Dear Rich Norman,

Thanks for question share. Well, first it is no secret that the huge pharmaceutical companies could make the hugest profit keeping the people ill i.e sell useless drugs with side effects. So there is much suppressed science!

In other topics there are fewer interests to 'manipulate' anything. However if one does not follow the mainstream science, he or she often looses attention (own experience...). Due to this reason it is very hard to establish new insights. Groups of 'off-mainstream-scientists' are often too small and underfinanced and therefore they publish only rarely. Even Gerard 't Hooft (a nobel laureat) mentions problems to get attention for his Book “The Cellular Automaton Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics" - See: https://www.researchgate.net/project/1-Wrapping-up-the-proofs-for-my-book-on-The-Cellular-Automaton-Interpretation-of-Quantum-Mechanics-2-The-pure-state-theory-for-black-holes-using-antipodal-identification

I started reading his book (following the link on project page) and, until now, I consider it as the ONLY meaningful interpretation of quantum mechanics.

All in all I hope that the situation is not a dark age but the beginning of a revolution: My own work is only possible if I think in networks, combining many topics. (See for Example my project 'New World', https://www.researchgate.net/project/New-World which I started some weeks ago). I hope many others will follow and start an inspiring discussion. The way of thinking must change; one cannot have success, of one only see his single topic.

Best Regards

Andreas

Dear Rich,

Your question is wonderful! I'll try to answer it in stages. Specially I will not read your text, at least at this stage, to try to cover the wider problem. So, let's begin. Science is done by people. We know very well what they were for the people. Where are they now? Where Galilei, Newton, Planck, Einstein and Bohr? Where Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Dirac and Feynman? They are definitely absent! But a lot of fuss around Hadron Collider. For a start it will be enough. I am going to sleep.

Yours

Vladimir

Hello Rich,

  I think many share your concerns regarding an apparent paralysis in sciences, especially, in medicine and the medical field, where the tyranny of moneyed-interest reigns. 

  With that said, I would like to state that it has never been different! Many often think of the past as some sort of "glory days", where empathy, altruism and humanism are supposedly found in greater quantity than they are today. The scientists of old struggled as much, if not more, than today, at least, equally so; because, all forms of iniquity that exist now, existed in days past, moreover, people have neither grown kinder in nature nor more callous than before our present time, yet knowledge and access to knowledge has grown in recent times. One should be grateful for that...at least...

   Although, despite the world remaining in a perpetual state of corruption, it is still frustrating, hence, it is imperative that people redouble their efforts. The world has always been jealous of creators and sought to kill them or at least swipe away from them their pride. In some sense, apathy has its rewards and validity, for in a hostile world, in such an unworthy world, should creators or the artistic ever spend the energy? 

   Such is life. 

P.S. I see you have some reservations over the Big Bang theory and Inflation...well, rightly so, but do realize that science is hierarchical and the Pharisees do not appreciate people from a lower class showing them up to be the morons they are, hence, do not be surprised if you get raped, beaten and murdered...so goes the script.

P.S.S. Man has always fumbled in the dark, hence, the Dark Age never lifted its oppressive veil from mankind's eye. On the other hand, man should be appreciative of the little bit of knowledge he's been able to wrestle from the clutches of Darkness. I will admit one thing: Galileo and Newton, their contemporaries, fought immensely against the establishment, which sought their death, and did cause an Age of Reason to arise; nonetheless, man is neither reasonable nor intelligent and simply because there was a glimmer of light, don't think you're entitled to the entire Sun. 

Andreas Mampel thank you for the thoughtful reply.  I will investigate the links tomorrow.    Luisiana Cundin your humor and cynicism are utterly priceless, and factual as well.  Yes I feel we are in complete agreement:   

Even so far back as the late 1800's the view into history was millennial, and the sight clear to interpret.   From Bechamp's seminal work, The Blood, we read:

"An historian of the founders of modern astronomy recently related that the philosopher Cleanthus three millennia before our era, wished to prosecute Aristarchus for blasphemy, for having believed that the earth moved, and having dared to say that the sun was the immovable centre of the universe. Two thousand years later, human reason having remained stationary, the wish of Cleanthus was realized.  Galileo was accused of blasphemy and impiety for having like Copernicus and following Aristarchus, maintained the same truth; a tribunal condemned his writings and forced him to a recantation which his conscience denied."

". . . I, Galileo, in the seventieth year of my age, on my knees before your Eminences, having before my eyes the holy gospels, which I touch with my own hands, I abjure, I curse, I detest, the error and heresy of the movement of the earth."

