My reading lately has me wondering how in earlier years I could be immunized from absorbing the intelligence I was exposed to. A friend in college, Chuck, was deeply into the work of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955), a Jesuit priest. Consequently, I know the name. Nothing more. Just the name.
I did not know, or even want to know more about the man. My college friend was, by use of reason, trying to come to grips with the problem of abortion. I wanted nothing of that, as I knew without thinking that abortion was wrong, a horrid evil.
I am reading again of Immanuel Velikovsky, this time of his public interactions with Carl Sagan, widely regarded as a go-to source in the field of astrophysics. I am reading a book by Charles Ginenthal, who apparently had low regard for Sagan. I have read much of Sagan’s popular work, and would not call him a fraud. However, he did not put actions behind his words, and that is Ginenthal’s complaint, as will be apparent below.
Ginenthal published Carl Sagan & Immanuel Velikovsky in 1995, and so knew of the transparency of the Sagan figure long before I even knew of Velikovsky. I take heart that Sagan, who died in 1996, must have known of Ginenthal’s work, published a year earlier. But of course, being Sagan, he would have smugly set it aside. (Ginenthal has also written Stephen J. Gould and Immanuel Velikovsky and Newton, Einstein and Velikovsky. Hallelujah! I’ve been dying for fresh reading material.)
This will be a shorter one compared to the Peculiar Plot series. I can understand people lack the attention span to read long pieces, but at the same time do not want to fall for that “Twitter 140 character soundbite” culture where 6 second attention span seekers with the patience of a ferret on crystal meth seem to rule, up to even people who are accustomed to read long pieces or listen to hours of talks, like people in their 50s and above, half or a full generation older than me.
The idea I want to share is the self fulshilling prophecy. It is one of my many neologisms; I like to invent new words to use because the language given to us is scripted to a large extent. By using our own ability to form language, we are humans after all, we can pinpoint what we mean much better without being compromised by agenda pushers.
We all have people who put out content that we like and we have them whom we don’t like. And our opinions about them or their content can shift over time. It also can lead to people joining hands and people walking away as they so please. This year we have already seen a lot of these schisms; the John Adams saga, the Miles Mathis drama and the Faykeopedia failure, to name just three obvious ones.
As probably a lot of readers here I also like listening to AAMorris’s podcasts “A Proper Gander at Propaganda”, that started on March 5th this year.
I want to focus on two recent episodes of that series, number 221 and the one of today, 225.
After the Ludicrous Lusitania, I think it is time to look at yet another Peculiar Plot of the early 20th century, the contemporaneous incredible, miraculous and chilling voyage of Ernest Shackleton to the South Pole. And beyond. Or rather not.
This plot is published at Wikipedia in not one, not two, but seven (!) Featured Articles (FA). Mán, they really want this peculiar plot to be carved into the minds of the people. And so it deserves a decent break-down, over multiple posts.
Allegedly, British polar explorer Ernest Shackleton (FA #1), sorry Sir Ernest Shackleton, experienced from earlier (supposed?) exploration, set sail for an extreme expedition; with a group of hardened men his plan was to cross Antarctica and be picked up by another crew on the other side and shipped back to civilization.
I’ve been traveling these last couple of weeks, maybe running from Father Time? I’ve experienced something so unusual that it needs to be memorialized … I’ve had nothing to write about! During this period (which included my 68th birthday) my lovely wife gave me a wonderful gift: Three books, two by Immanuel Velikovsky and one by his daughter. I’ve been engrossed.
Of the four I have written about these past two weeks, this one stands out as a true icon buster. He has disassembled fake reality before our eyes in almost every imaginable area of life, from science to fake events to art.
In my interview with Faye, she seemed deeply suspicious that Mr. Mathis is a front for a committee, and I could not dissuade her. But stop and think: If it is so, then the overlords are working against themselves, one faction exposing perhaps some truth while another (larger one) works to keep us in the dark. Just as a thought experiment, imagine that to be the case. Would it not then point to a split, factions working against each other? And if Mr. Mathis is right in any, most, or all of his writings, then he would he not represent a faction of light? (It could be that all factions are putting out misdirection … if so, I have to resign. It is too much.)