## Tuesday, March 19, 2019

### How I Rewired My Brain to Become Fluent in Math

this is important.

The key idea is chunking.  Work on it and gain specific fluency over a chunk of the material.  Whatever it is.  I certainly did this with Chess and Go and blew everyone away inside a brief period of time.  I also did it with a lot of math and lost this approach through too much misdirection and not actually identifying it.

You must chunk.

How I Rewired My Brain to Become Fluent in Math

By Barbara Oakley

September 15, 2016

The building blocks of understanding are memorization and repetition.++

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/how-i-rewired-my-brain-to-become-fluent-in-math

I was a wayward kid who grew up on the literary side of life, treating math and science as if they were pustules from the plague. So it’s a little strange how I’ve ended up now—someone who dances daily with triple integrals, Fourier transforms, and that crown jewel of mathematics, Euler’s equation. It’s hard to believe I’ve flipped from a virtually congenital math-phobe to a professor of engineering.

One day, one of my students asked me how I did it—how I changed my brain. I wanted to answer Hell—with lots of difficulty! After all, I’d flunked my way through elementary, middle, and high school math and science. In fact, I didn’t start studying remedial math until I left the Army at age 26. If there were a textbook example of the potential for adult neural plasticity, I’d be Exhibit A.

Learning math and then science as an adult gave me passage into the empowering world of engineering. But these hard-won, adult-age changes in my brain have also given me an insider’s perspective on the neuroplasticity that underlies adult learning. Fortunately, my doctoral training in systems engineering—tying together the big picture of different STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) disciplines—and then my later research and writing focusing on how humans think have helped me make sense of recent advances in neuroscience and cognitive psychology related to learning.

In the years since I received my doctorate, thousands of students have swept through my classrooms—students who have been reared in elementary school and high school to believe that understanding math through active discussion is the talisman of learning. If you can explain what you’ve learned to others, perhaps drawing them a picture, the thinking goes, you must understand it.

Japan has become seen as a much-admired and emulated exemplar of these active, “understanding-centered” teaching methods. But what’s often missing from the discussion is the rest of the story: Japan is also home of the Kumon method of teaching mathematics, which emphasizes memorization, repetition, and rote learning hand-in-hand with developing the child’s mastery over the material. This intense afterschool program, and others like it, is embraced by millions of parents in Japan and around the world who supplement their child’s participatory education with plenty of practice, repetition, and yes, intelligently designed rote learning, to allow them to gain hard-won fluency with the material.

Teachers can inadvertently set their students up for failure as those students blunder in illusions of competence.

In the United States, the emphasis on understanding sometimes seems to have replaced rather than complemented older teaching methods that scientists are—and have been—telling us work with the brain’s natural process to learn complex subjects like math and science.

The latest wave in educational reform in mathematics involves the Common Core—an attempt to set strong, uniform standards across the U.S., although critics are weighing in to say the standards fail by comparison with high-achieving countries. At least superficially, the standards seem to show a sensible perspective. They propose that in mathematics, students should gain equal facility in conceptual understanding, procedural skills and fluency, and application.

The devil, of course, lies in the details of implementation. In the current educational climate, memorization and repetition in the STEM disciplines (as opposed to in the study of language or music), are often seen as demeaning and a waste of time for students and teachers alike. Many teachers have long been taught that conceptual understanding in STEM trumps everything else. And indeed, it’s easier for teachers to induce students to discuss a mathematical subject (which, if done properly, can do much to help promote understanding) than it is for that teacher to tediously grade math homework. What this all means is that, despite the fact that procedural skills and fluency, along with application, are supposed to be given equal emphasis with conceptual understanding, all too often it doesn’t happen. Imparting a conceptual understanding reigns supreme—especially during precious class time.

The problem with focusing relentlessly on understanding is that math and science students can often grasp essentials of an important idea, but this understanding can quickly slip away without consolidation through practice and repetition. Worse, students often believe they understand something when, in fact, they don’t. By championing the importance of understanding, teachers can inadvertently set their students up for failure as those students blunder in illusions of competence. As one (failing) engineering student recently told me: “I just don’t see how I could have done so poorly. I understood it when you taught it in class.” My student may have thought he’d understood it at the time, and perhaps he did, but he’d never practiced using the concept to truly internalize it. He had not developed any kind of procedural fluency or ability to apply what he thought he understood.

There is an interesting connection between learning math and science, and learning a sport. When you learn how to swing a golf club, you perfect that swing from lots of repetition over a period of years. Your body knows what to do from a single thought—one chunk—instead of having to recall all the complex steps involved in hitting a ball.

I learned these things about math and the process of learning not in the K-12 classroom but in the course of my life, as a kid who grew up reading Madeleine L’Engle and Dostoyevsky, who went on to study language at one of the world’s leading language institutes, and then to make the dramatic shift to become a professor of engineering.

As a young woman with a yen for learning language and no money or skills to speak of, I couldn’t afford to go to college (college loans weren’t then in the picture). So I launched directly from high school into the Army. I had loved learning new languages in high school, and the Army seemed to be a place where people could actually get paid for their language study, even as they attended the top-ranked Defense Language Institute—a place that had made language- learning a science. I chose Russian because it was very different from English, but not so difficult that I could study it for a lifetime only to perhaps gain the fluency of a 4-year-old. Besides, the Iron Curtain was mysteriously appealing—could I somehow use my knowledge of Russian to peer behind it?

After leaving the service, I became a translator for the Russians on Soviet trawlers on the Bering Sea. Working for the Russians was fun and engrossing—but it was also a superficially glamorous form of migrant work. You go to sea during fishing season, make a decent salary while getting drunk all the time, then go back to port when the season’s over and hope they’ll rehire you next year. There was pretty much only one other alternative for a Russian language speaker—working for the National Security Agency. (My Army contacts kept pointing me that way, but it wasn’t for me.)

I began to realize that while knowing another language was nice, it was also a skill with limited opportunities and potential. People weren’t pounding down my door looking for my Russian declension abilities. Unless, that is, I was willing to put up with seasickness and sporadic malnutrition out on stinking trawlers in the middle of the Bering Sea. I couldn’t help but reflect back on the West Point-trained engineers I’d worked with in the Army. Their mathematically and scientifically based approach to problem-solving was clearly useful for the real world—far more useful than my youthful misadventures with math had been able to imagine.

So, at age 26, as I was leaving the Army and casting about for fresh opportunities, it occurred to me: If I really wanted to try something new, why not tackle something that could open a whole world of new perspectives for me? Something like engineering? That meant I would be trying to learn another very different language—the language of calculus.

You go to sea during fishing season, make a decent salary while getting drunk all the time, then go back to port when the season’s over.

With my poor understanding of even the simplest math, my post-Army retraining efforts began with not-for-credit remedial algebra and trigonometry. This was way below mathematical ground zero for most college students. Trying to reprogram my brain sometimes seemed like a ridiculous idea—especially when I looked at the fresh young faces of my younger classmates and realized that many of them had already dropped their hard math and science classes—and here I was heading right for them. But in my case, from my experience becoming fluent in Russian as an adult, I suspected—or maybe I just hoped—that there might be aspects to language learning that I might apply to learning in math and science.

What I had done in learning Russian was to emphasize not just understanding of the language, but fluency. Fluency of something whole like a language requires a kind of familiarity that only repeated and varied interaction with the parts can develop. Where my language classmates had often been content to concentrate on simply understanding Russian they heard or read, I instead tried to gain an internalized, deep-rooted fluency with the words and language structure. I wouldn’t just be satisfied to know that понимать meant “to understand.” I’d practice with the verb—putting it through its paces by conjugating it repeatedly with all sorts of tenses, and then moving on to putting it into sentences, and then finally to understanding not only when to use this form of the verb, but also when not to use it. I practiced recalling all these aspects and variations quickly. After all, through practice, you can understand and translate dozens—even thousands— of words in another language. But if you aren’t fluent, when someone throws a bunch of words at you quickly, as with normal speaking (which always sounds horrifically fast when you’re learning a new language), you have no idea what they’re actually saying, even though technically you understand all the component words and structure. And you certainly can’t speak quickly enough yourself for native speakers to find it enjoyable to listen to you.