 I will add the neutron synthesis paper to the original question.  It is very impressive.  Theory will need to be rewritten should it be confirmed.  I am quite sure it must be valid.  

Theoretical adjustments implied if the neutron experiments work.  From the paper:

Apparent confirmation of Don Borghi’s experiment on the laboratory synthesis of neutrons from protons and electrons

Ruggero Maria Santilli

http://www.i-b-r.org,

http://www.neutronstructure.org

1) The neutron synthesis requires at least 0.78 MeV over the rest energies of the protons and the electron, in which case the Schrodinger’s equation would require a ”positive” binding energy (an anathema for quantum mechanics), resulting in unphysical solutions;

2) Quantum mechanics does not allow for a bound state of two particles with spin 1/2, the proton and the electron, to yield the spin 1/2 needed for the neutron;

3) Quantum mechanics does not allow the electron to be bound inside the proton for the 15 m lifetime of an isolated neutron;

4) Assuming that the above anomalies are somehow resolved, quantum mechanics does not allow a representation of the magnetic moment of the neutron from the known magnetic moments of the proton and the electron;

5) Irrespective of all preceding anomalies, Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle does not allow the electron to be permanently bound inside the proton, as it would be the case for the deuteron and other stable nuclei.

Rich,

  I protest: I fail to see the humor! Of course, the whole damn thing is a comedy...so, I patiently await the catastrophe. 

Himalayan Space-rock

      Lo, God did promise...

        did promise an End.

           If only that End would come!     

      Where, Oh where art thou Himalayan space-rock?

      It was with Job that God lost his bet with Satan,

         worse, he did welch upon that bet,

             for Job did curse God and did deny the Most High!

        There is scant any solution, save the Himalayan space-rock.

         Pray, we do, pray for a solution; but,

             let it not be partial, 

                    let not the End, itself, fail us!

         It was a mighty rock, indeed, that wiped out the Dinosaurs; yet,

              insufficient is such a paltry rock for this present-day terror!

        A rock indeed, but pray it be the dimensions of the Himalayan mountains.

       Oh, yes, that would most certainly suffice

               and be most agreeable, indeed. 

        Annihilation, most complete,

              and it is only the Himalayan space-rock which can satisfy,

                      satisfy the debt God and Man owes Satan.

In the Dark Age of history in first millennium AD people were advised not to question their lot in life or resist the fate that society offered them. That doesn't describe the scientific community of today. Maybe we would like to have a different situation, but it isn't a dark age.

Society today most certainly demands obedience and frowns upon anyone questioning the prevailing myths. Men of old most certainly resisted authority, hence, did you not notice the rivers of blood, blood from men fighting against tyranny of all manner, whether political, psychological or for reasons attributable to just plain 'ole obnoxious?

Of the many examples, this one should suffice:

We have a mammoth medical field, they call it with pride--modern medicine. Yet, upon further inspection, one realizes the entire industry fails to promote health, in fact, just the opposite, they do harm, intentionally, in order to fill their coffers. Every lozenge offered causes more damage than good, in fact, as with the so-called Flu Shot, all evidence proves a mere 6% effectivity; yet, what of all the damage done, what of all those souls suffering paralysis, then there is unnamed, unknown diseases caused by such "good intentions". It is known that the average person will spend 70% of all their medical expenses in the last five years of their life. It could be said, "money well spent," premised upon that illustrious concept of "caring"; yet, doctors cluster about the old and infirmed like flies around a rotting corpse, seeking succor, seeking to cause their progeny to flourish! 

We live in a Dark Age, absolutely, only, in the Dark Ages of past, everyone knew it was dark, this time, our Time, we fail to see the Darkness all around us! Who's more foolish? Men of Old or we, we the young?

It is also known, generally, that any scientist who dares to question the prevailing consensus, paid for in full, by industry, that GMOs are safe, those scientists are immediately ostracised, from academia, industry and society. 

Dark are these days, indeed!

