticism is about knowledge, agnostic is ‘no knowledge’… Neil doesn’t seem to understand you either believe god exists, or you believe god does not exists. Their IS no ‘middle belief’.

He also does not understand that you cannot be an agnostic any more than you can be a ‘staunch’.  You have to be an agnostic ‘about’ something. Despite him piling baggage onto atheists, saying that they are ‘in your face’, most atheists are actually agnostic atheists. They do not believe in god, but they cannot KNOW there is no god. Rare sensible theists will admit to being ‘agnostic theists’. Anyone at the extremes is slipping into dogmatism and close-mindedness.

An a-gnostic theist would become an a-theist IF he gained knowledge or proof that there was no God… and an a-gnostic a-theist WOULD become a theist IF he found evidence or proof that there actually WAS something to believe in!

It is a BASIC scientific position to be skeptical. I am skeptical about Neil’s motives. Perhaps he is under pressure from his ratings orientated sponsors, but he doesn’t sound like ‘just a scientist’, he sounds like ‘just a media presenter’ who is keen not to ‘offend’ half his audience!

I was also astounded by his seemed ignorance about what the atheism movement is about. We don’t meet to talk about how we don’t believe in god, we meet to mobilize against the virtual theocracies we live in, where Christian privilege (or Muslim privilege) turns unbelievers/apostates into second class citizens, to be despised as immoral, unpatriotic, etc. If he is ‘just a scientist’ then perhaps he needs to get his head out of the sky occasionally.

Neil… assuming you are not a dogmatist as well as a scientist…  are you an agnostic atheist, or an agnostic theist?

Stop bothering God with prayers! Can’t you see he’s busy?

June 3, 2013


And God replied??? You do realize that if you told your friends that the late George Carlin had spoken to you, or Ralph Waldo Emerson, or Attila the Hun, then you would be rightly judged as being psychotic. But just because it is the ‘voice of God’ you are hearing it is suddenly NOT a psychotic incident? You were under stress, literally at your wit’s end. Hearing voices is perfectly understandable, no cosmic entity necessary.

Do you see my point though? If you were an inmate in a sanatorium, talking to Hitler, we would think you were in the right place. Yet if God is ‘real’ then the millions of people that God has killed makes Hitler look like a boyscout by comparison.

On top of all the killing God has supposedly done (according to the Bible)… he would also have been the one who ‘created’ the 100 Billion people who have been born since the very first man lived… yes? BUT… did you know that 50 BILLION of these died BEFORE they reached adulthood?  Did you?  Please don’t tell me these children and babies are in God’s loving arms now, they all STILL had to go through agonizing deaths. A pretty sick creature, this ‘God’, creating babies, so he can watch them die.

Believers TRY to make excuses, saying Jesus made a new covenant, so the old laws and judgements of God are no longer valid… If this WERE true it would STILL be the SAME God, just with better PR. I’ll repeat that, because MANY don’t get it. The OT god and the NT God are the SAME God. Being all loving and kind ‘NOW’ doesn’t wipe out his guilt.

According to believers he STILL creates child abusers and murderers, even knowing (omniscient) that they WILL offend and he STILL creates innocent little children so that he can abuse them and murder them? He will even watch it all happening (omnipresent). This is truly obscene. You and I are WAY more moral than that.

This sick scenario (and many others) will just disappear, when you realize that there is NO God, not of the Biblical variety anyway. Nobody is ‘creating’ cannon fodder for wars either. Unless they are mentally ill (psychotic), bad people do bad things simply because of bad raising and bad environment. End of.

If, alternatively, you held the ‘deist’ position, perhaps that a benign being kick-started the universe, I would say it seems very unlikely, but not totally implausible… which an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient creator and loving ‘god’ would certainly be. Even then, if energy/matter cannot be destroyed, or created, then the cosmos has, in one form or another, always been here and always will be here. So no need for a god.

Just so you know, I am not all bitter and twisted. I have had the most wonderful life, but when it ends it will end. Death/non-existence holds no fears, I’ve been there before. I was non-existent for billions of years, I have a few years right now to be a bright sparkling moment of light, to hopefully brighten a few other’s lives, then it is back to non-existence for billions more years.

Have to go and play with my lovely little daughter. Which reminds me, one more scenario… If I became a believer but my daughter did NOT, then when we died I would be looking down from heaven at her being tortured for all eternity. I would be in Heaven… but would I be happy??? Of course not. I’d say “Screw Heaven, screw you, God! I’ll suffer with my daughter, thank you.” Wouldn’t you do the same, in that scenario?

Anyway, as you know, I take the atheist position. That does NOT mean – ‘I don’t believe in God’ – because that would presume that there IS a God for me NOT to believe in. Atheist means ‘I am not convinced by the argument that there IS a god. Mainly because of the lack of evidence that there is a god, but more damningly,  because of the complete lack of a necessity for one!’

Anyhow, do enjoy your brief sparkling moment.


May 9, 2013

If not for our use of camels, horses, carts, wagons, cars, trains, boats and planes we would eventually no longer be just ONE species!


One species of Human, thanks to Science

One species of Human, thanks to Science

If we had not created our worldwide transportation systems, which have enabled breeding between all the diverse peoples of the world, then we would have continued to evolve differently in our separate environments and would have become discrete sub-species of humans… to eventually become ‘unable’ to successfully breed with people from other populations.

You may have heard about strong, burly mountaineers passing out in the Himalayas, due to lack of oxygen at these altitudes, whilst small native children, or little old native women carrying pack-horse sized bundles, hurry by. These same mountain-dwellers would pass out if they were taken to sea level. Mere thousands of years have begun to create a sub-species of mountain-dwelling human and only travel and interbreeding with low level dwellers can stop it from happening.

Without Science we would eventually have become the Arab species, the Eskimo species, the Sub-Saharan African species, the Chinese species, etc, etc, etc… ‘Diversity’ in humanity would have a totally different meaning.