This approach—which focused on fluency instead of simple understanding—put me at the top of the class. And I didn’t realize it then, but this approach to learning language had given me an intuitive understanding of a fundamental core of learning and the development of expertise—chunking.

Chunking was originally conceptualized in the groundbreaking work of Herbert Simon in his analysis of chess—chunks were envisioned as the varying neural counterparts of different chess patterns. Gradually, neuroscientists came to realize that experts such as chess grand masters are experts because they have stored thousands of chunks of knowledge about their area of expertise in their long-term memory. Chess masters, for example, can recall tens of thousands of different chess patterns. Whatever the discipline, experts can call up to consciousness one or several of these well-knit-together, chunked neural subroutines to analyze and react to a new learning situation. This level of true understanding, and ability to use that understanding in new situations, comes only with the kind of rigor and familiarity that repetition, memorization, and practice can foster.

As studies of chess masters, emergency room physicians, and fighter pilots have shown, in times of critical stress, conscious analysis of a situation is replaced by quick, subconscious processing as these experts rapidly draw on their deeply ingrained repertoire of neural subroutines—chunks. At some point, self-consciously “understanding” why you do what you do just slows you down and interrupts flow, resulting in worse decisions. When I felt intuitively that there might be a connection between learning a new language and learning mathematics, I was right. Day-by-day, sustained practice of Russian fired and wired together my neural circuits, and I gradually began to knit together chunks of Slavic insight that I could call into working memory with ease. By interleaving my learning—in other words, practicing so that I knew not only when to use that word, but when not to use it, or to use a different variant of it—I was actually using the same approaches that expert practitioners use to learn in math and science.

When learning math and engineering as an adult, I began by using the same strategy I’d used to learn language. I’d look at an equation, to take a very simple example, Newton’s second law of f = ma. I practiced feeling what each of the letters meant—f for force was a push, m for mass was a kind of weighty resistance to my push, and a was the exhilarating feeling of acceleration. (The equivalent in Russian was learning to physically sound out the letters of the Cyrillic alphabet.) I memorized the equation so I could carry it around with me in my head and play with it. If m and a were big numbers, what did that do to f when I pushed it through the equation? If f was big and a was small, what did that do to m? How did the units match on each side? Playing with the equation was like conjugating a verb. I was beginning to intuit that the sparse outlines of the equation were like a metaphorical poem, with all sorts of beautiful symbolic representations embedded within it. Although I wouldn’t have put it that way at the time, the truth was that to learn math and science well, I had to slowly, day by day, build solid neural “chunked” subroutines—such as surrounding the simple equation f = ma—that I could easily call to mind from long term memory, much as I’d done with Russian.

Time after time, professors in mathematics and the sciences have told me that building well-ingrained chunks of expertise through practice and repetition was absolutely vital to their success. Understanding doesn’t build fluency; instead, fluency builds understanding. In fact, I believe that true understanding of a complex subject comes only from fluency.

In other words, in science and math education in particular, it’s easy to slip into teaching methods that emphasize understanding and that avoid the sometimes painful repetition and practice that underlie fluency. I learned Russian not just by understanding it—understanding, after all, is facile, and can easily slip away. (What did that word понимать mean?) I learned Russian by gaining fluency through practice, repetition, and rote learning—but rote learning that emphasized the ability to think flexibly and quickly. I learned math and science by applying precisely those same ideas. Language, math, and science, as with almost all areas of human expertise, draw on the same reservoir of brain mechanisms.

As I forayed into a new life, becoming an electrical engineer and, eventually, a professor of engineering, I left the Russian language behind. But 25 years after I’d last raised an inebriated glass on the Soviet trawlers, my family and I decided to take the trans-Siberian railway across Russia. Although I was excited to take the long-dreamed-of trip, I was also worried. I’d barely uttered a word of Russian in all that time. What if I’d lost it all? What had those years of gaining fluency really bought me?

Sure enough, when we first got on the train, I spoke Russian like a 2-year-old. I’d grasp for words, my declensions and conjugations were all wrong, and my formerly near-perfect accent sounded dreadful. But the foundation was there, and day by day, my Russian improved. And even with my rudimentary Russian, I could handle the day-to-day needs of our traveling. Soon, tour guides were coming to me for help translating for the other passengers. When we finally arrived in Moscow, we hopped in a taxi. The driver, I soon discovered, was intent on ripping us off—heading directly the wrong way and trapping us in a logjam of cars, where he expected us ignorant foreigners to quietly acquiesce to an unnecessary extra hour of meter time. Suddenly, Russian words I hadn’t spoken for decades flew from my mouth. I hadn’t even consciously known I knew those words.

Underneath it all, when it was needed, the fluency was there—and it quickly got us out of trouble (and into another taxi). Fluency allows understanding to become embedded, emerging when needed.

As I look today at the shortage of science and math majors in this country, and our current trend in how we teach people to learn, and as I reflect on my own pathway, knowing what I know now about the brain, it occurs to me that we can do better. As parents and teachers, we can use simple, accessible methods for deepening understanding and making it useful and flexible. We can encourage others and ourselves to try new disciplines that we thought were too hard—math, dance, physics, language, chemistry, music—opening new worlds for ourselves and others.

As I discovered, having a basic, deep-seated fluency in math and science—not just an “understanding,” is critical. It opens doors for many of life’s most intriguing jobs. Looking back, I realize that I didn’t have to just blindly follow my initial inclinations and passions. The “fluency” part of me that loved literature and language was also the same part of me that ultimately fell in love with math and science—and transformed and enriched my life.

Barbara Oakley is a professor of engineering at Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, and the author of, most recently, A Mind for Numbers: How to Excel at Math and Science (Even If  You Flunked Algebra). She is also co-instructor, with Terrence Sejnowski, the Francis Crick Professor at the Salk Institute, of one of the world’s largest online courses, “Learning How to Learn,” with Coursera.

### Patrick Moore: Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?

Of course we should.  This item nicely addresses our pertinent geological history over the past several millions of years.

Patrick Moore deftly attacks the scientific illiteracy of our so called radical eco movement types which is better described as eco ignorance.

He is a trained scientist while the movement itself has clearly been hijacked simple activists lacking any scientific credentials.

Patrick Moore: Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?