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-flu-shot-remains-the-most-dangerous-vaccine/5550163

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-toxic-science-of-flu-vaccines/5554257

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/i-was-tossed-out-of-the-tribe-climate-scientist-judith-curry-interviewed/

http://responsibletechnology.org/allfraud/monsanto-whistleblower-says-genetically-engineered-crops-may-cause-disease/

 Luisiana you have greatly cheered me with your replies.  An excellent and deeply hopeful poem!  I would post one of my own but the work in question, well, it lacks the buoyant cheerful spirit of your contribution.  It appears we are all but joined at the hip in our evaluation of the the sight.  My horror at what ‘medicine’ has wrought is born of experience.  If you are brave you may read the cancer link of course but better still, the chapter on drugs and violence in my new book.  What could cleanse the sight?  The eye must either be stitched shut, or blinded. I will post the situation about Statin drugs below, for a cheap laugh.  Yesterday I was inspired to post the question for two reasons: 1. Reaction! I found ‘new’ work boastfully proclaiming someone had discovered the surprising possible fact of variable light speed; a theory most correct which has been around for years, ridiculed for decades, those who espouse it ruined as fools although they are correct.  The man who ‘discovered’ it is of course lying, a champion of the orthodox system who is evidently the chosen flag bearer of this new piece of incremental change.  I sent email noting the original paper by Thornhill which was plagiarized. There has been no reply to my catching the crook. He receives praise.  My friend Jeremy and I wrote the liars.  No reply.  These money/science creeps defend each other, never mind the truth, or another man’s priority and valid life’s work.  2.  The horror to now understand that although I have found science which may end pollution, and end radioactive contamination, and end energy dependence…well…those are a no no!  No no no!  All the profit from nuclear waste, and oil!  Please breathe the smog, and pay for the privilege.  Thank you, dear slave. Breathe deeply, and hand me a dollar.   No one will test the ideas.  All run like roaches with the light snapped on.  I deduce, the science may well be right!

Cancer is a racket.  The head man at Harvard was my buddy, then I found it. "Matthew: Look, cancer...it may be treatable like this!  No cost, very likely this will work!  This is CRIMINAL.  Do you agree?"  One email, and no more contact with my esteemed and truly superior old chum. My old buddy, no longer writes me. Top man.  Bah! I found it!!  The Gravy Train!  Read below of statins (and psych drugs; there are other examples of those):

Profit from poison:

The other face of the 'patentable molecule', this dirty coin of the realm in for-profit medical science, is to be found in toxic harmful compounds which although of little or no clinical use, do cause harm to those who take them and yield profit for the companies which develop and pedal them to consumers and physicians.

Statin drugs (such as Lipitor or Crestor), are not heart protective, they are a money making racket.  They do lower cholesterol, but the benefits have been falsified. These drugs can CAUSE heart failure, and sabotage the energy production mechanisms of the cell. They cause the problems they are supposed to prevent.  These deadly pills are, however, some of the very best selling drugs of all time.

An enzyme is blocked by statins which thereby suppresses the production of a coenzyme: CoQ10––that harms the ATP production process. The drugs are toxic to mitochondria. They interfere with K2 production. That leads to hardening of the arteries. These drugs can cause heart failure! Glutathione is interfered with leading to oxidative stress.  As is known, statins are associated with cataracts, liver damage, kidney disease, cancer, sexual dysfunction, depression, memory loss, and diabetes.  How have we citizens and many doctors been fooled?

"Relative Risk Reduction" statistical analysis has been falsely applied to create the impression that, what are ~one/two percent benefits…revealing a worthless treatment, which harms a great many, are "in fact" 30 and 50 percent gains in the amelioration of pathology. With annual lobbying for the pharmaceutical/health giants amounting to ~$235,107,261 in 2015, it appears, the government is in bed with the corporations.  The modern system of money and scientific advancement is flawed, ugly and dangerous. An entirely new way to fund science is required.   

From an important PubMed paper on the topic (Okuyama et al., 2015), we can see what this means for each of us: 

“An impairment of selenoprotein biosynthesis may be a factor in congestive heart failure, reminiscent of the dilated cardiomyopathies seen with selenium deficiency. Thus, the epidemic of heart failure and atherosclerosis that plagues the modern world may paradoxically be aggravated by the pervasive use of statin drugs. We propose that current statin treatment guidelines be critically reevaluated.”  [Statins stimulate atherosclerosis and heart failure: pharmacological mechanisms. Okuyama et al.]

Just in case you imagine that to be a fluke, a simple mistake from our benevolent and protective monetary-based authoritarian government and for-profit scientific and medical industries…please note the following: It is official that the top grossing drug in America (in 2014) was an anti-psychotic: Abilify.  Complete with the usual anti-psychotic profile of side-effects, such as permanent ticks and motor symptoms: Tardive Dyskinesia. Now, prescribed for depression, typically with an SSRI (such as Prozac or Zoloft), which are themselves potentially associated with suicide upon withdrawal, and their own permanent condition, Tardive Dysphoria.  Let's be clear: these "nonaddictive" SSRI drugs, do not themselves cause death upon withdrawal.  SSRI drugs (used for depression and OCD) are only correlated with death via one of the most certain findings in all of psychiatry: low 5-HT is associated with suicide.  Withdrawal therefore, may lead to death.  Not an addictive drug.  Simply know, if you stop from high doses, you may die by suicide.  Taper very gradually, and only attempt withdrawal under a doctor's supervision, knowing, there may or may not be permanent damage.  Now Abilify with its anti-psychotic profile of damage is also handed out like anti-psychotic candy for depression.  American medicine...is a racket...nearly as lucrative as war.  These drugs do most assuredly have a valid place in medicine, they are indispensable for those few who need them.  Please do understand: using them as high dollar substitute jelly beans is not it.  ~7 billion dollars in sales from Abilify, in one year (2014).  Money makes for deadly, toxic medicine.

Have we entered a scientific dark age? Quite definitely YES! However, I feel we've been in that situation for around at least a century. No-one can, or should, blame Einstein but, since the apparent total acceptance of his theories of relativity, two consequences have followed in physics:- (i) research in several important areas - eg. electromagnetism - has slowed considerably, and (ii) some theories such as relativity and quantum mechanics have become complete no-go areas as far as criticism or questioning goes. If you suggest an alternative way of solving problems already admitting solutions via relativity, you are accused of attacking relativity and subsequently black balled among the scientific elite. If you suggest alternative solutions to problems of astrophysics or cosmology compared with presently accepted conventional wisdom, you are labelled a crank and condemned to outer darkness. If you perform experiments, the results of which suggest water has memory, you are investigated by a professional magician rather than an accomplished scientist with knowledge in your field - don't even think of repeating the experiments as Popper would have advocated. No; in too many areas we see the influence of those who, by some unknown means, have come to be regarded as the scientific elite and the guardians of our knowledge - at least of the knowledge they deem acceptable. Of course, on top of this, big money will also have a part to play. Those in control, also control the purse strings and allocate where they see fit. In areas such as medicine and closely related fields one also suspects protection of the interests of the huge drug companies who fund so much of the research. Remember that, when big money is involved, the experimenter is almost bound to achieve the results wanted; if not, the funding stops and his tenure comes under threat. Cynical? Yes; but, unfortunately, I suspect the cynicism contains an unpleasant element of truth. The time has surely come for a genuine public debate.

Definitely NO

It is begining of the end .

We have started to change our Newtonian reductionist approach. We have started to remove inter- disciplinary (math, physics, biology, philosophy etc)boundaries.

If this is darkness ,this darkness is like the darkness that the baby feels at birth.

I wish to thank everyone for the lively debate.  Jeremy, you are fundamentally wise. I see just the same.  Mesut, I hope you are exactly correct, although my own experience has gutted my optimism. Two or three years past, I would not have hesitated to agree.  Indeed, just what you say is what is needed...connectivity between disciplines is the future. Think of Montagnier.  But one can not publish, or gain funding for any paradigm shift or slightly new interdisciplinary approach. One is attacked and the work disgraced. Again, think of Montagnier.  Read my quantum information medicine paper, for an example of such an approach.  If one does advance such work, one can not publish, save in China.  My answers above and the original question, hold forth the current problems.  I wish someone would test the specific science I have articulated. It may be possible to fund the neutron experiments.  Perhaps. Those experiments articulated above must be run. Until that happens, I have a leaden feeling in my gut.  Perhaps Santilli himself might be tempted to add an answer to this thread.  Half of these ideas concern his science.  I few words about hydrogen accretion, clean fuels with new chemistry and accompanying theory, and the hyper-furnace are in order.  

OK folks.  The original question has a paper attached concerning neutron synthesis.  Then ... I just found this little gem.  These new ideas are a mile deep.  There is a ton of this material, the links in the original question contain a simple bit on magnecular fuels...this is a bit of a tough nut, but worth the cracked tooth.  This seems to me, to be a way out of our 'dark age.'  http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-113.pdf

Rich,

I have reasons to call you "the man of the difficult questions and answers".

You have got important remarkable responses. From a medical point of view "Luisiana" response and your comments on the response are very important. "Tez" short conclusion is giving a basic excellent overview which is full of hope for a coming master plan. Other responses are sharing all of us the concept, the sadness and the hope.

The surprising question is how do darkness prevail at a time of scientific revolution and knowledge?!!!

No body can deny our current very advanced technology and that man has put his feet on moon.

It is the age of speed, money, wars, lies and unfairness.

May be the glare of too much knowledge and papers, added to many greedy beneficiary persons led communities and people not able to find the truth. They are puzzled.