Date: 15/10/15

Patrick Moore PhD, Global Warming Policy Foundation
2015 Annual GWPF Lecture

Institution of Mechanical Engineers, London 14 London

http://www.thegwpf.org/patrick-moore-should-we-celebrate-carbon-dioxide/
Thank you for the opportunity to set out my views on climate change. As I have stated publicly on many occasions, there is no definitive scientific proof, through real-world observation, that carbon dioxide is responsible for any of the slight warming of the global climate that has occurred during the past 300 years, since the peak of the Little Ice Age. If there were such a proof through testing and replication it would have been written down for all to see.
The contention that human emissions are now the dominant influence on climate is simply a hypothesis, rather than a universally accepted scientific theory. It is therefore correct, indeed verging on compulsory in the scientific tradition, to be skeptical of those who express certainty that “the science is settled” and “the debate is over”.
But there is certainty beyond any doubt that CO2 is the building block for all life on Earth and that without its presence in the global atmosphere at a sufficient concentration this would be a dead planet. Yet today our children and our publics are taught that CO2 is a toxic pollutant that will destroy life and bring civilization to its knees. Tonight I hope to turn this dangerous human-caused propaganda on its head. Tonight I will demonstrate that human emissions of CO2 have already saved life on our planet from a very untimely end. That in the absence of our emitting some of the carbon back into the atmosphere from whence it came in the first place, most or perhaps all life on Earth would begin to die less than two million years from today.
But first a bit of background.
I was born and raised in the tiny floating village of Winter Harbour on the northwest tip of Vancouver Island, in the rainforest by the Pacific. There was no road to my village so for eight years myself and a few other children were taken by boat each day to a one-room schoolhouse in the nearby fishing village. I didn’t realize how lucky I was playing on the tide flats by the salmon-spawning streams in the rainforest, until I was sent off to boarding school in Vancouver where I excelled in science. I did my undergraduate studies at the University of British Columbia, gravitating to the life sciences – biology, biochemistry, genetics, and forestry – the environment and the industry my family has been in for more than 100 years. Then, before the word was known to the general public, I discovered the science of ecology, the science of how all living things are inter-related, and how we are related to them. At the height of the Cold War, the Vietnam War, the threat of all-out nuclear war and the newly emerging consciousness of the environment I was transformed into a radical environmental activist. While doing my PhD in ecology in 1971 I joined a group of activists who had begun to meet in the basement of the Unitarian Church, to plan a protest voyage against US hydrogen bomb testing in Alaska.
We proved that a somewhat rag-tag looking group of activists could sail an old fishing boat across the north Pacific ocean and help change the course of history. We created a focal point for the media to report on public opposition to the tests.
When that H-bomb exploded in November 1971, it was the last hydrogen bomb the United States ever detonated. Even though there were four more tests planned in the series, President Nixon canceled them due to the public opposition we had helped to create. That was the birth of Greenpeace.
Flushed with victory, on our way home from Alaska we were made brothers of the Namgis Nation in their Big House at Alert Bay near my northern Vancouver Island home. For Greenpeace this began the tradition of the Warriors of the Rainbow, after a Cree Indian legend that predicted the coming together of all races and creeds to save the Earth from destruction. We named our ship the Rainbow Warrior and I spent the next fifteen years in the top committee of Greenpeace, on the front lines of the environmental movement as we evolved from that church basement into the world’s largest environmental activist organization.
Next we took on French atmospheric nuclear testing in the South Pacific. They proved a bit more difficult than the US nuclear tests. It took years to eventually drive these tests underground at Mururoa Atoll in French Polynesia. In 1985, under direct orders from President Mitterrand, French commandos bombed and sank the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbour, killing our photographer. Those protests continued until long after I left Greenpeace. It wasn’t until the mid-1990s that nuclear testing finally ended in the South Pacific, and it most other parts of the world as well.
Going back to 1975, Greenpeace set out to save the whales from extinction at the hands of huge factory whaling fleets.  We confronted the Soviet factory whaling fleet in the North Pacific, putting ourselves in front of their harpoons in our little rubber boats to protect the fleeing whales. This was broadcast on television news around the world, bringing the Save the Whales movement into everyone’s living rooms for the first time. After four years of voyages, in 1979 factory whaling was finally banned in the North Pacific, and by 1981 in all the world’s oceans.
In 1978 I sat on a baby seal off the East Coast of Canada to protect it from the hunter’s club. I was arrested and hauled off to jail, the seal was clubbed and skinned, but a photo of me being arrested while sitting on the baby seal appeared in more than 3000 newspapers around the world the next morning. We won the hearts and minds of millions of people who saw the baby seal slaughter as outdated, cruel, and unnecessary.
Why then did I leave Greenpeace after 15 years in the leadership? When Greenpeace began we had a strong humanitarian orientation, to save civilization from destruction by all-out nuclear war. Over the years the “peace” in Greenpeace was gradually lost and my organization, along with much of the environmental movement, drifted into a belief that humans are the enemies of the earth. I believe in a humanitarian environmentalism because we are part of nature, not separate from it. The first principle of ecology is that we are all part of the same ecosystem, as Barbara Ward put it, “One human family on spaceship Earth”, and to preach otherwise teaches that the world would be better off without us. As we shall see later in the presentation there is very good reason to see humans as essential to the survival of life on this planet.
In the mid 1980s I found myself the only director of Greenpeace International with a formal education in science. My fellow directors proposed a campaign to “ban chlorine worldwide”, naming it “The Devil’s Element”. I pointed out that chlorine is one of the elements in the Periodic Table, one of the building blocks of the Universe and the 11th most common element in the Earth’s crust. I argued the fact that chlorine is the most important element for public health and medicine. Adding chlorine to drinking water was the biggest advance in the history of public health and the majority of our synthetic medicines are based on chlorine chemistry. This fell on deaf ears, and for me this was the final straw. I had to leave.
When I left Greenpeace I vowed to develop an environmental policy that was based on science and logic rather than sensationalism, misinformation, anti-humanism and fear. In a classic example, a recent protest led by Greenpeace in the Philippines used the skull and crossbones to associate Golden Rice with death, when in fact Golden Rice has the potential to help save 2 million children from death due to vitamin A deficiency every year.
The Keeling curve of CO2 concentration in the Earth’s atmosphere since 1959 is the supposed smoking gun of catastrophic climate change. We presume CO2 was at 280 ppm at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, before human activity could have caused a significant impact. I accept that most of the rise from 280 to 400 ppm is caused by human CO2 emissions with the possibility that some of it is due to outgassing from warming of the oceans.
NASA tells us that “Carbon Dioxide Controls Earth’s Temperature” in child-like denial of the many other factors involved in climate change. This is reminiscent of NASA’s contention that there might be life on Mars. Decades after it was demonstrated that there was no life on Mars, NASA continues to use it as a hook to raise public funding for more expeditions to the Red Planet. The promulgation of fear of Climate Change now serves the same purpose. As Bob Dylan prophetically pointed out, “Money doesn’t talk, it swears”, even in one of the most admired science organizations in the world.
On the political front the leaders of the G7 plan to “end extreme poverty and hunger” by phasing out 85% of the world’s energy supply including 98% of the energy used to transport people and goods, including food. The Emperors of the world appear clothed in the photo taken at the close of the meeting but it was obviously Photo-shopped. They should be required to stand naked for making such a foolish statement.

The world’s top climate body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, is hopelessly conflicted by its makeup and it mandate. The Panel is composed solely of the World Meteorological Organization, weather forecasters, and the United Nations Environment Program, environmentalists. Both these organizations are focused primarily on short-term timescales, days to maybe a century or two. But the most significant conflict is with the Panel’s mandate from the United Nations. They are required only to focus on “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the atmosphere, and which is in addition to natural climate variability.” So if the IPCC found that climate change was not being affected by human alteration of the atmosphere or that it is not “dangerous” there would be no need for them to exist. They are virtually mandated to find on the side of apocalypse.
Scientific certainty, political pandering, a hopelessly conflicted IPCC, and now the Pope, spiritual leader of the Catholic Church, in a bold move to reinforce the concept of original sin, says the Earth looks like “an immense pile of filth” and we must go back to pre-industrial bliss, or is that squalor?
And then there is the actual immense pile of filth fed to us more than three times daily by the green-media nexus, a seething cauldron of imminent doom, like we are already condemned to Damnation in Hell and there is little chance of Redemption. I fear for the end of the Enlightenment. I fear an intellectual Gulag with Greenpeace as my prison guards.
Let’s begin with our knowledge of the long-term history of the Earth’s temperature and of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere. Our best inference from various proxies back indicate that CO2 was higher for the first 4 billion years of Earth’s history than it has been since the Cambrian Period until today. I will focus on the past 540 million years since modern life forms evolved. It is glaringly obvious that temperature and CO2 are in an inverse correlation at least as often as they are in any semblance of correlation. Two clear examples of reverse correlation occurred 150 million years and 50 million years ago. At the end of the Jurassic temperature fell dramatically while CO2 spiked. During the Eocene Thermal Maximum, temperature was likely higher than any time in the past 550 million years while CO2 had been on a downward track for 100 million years. This evidence alone sufficient to warrant deep speculation of any claimed lock-step causal relationship between CO2 and temperature.
The Devonian Period beginning 400 million years ago marked the culmination of the invasion of life onto the land. Plants evolved to produce lignin, which in combination with cellulose, created wood which in turn for the first time allowed plants to grow tall, in competition with each other for sunlight. As vast forests spread across the land living biomass increased by orders of magnitude, pulling down carbon as CO2 from the atmosphere to make wood. Lignin is very difficult to break down and no decomposer species possessed the enzymes to digest it. Trees died atop one another until they were 100 metres or more in depth. This was the making of the great coal beds around the world as this huge store of sequestered carbon continued to build for 90 million years. Then, fortunately for the future of life, white rot fungi evolved to produce the enzymes that can digest lignin and coincident with that the coal-making era came to an end.
There was no guarantee that fungi or any other decomposer species would develop the complex of enzymes required to digest lignin. If they had not, CO2, which had already been drawn down for the first time in Earth’s history to levels similar to todays, would have continued to decline as trees continued to grow and die. That is until CO2 approached the threshold of 150 ppm below which plants begin first to starve, then stop growing altogether, and then die. Not just woody plants but all plants. This would bring about the extinction of most, if not all, terrestrial species, as animals, insects, and other invertebrates starved for lack of food. And that would be that. The human species would never have existed. This was only the first time that there was a distinct possibility that life would come close to extinguishing itself, due to a shortage of CO2, which is essential for life on Earth.
A well-documented record of global temperature over the past 65 million years shows that we have been in a major cooling period since the Eocene Thermal Maximum 50 million years ago. The Earth was an average 16C warmer then, with most of the increased warmth at the higher latitudes. The entire planet, including the Arctic and Antarctica were ice-free and the land there was covered in forest. The ancestors of every species on Earth today survived through what may have been the warmest time in the history of life. It makes one wonder about dire predictions that even a 2C rise in temperature from pre-industrial times would cause mass extinctions and the destruction of civilization. Glaciers began to form in Antarctica 30 million years ago and in the northern hemisphere 3 million years ago. Today, even in this interglacial period of the Pleistocene Ice Age, we are experiencing one of the coldest climates in the Earth’s history.
Coming closer to the present we have learned from Antarctic ice cores that for the past 800,000 years there have been regular periods of major glaciation followed by interglacial periods in 100,000 year-cycles. These cycles coincide with the Milankovitch cycles that are tied to the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit and its axial tilt. It is highly plausible that these cycles are related to solar intensity and the seasonal distribution of solar heat on the Earth’s surface. There is a strong correlation between temperature and the level of atmospheric CO2 during these successive glaciations, indicating a possible cause-effect relationship between the two. CO2 lags temperature by an average of 800 years during the most recent 400,000-year period, indicating that temperature is the cause, as the cause never comes after the effect.
Looking at the past 50,000 years of temperature and CO2 we can see that changes in CO2 follow changes in temperature. This is as one could expect, as the Milankovitch cycles are far more likely to cause a change in temperature than a change in CO2. And a change in the temperature is far more likely to cause a change in CO2 due to outgassing of CO2 from the oceans during warmer times and an ingassing (absorption) of CO2 during colder periods. Yet climate alarmists persist in insisting that CO2 is causing the change in temperature, despite the illogical nature of that assertion.
It is sobering to consider the magnitude of climate change during the past 20,000 years, since the peak of the last major glaciation. At that time there were 3.3 kilometres of ice on top of what is today the city of Montreal, a city of more than 3 million people. 95% of Canada was covered in a sheet of ice. Even as far south as Chicago there was nearly a kilometre of ice. If the Milankovitch cycle continues to prevail, and there is little reason aside from our CO2 emissions to think otherwise, this will happen gradually again during the next 80,000 years. Will our CO2 emissions stave off another glaciation as James Lovelock has suggested? There doesn’t seem to be much hope of that so far, as despite 1/3 of all our CO2 emissions being released during the past 18 years the UK Met Office contends there has been no statistically significant warming during this century.
At the height of the last glaciation the sea level was about 120 metres lower than it is today. By 7,000 years ago all the low-altitude, mid-latitude glaciers had melted. There is no consensus about the variation in sea level since then although many scientists have concluded that the sea level was higher than today during the Holocene Thermal optimum from 9,000 to 5,000 years ago when the Sahara was green. The sea level may also have been higher than today during the Medieval Warm Period.
Hundred of islands near the Equator in Papua, Indonesia, have been undercut by the sea in a manner that gives credence to the hypothesis that there has been little net change in sea level in the past thousands of years. It takes a long time for so much erosion to occur from gentle wave action in a tropical sea.
Coming back to the relationship between temperature and CO2 in the modern era we can see that temperature has risen at a steady slow rate in Central England since 1700 while human CO2 emissions were not relevant until 1850 and then began an exponential rise after 1950. This is not indicative of a direct causal relationship between the two. After freezing over regularly during the Little Ice Age the River Thames froze for the last time in 1814, as the Earth moved into what might be called the Modern Warm Period.
The IPCC states it is “extremely likely” that human emissions have been the dominant cause of global warming “since the mid-20th century”, that is since 1950. They claim that “extremely” means 95% certain, even though the number 95 was simply plucked from the air like an act of magic. And “likely” is not a scientific word but rather indicative of a judgment, another word for an opinion.
There was a 30-year period of warming from 1910-1940, then a cooling from 1940 to 1970, just as CO2 emissions began to rise exponentially, and then a 30-year warming from 1970-2000 that was very similar in duration and temperature rise to the rise from 1910-1940. One may then ask “what caused the increase in temperature from 1910-1940 if it was not human emissions? And if it was natural factors how do we know that the same natural factors were not responsible for the rise between 1970-2000.” You don’t need to go back millions of years to find the logical fallacy in the IPCC’s certainty that we are the villains in the piece.
Water is by far the most important greenhouse gas, and is the only molecule that is present in the atmosphere in all three states, gas, liquid, and solid. As a gas, water vapour is a greenhouse gas, but as a liquid and solid it is not. As a liquid water forms clouds, which send solar radiation back into space during the day and hold heat in at night. There is no possibility that computer models can predict the net effect of atmospheric water in a higher CO2 atmosphere. Yet warmists postulate that higher CO2 will result in positive feedback from water, thus magnifying the effect of CO2 alone by 2-3 times. Other scientists believe that water may have a neutral or negative feedback on CO2. The observational evidence from the early years of this century tends to reinforce the latter hypothesis.
How many politicians or members of the media or the public are aware of this statement about climate change from the IPCC in 2007?
“we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled nonlinear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”
There is a graph showing that the climate models have grossly exaggerated the rate of warming that confirms the IPCC statement. The only trends the computer models seem able to predict accurately are ones that have already occurred.
Coming to the core of my presentation, CO2 is the currency of life and the most important building block for all life on Earth. All life is carbon-based, including our own. Surely the carbon cycle and its central role in the creation of life should be taught to our children rather than the demonization of CO2, that “carbon” is a “pollutant” that threatens the continuation of life. We know for a fact that CO2 is essential for life and that it must be at a certain level in the atmosphere for the survival of plants, which are the primary food for all the other species alive today. Should we not encourage our citizens, students, teachers, politicians, scientists, and other leaders to celebrate CO2 as the giver of life that it is?
It is a proven fact that plants, including trees and all our food crops, are capable of growing much faster at higher levels of CO2 than present in the atmosphere today. Even at the today’s concentration of 400 ppm plants are relatively starved for nutrition. The optimum level of CO2 for plant growth is about 5 times higher, 2000 ppm, yet the alarmists warn it is already too high. They must be challenged every day by every person who knows the truth in this matter. CO2 is the giver of life and we should celebrate CO2 rather than denigrate it as is the fashion today.
We are witnessing the “Greening of the Earth” as higher levels of CO2, due to human emissions from the use of fossil fuels, promote increased growth of plants around the world. This has been confirmed by scientists with CSIRO in Australia, in Germany, and in North America. Only half of the CO2 we are emitting from the use of fossil fuels is showing up in the atmosphere. The balance is going somewhere else and the best science says most of it is going into an increase in global plant biomass. And what could be wrong with that, as forests and agricultural crops become more productive?
All the CO2 in the atmosphere has been created by outgassing from the Earth’s core during massive volcanic eruptions. This was much more prevalent in the early history of the Earth when the core was hotter than it is today. During the past 150 million years there has not been enough addition of CO2 to the atmosphere to offset the gradual losses due to burial in sediments.