Do we need a leader who can tell us the correct direction how to focus on the truth and to get us out of this disturbing puzzle?

I hope you will not end the debate without getting suggested solutions and insight. I will be waiting to know more. 

My best wishes,

@Omer,

  Touche! You have done a great job in focusing the debate.

I submit the following argument for darkness: knowledge is self-evident, hence, how else could lies ever be promulgated and perpetuated if not for willful acquiesce on the part of people.  

   For example: we all know wars are created. We all know wars are created for the benefit of the few. Yet, we all continue to go to war, acting as if this fight is ours, when it is clearly not. Why? It is implicit that some will benefit, including middle-class, hence, portions of society feed off the gullibility of another, namely, the poor class, which can be excused for going to war, for they have little recourse but to do so under such economic and political pressure. Okay, so, class warfare...not a new concept; nevertheless, this concept can be used with great effect, it is a valid model.

Another: GMOs, are they safe or not? Well, obviously, the answer depends upon the person asked, but for an objective answer, one would need independent studies showing what are the risks. Fair enough, but one thing is for sure: the industry continues to deny any funds for truly independent, integral research into GMO safety, hence, evidence of their detriment, in fact, no more evidence is really needed. Besides questions regarding health risks, there is the obvious economic questions, where studies have proved GMOs do not increase crop yield; hence, why bother with a product that does not deliver on the promise of increased yield, further still, poses a potential risk to ecology and human health and safety. There there is the issue of patent seeds, which would enslave any country to a producer of such seeds...pray tell, why would any country willfully submit the sovereignty of their country to bandits?

Darkness equals blindness, yet ignorance is "ignoring" the obvious truth, therefore, darkness is willful. In other words, there is a tendency in our modern times to relegate evil acts to the arena of "unintended consequences", that is to say, there is a tendency to divorce human will from the cause, yet why do serial killers kill...answer is simple: because they want to.

So, once again: the reason for darkness is that it is desired.

Hi Rich.

The topic you raise is indeed very interesting, reflective and has philosophical roots in the way we understand and trust the "modern scientific method", as proposed, questioned and refined by remarkable minds ranging from Aristotle, through Roger Bacon to Karl Popper. Personally, I believe that, as scientists, we should never stop questioning and re-evaluating adequacy and effectiveness of the scientific method, as would naturally happen to any other field of knowledge. One interesting paper might partially corroborate with your hypothesis, by Prof. Ioannidis, cited 4144 times according to Google, that exposes a logical argument leading to the astounding conclusion that, most probably (the paper studies the case in a probabilistic sense), most published research findings  are false these days. The link to the paper is below:

http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

Best regards,

Flávio.

Greetings all!  I have written a series of articles with Jeremy that address the topic under discussion in ever greater length and detail.  This is the most cursory of the lot.  I will post the rest in turn. I have yet to give this the final check for typos, so do forgive any.  You may enjoy this first in the series. These are for a lay audience.  I will let you know where the work ends up.  The links in the pdf do not work.  I will attach a functional docx also.

This article is very positive in its approach to this deeply negative situation.  If there is an answer to the darkness, it must be light.  Enjoy.  

@ Luisiana Thanks for your good words on my comment.

Your differentiation between ignorance and darkness is very important. It is a quantity of research reality. But also we need to see other reasons of current false research: as was mentioned above by Flavio in discussing the history of research methods as well as quoting an article proving that our talk is impossible to be sick imaginations. Also Rich creative pessimistic question changed to some optimism by quoting "Our Belief in Our Belief":  which explains that science is a continuous process of change and reevaluation.

I am very sure that the discussion would be enriched by more opinions shortly. I hope the debate will conclude points (a master plan) which can help to redirect research back to a correct methodology and evaluation path and also to be able to stop or minimize the willful darkness.

Best regards

Perhaps there is a specific thing which can be done to put a crack in the darkness; by which I mean, improve the situation concerning restrictions to new thinking within science and also, the basic lot of mankind in a single hit.  The chances are slim, but it is easy, and if you approve of my plan, you can help.  I will explain:

The recent conflagration of events in the US are unfortunate, but provide an opportunity. 

1. Trump has appointed an oil company lobbyist who takes money in piles from oil companies, a man named named Ebell, to head the destruction of the Environmental Protection Agency, and promises an 80 percent reduction in all pollution regulations.  His motivation is very clear: Greed. 

2.  Academia is unwilling to even examine new science of any kind which goes against its paradigms.  However, such science has come to mature fruition, and a new molecular species has been uncovered, tested, the results confirmed and the material marketed.  Fuel can be produced cheaply from oil or waste chemicals, even sewage, and this fuel does not pollute … oxygen is emitted in the exhaust.  Coal may be bonded in a new way to hydrogen, and also burned with no pollution. 