Let’s look at where all the carbon is in the world, and how it is moving around.
Today, at just over 400 ppm, there are 850 billion tons of carbon as CO2 in the atmosphere. By comparison, when modern life-forms evolved over 500 million years ago there was nearly 15,000 billion tons of carbon in the atmosphere, 17 times today’s level. Plants and soils combined contain more than 2,000 billion tons of carbon, more that twice as much as the entire global atmosphere. The oceans contain 38,000 billion tons of carbon, as dissolved CO2, 45 times as much as in the atmosphere. Fossil fuels, which are made from plants that pulled CO2 from the atmosphere account for 5,000 – 10,000 billion tons of carbon, 6 – 12 times as much carbon as is in the atmosphere.
But the truly stunning number is the amount of carbon that has been sequestered from the atmosphere and turned into carbonaceous rocks. 100,000,000 billion tons, that’s one quadrillion tons of carbon, have been turned into stone by marine species that learned to make armour-plating for themselves by combining calcium and carbon into calcium carbonate. Limestone, chalk, and marble are all of life origin and amount to 99.9% of all the carbon ever present in the global atmosphere. The white cliffs of Dover are made of the calcium carbonate skeletons of coccolithophores, tiny marine phytoplankton.
The vast majority of the carbon dioxide that originated in the atmosphere has been sequestered and stored quite permanently in carbonaceous rocks where it cannot be used as food by plants.
Beginning 540 million years ago at the beginning of the Cambrian Period many marine species of invertebrates evolved the ability to control calcification and to build armour plating to protect their soft bodies. Shellfish such as clams and snails, corals, coccolithofores (phytoplankton) and foraminifera (zooplankton) began to combine carbon dioxide with calcium and thus to remove carbon from the life cycle as the shells sank into sediments; 100,000,000 billion tons of carbonaceous sediment. It is ironic that life itself, by devising a protective suit of armour, determined its own eventual demise by continuously removing CO2 from the atmosphere. This is carbon sequestration and storage writ large. These are the carbonaceous sediments that form the shale deposits from which we are fracking gas and oil today. And I add my support to those who say, “OK UK, get fracking”.
The past 150 million years has seen a steady drawing down of CO2 from the atmosphere. There are many components to this but what matters is the net effect, a removal on average of 37,000 tons of carbon from the atmosphere every year for 150 million years. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere was reduced by about 90% during this period. This means that volcanic emissions of CO2 have been outweighed by the loss of carbon to calcium carbonate sediments on a multi-million year basis.
If this trend continues CO2 will inevitably fall to levels that threaten the survival of plants, which require a minimum of 150 ppm to survive. If plants die all the animals, insects, and other invertebrates that depend on plants for their survival will also die.
How long will it be at the present level of CO2 depletion until most or all of life on Earth is threatened with extinction by lack of CO2 in the atmosphere?
During this Pleistocene Ice Age, CO2 tends to reach a minimum level when the successive glaciations reach their peak. During the last glaciation, which peaked 18,000 years ago, CO2 bottomed out at 180 ppm, extremely likely the lowest level CO2 has been in the history of the Earth. This is only 30 ppm above the level that plants begin to die. Paleontological research has demonstrated that even at 180 ppm there was a severe restriction of growth as plants began to starve. With the onset of the warmer interglacial period CO2 rebounded to 280 ppm.  But even today, with human emissions causing CO2 to reach 400 ppm plants are still restricted in their growth rate, which would be much higher if CO2 were at 1000-2000 ppm.
Here is the shocking news. If humans had not begun to unlock some of the carbon stored as fossil fuels, all of which had been in the atmosphere as CO2 before sequestration by plants and animals, life on Earth would have soon been starved of this essential nutrient and would begin to die. Given the present trends of glaciations and interglacial periods this would likely have occurred less than 2 million years from today, a blink in nature’s eye, 0.05% of the 3.5 billion-year history of life.
No other species could have accomplished the task of putting some of the carbon back into the atmosphere that was taken out and locked in the Earth’s crust by plants and animals over the millennia. This is why I honour James Lovelock in my lecture this evening. Jim was for many years of the belief that humans are the one-and-only rogue species on Gaia, destined to cause catastrophic global warming. I enjoy the Gaia hypothesis but I am not religious about it and for me this was too much like original sin. It was as if humans were the only evil species on the Earth.
But James Lovelock has seen the light and realized that humans may be part of Gaia’s plan, and he has good reason to do so. And I honour him because it takes courage to change your mind after investing so much of your reputation on the opposite opinion. Rather than seeing humans as the enemies of Gaia, Lovelock now sees that we may be working with Gaia to “stave of another ice age”, or major glaciation. This is much more plausible than the climate doom-and gloom scenario because our release of CO2 back into the atmosphere has definitely reversed the steady downward slide of this essential food for life, and hopefully may reduce the chance that the climate will slide into another period of major glaciation. We can be certain that higher levels of CO2 will result in increased plant growth and biomass. We really don’t know whether or not higher levels of CO2 will prevent or reduce the eventual slide into another major glaciation. Personally I am not hopeful for this because the long-term history just doesn’t support a strong correlation between CO2 and temperature.
It does boggle the mind in the face of our knowledge that the level of CO2 has been steadily falling that human CO2 emissions are not universally acclaimed as a miracle of salvation. From direct observation we already know that the extreme predictions of CO2’s impact on global temperature are highly unlikely given that about one-third of all our CO2 emissions have been discharged during the past 18 years and there has been no statistically significant warming. And even if there were some additional warming that would surely be preferable to the extermination of all or most species on the planet.
You heard it here. “Human emissions of carbon dioxide have saved life on Earth from inevitable starvation and extinction due to lack of CO2”. To use the analogy of the Atomic Clock, if the Earth were 24 hours old we were at 38 seconds to midnight when we reversed the trend towards the End Times. If that isn’t good news I don’t know what is. You don’t get to stave off Armageddon every day.
I issue a challenge to anyone to provide a compelling argument that counters my analysis of the historical record and the prediction of CO2 starvation based on the 150 million year trend. Ad hominem arguments about “deniers” need not apply. I submit that much of society has been collectively misled into believing that global CO2 and temperature are too high when the opposite is true for both. Does anyone deny that below 150 ppm CO2 that plants will die? Does anyone deny that the Earth has been in a 50 million-year cooling period and that this Pleistocene Ice Age is one of the coldest periods in the history of the planet?
If we assume human emissions have to date added some 200 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere, even if we ceased using fossil fuels today we have already bought another 5 million years for life on earth. But we will not stop using fossil fuels to power our civilization so it is likely that we can forestall plant starvation for lack of CO2 by at least 65 million years. Even when the fossil fuels have become scarce we have the quadrillion tons of carbon in carbonaceous rocks, which we can transform into lime and CO2 for the manufacture of cement. And we already know how to do that with solar energy or nuclear energy. This alone, regardless of fossil fuel consumption, will more than offset the loss of CO2 due to calcium carbonate burial in marine sediments. Without a doubt the human species has made it possible to prolong the survival of life on Earth for more than 100 million years. We are not the enemy of nature but its salvation.
As a postscript I would like to make a few comments about the other side of the alleged dangerous climate change coin, our energy policy, in particular the much maligned fossil fuels; coal, oil, and natural gas.
Depending how it’s tallied, fossil fuels account for between 85-88% of global energy consumption and more than 95% of energy for the transport of people and goods, including our food.
Earlier this year the leaders of the G7 countries agreed that fossil fuels should be phased out by 2100, a most bizarre development to say the least. Of course no intelligent person really believes this will happen but it is a testament to the power of the elites that have converged around the catastrophic human-caused climate change that so many alleged world leaders must participate in the charade. How might we convince them to celebrate CO2 rather than to denigrate it?
A lot of nasty things are said about fossil fuels even though they are largely responsible for our longevity, our prosperity, and our comfortable lifestyles.
Hydrocarbons, the energy components of fossil fuels, are 100% organic, as in organic chemistry. They were produced by solar energy in ancient seas and forests. When they are burned for energy the main products are water and CO2, the two most essential foods for life. And fossil fuels are by far the largest storage battery of direct solar energy on Earth. Nothing else comes close except nuclear fuel, which is also solar in the sense that it was produced in dying stars.
Today, Greenpeace protests Russian and American oil rigs with 3000 HP diesel-powered ships and uses 200 HP outboard motors to board the rigs and hang anti-oil plastic banners made with fossil fuels. Then they issue a media release telling us we must “end our addiction to oil”. I wouldn’t mind so much if Greenpeace rode bicycles to their sailing ships and rowed their little boats into the rigs to hang organic cotton banners. We didn’t have an H-bomb on board the boat that sailed on the first Greenpeace campaign against nuclear testing.
Some of the world’s oil comes from my native country in the Canadian oil sands of northern Alberta. I had never worked with fossil fuel interests until I became incensed with the lies being spread about my country’s oil production in the capitals of our allies around the world. I visited the oil sands operations to find out for myself what was happening there.
It is true it’s not a pretty sight when the land is stripped bare to get at the sand so the oil can be removed from it. Canada is actually cleaning up the biggest natural oil spill in history, and making a profit from it. The oil was brought to the surface when the Rocky Mountains were thrust up by the colliding Pacific Plate. When the sand is returned back to the land 99% of the so-called “toxic oil” has been removed from it.
Anti-oil activists say the oil-sands operations are destroying the boreal forest of Canada. Canada’s boreal forest accounts for 10% of all the world’s forests and the oil-sands area is like a pimple on an elephant by comparison. By law, every square inch of land disturbed by oil-sands extraction must be returned to native boreal forest. When will cities like London, Brussels, and New York that have laid waste to the natural environment be returned to their native ecosystems?
The art and science of ecological restoration, or reclamation as it is called in the mining industry, is a well-established practice. The land is re-contoured, the original soil is put back, and native species of plants and trees are established. It is possible, by creating depressions where the land was flat, to increase biodiversity by making ponds and lakes where wetland plants, insects, and waterfowl can become established in the reclaimed landscape.
The tailings ponds where the cleaned sand is returned look ugly for a few years but are eventually reclaimed into grasslands. The Fort McKay First Nation is under contract to manage a herd of bison on a reclaimed tailings pond. Every tailings pond will be reclaimed in a similar manner when operations have been completed.
As an ecologist and environmentalist for more than 45 years this is good enough for me. The land is disturbed for a blink of an eye in geological time and is then returned to a sustainable boreal forest ecosystem with cleaner sand. And as a bonus we get the fuel to power our weed-eaters, scooters, motorcycles, cars, trucks, buses, trains, and aircraft.
To conclude, carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is the stuff of life, the staff of life, the currency of life, indeed the backbone of life on Earth.
I am honoured to have been chosen to deliver your annual lecture.
Thank you for listening to me this evening.