3.  The above mentioned process is more efficient than the current methods, and cheaper.  This allows MORE PROFIT, and coincidentally, ends pollution on the planet stemming from perhaps the single biggest source. 

4.  Ergo, science which academia will not test, but industry has and uses all the time, may be permitted to save the planet, and Ebell and his precious oil companies can have all the money they like!  This will make them even more of the money they crave so deeply, and by coincidence, save us all. 

Now, I can not figure how to get to Pruitt, and also believe he is a lost cause, but Ebell, he can be contacted.  The science will then be made plain, and the world of academia will no longer be able to shut its eyes, and will have to advance its scientific thinking from the dark, and, the greed monster may have piles of extra money while the planet is preserved.  

If you like this notion, from whatever country you reside, please copy and send the attached email as written.  It is aimed at the psychology of the man.  No negative remarks please!  That will sour the milk.  You may read the attached document, and assess the tone and aim of the finished round.  If you find it rightly cast, please do send it to him!  His greed, and the health of the planet, along with a lesson for academia may be landed in one shot. 

@all fantastic contribution 

I'd say that we have entered a 'gray zone' because - at least - some efforts are done to keep the methodologies to seem 'right'.

But after LIGO case, science derailed totally: if we have reached the stage of 'detecting' our self 'blindly injected' signals as 'observations', then I doubt a lot about the prefix 'scientific' in our days...

Data Big data analysis of Livingston and Hanford logfiles for LIG...

 @Demetris.  This looks excellent.  I will download the paper and read it.  I agree entirely!  No way, is that good science! Bah!  @J Dunning-Davies you will enjoy this paper to be sure!  I will follow the paper.  Thank you sir!

Dear Rich, Demetris, and all,

Is it sunny with a clear blue sky? Are we blind?

Is it grey with some clouds?

Or is it a dark age with very heavy clouds

I have become confused. A clear answer is very important, either to go our way or to change direction. To give some lights to us and others we have to agree.

My respect and best wishes.

I have just written a lengthy assessment of the year in review which summarizes my response to Omer's question.  This was written for a lay audience, but will serve to condense my reply.  

The year in review: Hope and lies

Greetings earth creatures!  This post has no politics…fear not.  I have found amazing and dread things this year…a stunning and unexpected year indeed.  Please enjoy this shocking and hopeful summary of the most incredible and frightening year yet!  Yikes.  Lies first, hope next. Wow, gulp…here we go!

It was this year that I began to support my suppositions concerning the lack of validity in the sciences.  This seems abstract, but just you wait, it is not!  I will tell you.  Around two years past, it occurred to me that uncertainty must play no real part in physical systems.  I also had the idea that it may be possible to make reality of the idea that dangerous expensive drugs may possibly be replaced with quantum information.  I soon found the informational science was suppressed, and discovered the scientist who was ruined and in reality killed, for his efforts to help: Benveniste.  (Money hates truth, new truth most of all, and smears the best science has to offer).  As I gathered top scientists to construct a paper and prove the science valid, I found a fine mathematician and physicist with a specialty in thermodynamics to help me: Jeremy Dunning-Davies, senior lecturer in math and physics at Hull University, now retired.  I seem to get on best with scientists in their 70s and 80s.  Well, this fellow and I began to talk and write.  We found it, between the two of us, we found the LOT of it…all the unbelievable lies and the pain they cause. We published a book, which is free.  Money, is the mark of the liar! 

I will quickly list a select few lies:

1.  I found that common drugs (SSRI drugs) given out for depression and OCD, cause permanent brain damage; the fact that statin drugs CAUSE heart disease; the fact that cancer and a host of other diseases have already been cured and the science suppressed.  Medical science kills many it is supposed to help, and SSRI drugs are directly correlated with the mass shootings, etc.  The way money has raped us all within the confines of medical practice, is unconscionable.  It is really quite evil.  I learned: do not believe experts––ever!  Become expert yourself, or you are as good as cattle being led to the slaughter.  Never…believe authority. No one knows more than you do…read and learn!  Obey only your own truth and law.  You are the only authority which exists!  The rest are liars.