### Democrats Vote To Give Illegal Immigrants The Right To Vote

.

This is so obviously absurd, that it begs belief. Surely it is all been espoused by opportunists who understand that it has zero chance of going forward. Let us also pass a law to disenfranchise women.  It should be possible to scare up the votes someday?.

Perhaps we need to return back to marauding tribes hauling all their dependents along.  The counter to all this is a renewal of full colonial control and forced modernization that quells the need of migration, and only because the locals are failing to do it.

British rule was far from perfect, but still the best of a bad lot and they seeded modernity everywhere they were.  Today we have some successor states that too often accept despotism that suppresses modernity.  This inevitably puts people on the move toward our southern borders..

Democrats Vote To Give Illegal Immigrants The Right To Vote

by Tyler Durden

Fri, 03/08/2019 - 23:15

Update: House Democrats voted Friday to defend localities that allow illegal immigrants to vote in their elections, turning back a GOP attempt to discourage the practice. As The Washington Times reports, the vote marks a stunning reversal from just six months ago, when the chamber - then under GOP control - voted to decry illegal immigrant voting.
“We are prepared to open up the political process and let all of the people come in,” Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat and hero of the civil rights movement, told colleagues as he led opposition to the GOP measure.
Texas Republican. Rep. Dan Crenshaw raged:
“It sounds like I’m making it up. What kind of government would cancel the vote of its own citizens, and replace it with noncitizens?”
*  *  *
As we detailed earlier, using carefully chosen words in what appears an attempt to hide the truth, House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi admitted this week  at a news conference on voting rights with Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, that Democrats want illegal immigrants to be able to come into the nation freely, across their open borders, in order to rig elections for the Democrats.

As CNSnews.com reports, Speaker Pelosi spoke on the importance of passing H.R. 1, the “For the People Act of 2019,” “to lay the foundation to pass the Voting Rights Act, strengthened after the actions of the Supreme Court, which significantly weakened it,” she said.

Specifically, Pelosi said immigrants “make America more American,” and we should not be “suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”
“So, when we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been – our families,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said.
“And that, unless you're blessed to be Native American – which is a blessing in itself that we respect – but that constant reinvigoration of hope, determination, optimism, courage, to make the future better for the next generation, those are American traits. And these newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system. And that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”
She then quoted former President Reagan out of context to support her argument:
“In the campaign, the candidate that I, the president that I quoted the most was Ronald Reagan. Does that surprise you? Maybe. But Ronald Reagan said this: ‘This is the last speech I will make as President of the United States. And I have a message I want to communicate to the country I love.’ He went on to talk about the Statue of Liberty and what it means to the world – that beacon of hope, what it means to people who have come here and seen that statue welcoming them – he said, our ancestors, our grandparents, our parents.”
As President Trump's son Donald Jr noted: "And there it is folks. What we all knew but no one would say. It’s only about votes for Democrats. "

Additionally, we note that friend-of-AOC, Rep. Ayanna Pressley may have outdone Pelosi with her latest stunt, an attempt to lower the federal voting age to 16.

“I am honored & excited to be introducing my very 1st amendment on the House floor, an amendment to #HR1, the #ForthePeopleAct. My amendment will lower the voting age from 18 to 16, allowing our youth to have a seat at the table of democracy. #16toVote,” she said.

### First Contact 1947 IS-BE Chpt 7 lesson in ancient history

This history is unattached to our local history, at least this section.  It is also unattached to the sweep of our own Galactic history and our long history for our planet.  That is unfortunate as no discussion takes place regarding solar creation itself and planet making.  It really kicks in with the advent of the Domain into our Galaxy a few million years ago.

A very good essay on time and space but no allusion to time manipulation.  I will assume that was deliberate.  There is plenty here anyway.

Yet Domain history  starts a mere 8200 years ago and includes heavy conflict with the Old Empire.

Why either is telling truth escapes me when evaluating two separate alien viewpoints.  In fact the reported time frames is convenient in order to avoid answering a lot of questions

Chapter Seven

A Lesson In Ancient History

(MATILDA O'DONNELL MACELROY PERSONAL NOTE)

"My instruction with Airl continued through the night until dawn of the next morning. I must say, that I was fascinated, skeptical, shocked, alarmed, dismayed and disgruntled by the "lesson" I was getting from Airl.

I could never have imagined  any of what she was telling me -- not even in my wildest dreams and nightmares!

The next afternoon, after I had slept, showered and eaten, I was debriefed about my interview session the previous evening by members of the gallery who recorded my  account of what Airl told me. There was a stenographer present for this session, as  usual, to whom I debriefed after each interview, and there were also 6 or 7 men who  asked for clarification of my statements. As always, there was constant pressure  applied to me to use my influence with Airl to persuade her to answer specific questions prompted by members of the gallery. I did my best to reassure everyone  that I would give my very best efforts to do so.

Nevertheless, only three things happened every day thereafter:

1) Airl resolutely refused to answer any questions that she sensed had been posed by or suggested to me by the gallery.

2) Airl continued to "instruct" me in subject matter of her own choice.

3) Every evening after my interview with, or instruction from Airl, she would give me a new list of subject matter about which she wanted more information. Each evening I presented this list to the gallery. The next day Airl received a large stack of books, magazines, articles, and so forth. She would study all of these during the night while I slept. This pattern repeated every day during the remainder of the time I spent with her.

The subject matter of my next interview, or lesson, from Airl continued with a brief history of Earth, our solar system and nearby space, from the perspective of The Domain."

[you can ask for little more either that you might comprehend - arclein ]

(OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW)
TOP SECRET

Official Transcript of the U.S. Army Air Force
Roswell Army Air Field, 509th Bomb Group

SUBJECT: ALIEN INTERVIEW, 25. 7. 1947, 1st Session

"Before you can understand the subject of history, you must first understand the subject of time. Time is simply an arbitrary measurement of the motion of objects through space.

Space is not linear. Space is determined by the point of view of an IS-BE when viewing a object. The distance between an IS-BE and the object being viewed is called "space".

Objects, or energy masses, in space do not necessarily move in a linear fashion. In this universe, objects tend to move randomly or in a curving or cyclical pattern, or as determined by agreed upon rules.

History is not only a linear record of events, as many authors of Earth history books imply, because it is not a string that can be stretched out and marked like a measuring tool. History is a subjective observation of the movement of objects through space, recorded from the point of view of a survivor, rather than of those who succumbed. Events occur interactively and concurrently, just as the biological body has a heart that pumps blood, while the lungs provide oxygen to the cells, which reproduce, using energy from the sun and chemicals from plants, at the same time as the liver strains toxic wastes from the blood, and eliminates them through the bladder and the bowels.

All of these interactions are concurrent and simultaneous. Although time runs consecutively, events do not happen in an independent, linear stream. In order to view and understand the history or reality of the past, one must view all events as part of an interactive whole. Time can also be sensed as a
vibration which is uniform throughout the entire physical universe.

Airl explained that IS-BEs have been around since before the beginning of the universe. The reason they are called "immortal", is because a "spirit" is not born and cannot die, but exists in a personally postulated perception of "is - will be". She was careful to explain that every spirit is not the same. Each is completely unique in identity, power, awareness and ability.

The difference between an IS-BE like Airl and most of the IS-BEs inhabiting bodies on Earth, is that Airl can enter and depart from her "doll" at will. She can perceive at selective depths through matter. Airl and other officers of The Domain can communicate telepathically. Since an IS-BE is not a physical universe entity it has no location in space or time.

An IS-BE is literally, "immaterial". They can span great distances of space instantly.

They can experience sensations, more intensely than a biological body, without the use of physical sensory mechanisms. An IS-BE can exclude pain from their perception. Airl can also remember her "identity", so to speak, all the way back into the dim mists of time, for trillions of years!

She says that the existing collection of suns in this immediate vicinity of the universe have been burning for the last 200 trillion years. The age of the physical universe is nearly infinitely old, but probably at least four quadrillion 62 (Footnote) years since its earliest beginnings.

Time is a difficult factor to measure as it depends on the subjective memory of IS-BEs and there has been no uniform record of events throughout the physical universe since it began. As on Earth, there are many different time measurement systems, defined by various cultures, which use cycles of motion, and points ofn origin to establish age and duration. 63 (Footnote)

The physical universe itself is formed from the convergence and amalgamation of many other individual universes 64 (Footnote), each one of which were created by an IS-BE or group of IS-BEs. The collision of these illusory universes commingled and coalesced and were solidified to form a mutually created universe. Because it is agreed that energy and forms can be created, but not destroyed, 65 (Footnote) this creative process has continued to form an ever-expanding universe of nearly infinite physical proportions.

Before the formation of the physical universe there was a vast period during which universes were not solid, but wholly illusionary. You might say that the universe was a universe of magical illusions which were made to appear and vanish at the will of the magician. In every case, the "magician" was one or more IS-BEs. Many ISBEs on Earth can still recall vague images from that period. Tales of magic, sorcery and enchantment, fairy tales and mythology speak of such things, 66 (Footnote) although in very crude terms.

[What this is saying is that second tier matter dominated and that consciousness arose within it.  Third tier matter fully existed but had not been acted on in order to produce what we understand as life. - arclein ]

Each IS-BE entered into the physical universe when they  lost their own, "home" universe. That is, when an ISBE's "home" universe was overwhelmed by the physical universe, or when the IS-BE joined with other IS-BEs to create or conquer the physical universe.

On Earth, the ability to determine when an IS-BE entered the physical universe is difficult for two reasons:

1) the memory of IS-BEs on Earth have been erased, and

2) IS-BEs arrival or invasion into the physical universe took place at different times, some 60 trillion years ago, and others only 3 trillion. Every once in a short while, a few million years, an area or planet will be taken over by another group of IS-BEs entering into the area.

Sometimes they will capture other IS-BEs as slaves. 67 (Footnote) They will be forced to inhabit bodies to perform menial, or manual work -- especially mining mineral ores on heavy-gravity planets, such as Earth.

[ we are describing a primitive mindset even as spirit is created that is persuasive.  The formation of an IS - BE appears to coincide with the creation of an unique universe. ( Star or planet?) - arclein]

[ Now throw in the idea of aspect and we have millions of copies to operate life on Earth say.   Does life emerge or become born during the ignition of a star or planet?  Does the memory of how  exist in the flux of photon ribbons? ]

Airl says that she has been a member of The Domain Expeditionary Force for more than 625 million years, when she became a pilot for a biological survey mission which included occasional visits to Earth. She can remember her entire career there, and for a very long time before that.

She told me that Earth scientists do not have an  accurate measuring system to gauge the age of matter.

They assume that because certain types of materials seem to deteriorate rather quickly, such as organic or carbon-based matter, that there is a deterioration of matter. It is not accurate to measure the age of stone, based on the measurement of the age of wood or bone.

This is a fundamental error. Factually, matter does not deteriorate. It cannot be destroyed. Matter may be altered in form, but it is never truly destroyed.

The Domain has conducted a periodic survey of the galaxies in this sector of the universe since it developed space travel technologies about 80 trillion years ago. A review of changes in the complexion of Earth reveal that mountain ranges rise and fall, continents change location, the poles of the planet shift, ice caps come and go, oceans appear and disappear, rivers, valleys and canyons change. In all cases, the matter is the same. It is always the same sand. Every form and substance is made of the same basic material, which never deteriorates.

(MATILDA O'DONNELL MACELROY PERSONAL NOTE)

("I cannot even begin to imagine how advanced a civilization may have become, technically, and mentally, after trillions of years! Just think of how advanced our own country has become, compared to only 150 years. Only a few generations ago transportation was on foot, horseback or boat, reading was done by candle light, heating and cooking were done over a fireplace, and there wasn't any indoor plumbing!")

(OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW)

"Airl described the abilities of an IS-BE officer of The Domain to me, and she demonstrated one to me when she contacted -- telepathically -- a communications officer of The Domain who is stationed in the asteroid belt. 68 (Footnote)

The asteroid belt is composed of thousands of broken up pieces of a planet that once existed between Mars and Jupiter. It serves as a good low-gravity jumping off point for incoming space craft traveling toward the center of our galaxy.

She requested that this officer consult information stored in the "files" of The Domain, concerning the history of Earth. She asked the communications officer to "feed" this information to Airl. The communications officer immediately complied with the request. Based on the information stored in the files of The Domain, Airl was able to give me a brief overview or "history lesson". This is what Airl told me that The Domain had observed about the history of Earth:

She told me that The Domain Expeditionary Force first entered into the Milky Way galaxy very recently -- only about 10,000 years ago. Their first action was to conquer the home planets of the "Old Empire" (this is not the official name, but a nick-name given to the conquered civilization by The Domain Forces) that served as the seat of central government for this galaxy, and other adjoining regions of space. These planets are located in the stars systems in the tail of the Big Dipper constellation. 69 (Footnote) She did not mention which stars, exactly.

About 1,500 years later The Domain began the installation bases for their own forces along the path of invasion which leads toward the center of this galaxy and beyond. About 8,200 years ago The Domain forces set up a base on Earth in the Himalaya Mountains near the border of modern Pakistan and Afghanistan. This was a base for a battalion of The Domain Expeditionary Force, which included about 3,000 members.

They set up a base under or inside the top of a mountain. The mountain top was drilled into and made hollow to create an area large enough to house the ships and personnel of that force. An electronic illusion of the mountain top was then created to hide the base by projecting a false image from inside the mountain against a "force screen". The ships could then enter and exit through the force screen, yet remain unseen by homo sapiens.

Shortly after they settled there the base was surprised by an attack from a remnant of the military forces of the "Old Empire". Unbeknownst to The Domain, a hidden, underground base on Mars, operated by the "Old Empire", had existed for a very long time. The Domain base was wiped out by a military attack from the Mars base and the IS-BEs of The Domain Expeditionary Force were captured.