2.  We found the fact, FACT, that relativistic science has been corrupted to the hilt!  The entire thing is false when applied outside of its originally intended conditions.  So…there is no curved space time, no dark energy or matter (this is ad hoc bunk, now pursued for piles of money…billion dollar budgets), and gravitation CAN NOT POSSIBLY move at the speed of light.  If it did, the planets would not remain in their orbits!  The silly junk science proclaiming the detection of gravitational waves, a huge billion dollar fake pulled on even participating scientists was exposed, to prove us exactly right!  Gravitational waves…what a fake!   Sorry folks, you are being lied to, so you will pay up for more lousy science.  They lie, you pay…now look at that.  Surprise!  Cha-ching!  The sound of lies.

3.  We found that fusion reactions are possible for low cost, have actually been successfully achieved in large reactor prototypes without radiation, and, that the neutron can be synthesized from an arc of current and hydrogen gas.  This validates Rutherford, invalidates the uncertainty relation, and much of quantum chemistries assumptions concerning binding energy.  Can’t have that, now can we?  It would undercut the oil companies…ooops!  It implies the possibility of nuclear waste disposal, in minutes! This potentially puts the bullet in the piles of money made from storing nuclear waste, and moving it around.  The science is again… suppressed.  Lies and a few more lies…perhaps a lie of omission will turn the deadly trick…cha-ching it is!  Liars.  How many die, for these money lies?  Count your pennies.  Count your dead.  Pretty little pennies.  DO NOT BELIEVE AUTHORITY NO MATTER WHAT THE MESSAGE!

4.  Quantum paradox is false.  One simple distinction clears up the whole mess!  Do not believe!

5.  Drugs and their costly toxic dangers may possibly be replaced with quantum information.  We found the experiments and scientists, and know this is likely true, and definitely suppressed!  No doubt at all.  How much drug company money would be lost to greedy pockets, if human health were rightly attended?  CHA-CHING!  Pay up, and suffer…good little sheep, time for lamb chops!

6.  Fuel which is cheap, and burns with no pollution can be made from sewage, waste chemicals, crude oil, diesel and coal.  It is based in new science which does not acknowledge the limits of quantum and relativistic science.  As it is correct, and will provide us independence from big oil and pollution, it is actively smeared, and suppressed.  I work with the scientist in question who founded the new science, and a free sample to test for complete pollution- free combustion is available to any qualified lab…free of charge.  Check my facts.  I am right.  We are being poisoned and sold oil, when we need not pay much for fuel, and said fuel need not pollute.  Cars so equipped need no catalytic converter at all.  Why are women dying of breast cancer from diesel exhaust …why are we paying high prices for deadly pollution?  Guess.  CHA-CHING!  Lies.  Do you see a pattern here?  Authority = Money = Lies.

7.  The list goes on for a few miles.  I will curtail it, and end here as it is a perfect transition to the hopeful part of this post:  I have discovered the history, psychology, genetics and neuroscience responsible for ‘conscience’ (super-ego), empathy and hence, social control.   This repressive basis is itself why we are foolish, easy to control, uncaring, empty and ill.  This is why we go to war, care too little for each other, support bad leaders, and never seem to change.  Know it: morality will and does, make you sick.  Health, empathy and ethics are based in connection and identification…NOT punishment.  Only obedience is fostered in punishment, not free thought (please!), and certainly not ethical expression.  Ethics, intelligence, happiness and hope, stand in diametric opposition to punitive morality.  They are opposites.  Morality and conscience are a black noose.  Caring and connection, know nothing of them!

Hope:

Although I can not address the details and methods here, they will be directly available and precisely articulated in the Black Papers, which will be published and available free of charge after my death.  This ‘culture’ finds reason to make taboo, all which is hopeful.  I will tell you only the result of what I have found:

Personality may be in large part ascribed a fundamental connective basis in the default mode network, which is itself associated closely with ego functioning.  To destructuralize said network, reveals an amazing and hopeful fact: beneath modern repressive mental topography, which is itself the basis of neurosis, a core self exists, which is not degenerated in life experience.  The complexity and dread illness which curtails happiness, keeps us empty and disconnected from the world and each other, is not a basic element within us, but instead, is an illness which was added after the fact, to foster obedience, and keep us weak and willing, as draft animals in the harness.  No matter the misfortunes life has bestowed upon you, no matter the illness which was created, you may be free of it…and find new energy and a kind heart, as an equal amongst equals…equal…to all things and peoples.  I have never felt such happiness, energy and light. I feel so very good.  Within each…is all.  One need but uncover the essence, the core, and allow energetic distributions to extend from here, not from the lessons and guilt which have afflicted us…to be well, happy, and filled with guiltless energy.  This is within us all: connection, and caring.  Thought itself, is powered by affect, by feeling.  Release everything, withhold nothing…and be well.  Thank you for reading, and accept my thanks for participating.  ––Rich Norman

Hello Rich,

When I do want to understand an unclear point, I would start by doubting myself.

I would not be able to discuss the whole 7 points "lies" mentioned above. I would choose the 2 examples closer to me as a practitioner which are depression and hyperlipedemia.

Do you accept "depression" as a disease entity or not? Do you accept neurotransmitters? If SSRI drugs are harmful, which is a better antidepressant?

Also in emergency room, I dealt with many MIs associated with hyperlipedemia, diabetes and hypertension. I saw clearly that controlling risk factors can help to prevent further heart attacks.

On my research point which is hydrocephalus, I agree and feel grateful to many papers I read. But I felt that response to potentially good ideas may be either very slow or neglected.  Also I know that research expenses and efforts are at many times misdirected to rare and very difficult diseases. I heard this also from neurosurgeons. Hydrocephalus researchers also complain lack of support to their projects.

Surely, current research is suffering something wrong. This was expressed on other threads as well. I do not think that describing current research situation and false results is enough. Drug companies gaining very high profits is important.

We need to clarify the problems more so that we can find solutions and hope. I feel I need to learn more

My best regards, 

Thank you for this reply.  Yes you are right, the situation does have some subtlety to it, however, the main of it is less than subtle. In some cases the SSRI drugs are sure to be preferable. I do not deny their specific utility or efficacy. However. . . . They do provide patients and extra ‘benefit’, often even at low doses used in depression (OCD doses are often 80 to 120 mg): brain damage.  As an alternative possibility to SSRI drugs I will offer you two papers linked.  I was unable to get funding to test them.  I tried…and was hoping to use a lab in Italy.  These two papers have a symbolic technique which should up-mediate dopamine and endorphins without toxic drugs so as to alleviate depression, other conditions and perhaps OCD as well, although that is a much tougher nut.  You will find attached my article on SSRI drugs.  They cause permanent brain damage.  Careful risk/benefit assessment is discouraged, in favor of profit. Damaging drugs should not be the first line of treatment... in but few cases.  Read to see the results to patients and society, of the dark practice of turning pills into profit.  I will extract two pieces and attach them…SSRI drugs and many others are discussed.  You can see the entire deception, the deaths, the brain damage, heart disease which is created by statins, Parkinson’s treatments left to wither; safe treatments are discouraged, and deadly ones encouraged which make money, etc. Alternatives are also discussed.  Ask for my articles about cancer…you will become sick.  Quite.  Two short articles are attached, extracted from my new book, written with Jeremy Dunning-Davies.     

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295918623_Homeostatic_Conductance_and_Parasympathetic_Basis_Alteration_Two_Alternative_Approaches_to_Deep_Brain_Stimulation_in_Parkinson%27s_Obsessive_Compulsive_Disorder_and_Depression?ev=prf_pub

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305190239_New_therapeutic_intervention_and_assessment_tools_GSR_sexual_dysfunction_and_the_Peptide_Assisted_Therapy_method--an_applied_therapy_and_mathematical_metric_of_healing?ev=prf_pub

Article Homeostatic Conductance and Parasympathetic Basis Alteration...

Article New therapeutic intervention and assessment tools: GSR, sexu...

You are giving strong evidences Rich. I think that many others understand your disappointment.

How was the discussions with you? What were the reasons offered to you on refusing your projects?

How do you think companies are able to stop potentially promising research? and how to overcome their obstacles? Is university system needs change? How do companies paralyze universities? What are the system changes do you suggest? Could our talk on researchgate be useful ?

Why it did not happen at the time of Einstein and Newton?

Forgive me for my simple questions.

Our book dealing directly with this very topic is now finished!  A great and productive labor has ended, and the much improved hard copy of Beyond the Veil is now available.  You may find the free version here on Research Gate on my publication list, or that of Jeremy Dunning-Davies. 

https://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Veil-Deception-Thoughts-Conventional/dp/1541117409/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1483385806&sr=1-1

I have been waiting your answer Rich. Thank you too much for the free download of your book. I will read it to find out if it is giving answers to my questions and return back to you for further discussions. I will need time. I am highly evaluating your values, contributions, your self-story and research works. God bless you.

Thanks Omer!  Here is another one.  

This is an example of what I call ‘the patentable molecule.’  They have not figured out how to gain money from this effective cure for antibiotic resistant pathogens, so people die.  This is wrong.  There are other examples in the new book, and I believe here it is again. 

http://www.prevention.com/health/health-concerns/cure-antibiotic-resistance