You can imagine that The Domain was very upset about losing such a large force of officers and crew, so they sent other crews to Earth to look for them. Those crews were also attacked. The captured IS-BEs from The Domain Forces were handled in the same fashion as all other ISBEs who have been sent to Earth. They were each given amnesia, had their memories replaced with false pictures and hypnotic commands and sent to Earth to inhabit biological bodies. They are still a part of the human population today.

After a very persistent and extensive investigation into the loss of their crews, The Domain discovered that "Old Empire" has been operating a very extensive, and very carefully hidden, base of operations in this part of the galaxy for millions of years. No one knows exactly how long. Eventually, the space craft of the "Old Empire"  forces and The Domain engaged each other in open combat  in the space of the solar system.

According to Airl, there was a running battle between the "Old Empire" forces and The Domain until about 1235 AD, when The Domain forces finally destroyed the last of the space craft of the "Old Empire" force in this area.

The Domain Expeditionary Force lost many of its own ships in this area during that time also.

About 1,000 years later the "Old Empire" base was discovered by accident in the spring of 1914 AD. The discovery was made when the body of the Archduke of Austria, 70 (Footnote) was "taken over" by an officer of The Domain Expeditionary Force. This officer, who was stationed in the asteroid belt, was sent to Earth on a routine mission to gather reconnaissance.

The purpose of this "take over" was to use the body as a "disguise" through which to infiltrate human society in order to gather information about current events on Earth. The officer, as an IS-BE, having greater power than the being inhabiting the body of the Archduke, simply "pushed" the being out and took over control of the body.

However, this officer did not realize how much the Hapsburgs were hated by feuding factions in the country, so he was caught off guard when the body of the Archduke was assassinated by a Bosnian student. The officer, or IS-BE, was suddenly "knocked out" of the body when it was shot by the assassin. Disoriented, the IS-BE inadvertently penetrated one of the "amnesia force screens" and was captured.

Eventually The Domain discovered that a wide area of space is monitored by an "electronic force field" 71 (Footnote) which controls all of the IS-BEs in this end of the galaxy, including Earth. The electronic force screen is designed to detect IS-BEs and prevent them from leaving the area.

If any IS-BE attempts to penetrate the force screen, it "captures" them in a kind of "electronic net". The result is that the captured IS-BE is subjected to a very severe "brainwashing" treatment which erases the memory of the IS-BE. This process uses a tremendous electrical shock, just like Earth psychiatrists use "electric shock therapy" to erase the memory and personality of a "patient" and to make them more "cooperative". 72 (Footnote)

On Earth this "therapy" uses only a few hundred volts of electricity. However, the electrical voltage 73 (Footnote) used by the "Old Empire" operation against IS-BEs is on the order of magnitude of billions of volts! This tremendous shock completely wipes out all the memory of the IS-BE. The memory erasure is not just for one life or one body. It wipes out the all of the accumulated experiences of a nearly infinite past, as well as the identity of the IS-BE!

The shock is intended to make it impossible for the ISBE to remember who they are, where they came from, their knowledge or skills, their memory of the past, and ability to function as a spiritual entity. They are overwhelmed into becoming a mindless, robotic nonentity.

After the shock a series of post hypnotic suggestions 74 (Footnote) are used to install false memories, and a false time orientation in each IS-BE. This includes the command to "return" to the base after the body dies, so that the same kind of shock and hypnosis can be done again, and again, again -- forever. The hypnotic command also tells the "patient" to forget to remember.

What The Domain learned from the experience of this officer is that the "Old Empire" has been using Earth as a "prison planet" for a very long time -- exactly how long is unknown -- perhaps millions of years.

So, when the body of the IS-BE dies they depart from the body. They are detected by the "force screen", they are captured and "ordered" by hypnotic command to "return to the light". The idea of "heaven" and the "afterlife" are part of the hypnotic suggestion -- a part of the treachery that makes the whole mechanism work.

After the IS-BE has been shocked and hypnotized to erase the memory of the life just lived, the IS-BE is immediately "commanded", hypnotically, to "report" back to Earth, as though they were on a secret mission, to inhabit a new body. Each IS-BE is told that they have a special purpose for being on Earth. But, of course there is no purpose for being in a prison -- at least not for the prisoner.

Any undesirable IS-BEs who are sentenced to Earth were classified as "untouchable" 75 (Footnote) by the "Old Empire".

This included anyone that the "Old Empire" judged to be criminals who are too vicious to be reformed or subdued, as well as other criminals such as sexual perverts, or beings unwilling to do any productive work.

An "untouchable" classification of IS-BEs also includes a wide variety of "political prisoners" 76 (Footnote). This includes IS-BEs who are considered to be noncompliant "free thinkers" or "revolutionaries" who make trouble for the governments of the various planets of the "Old Empire". Of course, anyone with a previous military record against the "Old Empire" is also shipped off to Earth.

A list of "untouchables" include artists, painters, singers, musicians, writers, actors, and performers of every kind. For this reason Earth has more artists per capita than any other planet in the "Old Empire".

"Untouchables" also include intellectuals, inventors and geniuses in almost every field. Since everything the "Old Empire" considers valuable has long since been invented or created over the last few trillion years, they have no further use for such beings. This includes skilled managers also, which are not needed in a society of obedient, robotic citizens.

Anyone who is not willing or able to submit to mindless economic, political and religious servitude as a taxpaying worker in the class system of the "Old Empire" are "untouchable" and sentenced to receive memory wipeout and permanent imprisonment on Earth.

The net result is that an IS-BE is unable to escape because they can't remember who they are, where they came from, where they are. They have been hypnotized to think they are someone, something, sometime, and somewhere other than were they really are.

The Domain officer who was "assassinated" while in the body of Archduke of Austria was, likewise, captured by the "Old Empire" force. Because this particular officer was a high powered IS-BE, compared to most, he was taken away to a secret "Old Empire" base under the surface of the planet Mars. They put him into a special electronic prison cell and held him there.

Fortunately, this Domain officer was able to escape from the underground base after 27 years in captivity. When he escaped from the "Old Empire" base, he returned immediately to his own base in the asteroid belt. His commanding officer ordered that a battle cruiser be dispatched 77 (Footnote) to the coordinates of the base, provided by this officer, and to destroy that base completely. This "Old Empire" base was located a few hundred miles north of the equator on Mars in the Cydonia region. 78 (Footnote)

Although the military base of the "Old Empire" was  destroyed, unfortunately, much of the vast machinery of the IS-BE force screens, the electroshock / amnesia / hypnosis machinery continues to function in other undiscovered locations right up to the present moment.

The main base or control center for this "mind control prison" 79 (Footnote) operation has never been found. So, the influences of this base, or bases, are still in effect.

The Domain has observed that since the "Old Empire" space forces were destroyed there is no one left to actively prevent other planetary systems from bringing their own "untouchable" IS-BEs to Earth from all over this galaxy, and from other galaxies nearby. Therefore, Earth has become a universal dumping ground for this entire region of space.

This, in part, explains the very unusual mix of races, cultures, languages, moral codes, religious and political influences among the IS-BE population on Earth. The number and variety of heterogeneous societies on Earth are extremely unusual on a normal planet. Most "Sun Type 12, Class 7" planets are inhabited by only one humanoid body type or race, if any.

In addition, most of the ancient civilizations of Earth, and many of the events of Earth have been heavily influenced by the hidden, hypnotic operation of the "Old Empire" base. So far, no one has figured out exactly where and how this operation is run, or by whom because it is so heavily protected by screens and traps.

Furthermore, there has been no operation undertaken to seek out, discover and destroy the vast and ancient network of electronics machinery that create the IS-BE force screens at this end of the galaxy. Until this has been done, we are not able to prevent or interrupt the electric shock operation, hypnosis and remote thought control 80 (Footnote) of the "Old Empire" prison planet.

Of course all of the crew members of The Domain Expeditionary Force now remain aware of this phenomena at all times while operating in this solar system space so as to prevent detection and the capture by "Old Empire" traps."