VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Print This Article Print This Article Email This Article Email This Article

Findings & Forecasts 01/23/2013

Share

Green Eco­nomics

I have been writing for sev­eral years now that the global elite are plan­ning to imple­ment a Technocracy-oriented eco­nomic system that will turn our existing cap­i­tal­istic eco­nomic system upside-down. Why? Because it will be based on ENERGY instead of MONEY.

The Trojan horse that is enabling Tech­noc­racy is “Green Energy.” You already know that green is on the lips of just about every politi­cian in the world. Obama kick-started the con­ver­sion of America’s energy grid into a “Smart Grid” that will con­trol energy con­sump­tion down to the appli­ance level in your home and busi­ness. Public money is reck­lessly thrown down a rabbit hole into green com­pa­nies like Solyndra. Europe is obsessed with green and sus­tain­able development.

In his second inau­gu­ra­tion speech, Obama stated,

“We will respond to the threat of cli­mate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our chil­dren and future gen­er­a­tions.  Some may still deny the over­whelming judg­ment of sci­ence, but none can avoid the dev­as­tating impact of raging fires, and crip­pling drought, and more pow­erful storms.  The path towards sus­tain­able energy sources will be long and some­times dif­fi­cult.  But America cannot resist this tran­si­tion; we must lead it.”

At the annual World Eco­nomic Forum summit meeting cur­rently taking place in Davos, Switzer­land, the first major head­line to be pro­duced is: Davos call for $14 tril­lion ‘greening’ of global economy. This is an amount larger than the entire global economy. The orga­ni­za­tion behind the pro­nounce­ment is the Green Growth Action Alliance. Who are they and who belongs to it?

The Green Growth Action Alliance was com­mis­sioned at last year’s Davos meeting, and is headed by former Mex­ican pres­i­dent Felipe Calderon. Alliance global banking mem­bers include: Bank of America Mer­rill Lynch, Bar­clays Cap­ital, Deutsche Bank Group, Euro­pean Bank for Recon­struc­tion and Devel­op­ment, Euro­pean Invest­ment Bank, Grupo Financiero Banorte, HSBC, Inter-American Devel­op­ment Bank, Morgan Stanley, World Bank Group. Other industry mem­bers include: Accen­ture, Alcatel-Lucent, Applied Mate­rials, Envi­ron­mental Defense Fund, GE Energy, Infosys, McK­insey & Com­pany, Sam­sung Elec­tronics Com­pany, Siemens, World Trade Organization.

This is a “who’s who” list of global giants. They, among other global movers and shakers, are col­lec­tively screaming for the world to turn “green”, all of it pred­i­cated on the unproven theory called Global Warming.

Given that the sci­ence behind global warming is rid­dled with fraud­u­lent data and pre­de­ter­mined “studies” skewed by grants from these same orga­ni­za­tions, what is the real agenda behind all this hoopla?

Tech­noc­racy.

The doc­trine of Tech­noc­racy was first for­mal­ized in the 1930’s by M. King Hub­bard at Columbia Uni­ver­sity, who later pro­posed the “Peak Oil Theory”, or Hubbard’s Peak. It sought to bal­ance con­sump­tion with pro­duc­tion based on an energy for­mula instead of supply-and-demand eco­nomics. Money would be dis­carded for energy credits. Society would be run by enlight­ened and unelected sci­en­tists and engi­neers (gov­er­nance), replacing rep­re­sen­ta­tive gov­ern­ments. There would be no pri­vate prop­erty or ability to accu­mu­late wealth. People would be herded, man­aged and directed like cattle in a feed lot.

Hub­bard, et al, believed that tech­nology had caused an organic change in society, which could only then be run by the tech­no­log­ical experts. They viewed politi­cians as igno­rant and even dan­gerous, unable to under­stand the tech­nology they were sup­posed to manage.

This elite thinking has per­sisted, not only in halls of acad­emia, but in the indus­trial world where tech­nology and man­agerism already reigns. At the core of this elitist phi­los­ophy is Sci­en­tism, and I offer the fol­lowing definition.

Sci­en­tism: An exten­sion of Pos­i­tivism based on a mix­ture of pseudo-science and empir­ical sci­ence that states that sci­ence alone, with its self-selected priest­hood of engi­neers and sci­en­tists, is the only source of truth about the nature of man, the phys­ical world and uni­versal reality. By def­i­n­i­tion it rejects the exis­tence of God and all notions of divine truth as is found in the Bible.

A caveat is nec­es­sary. All sci­en­tists are not accused of Sci­en­tism. There are plenty (if not a majority) of sci­en­tists, engi­neers and tech­ni­cians who accept the notion of divine and/or absolute truth out­side of sci­ence. Unfor­tu­nately, these are looked upon as heretics by adher­ents to Sci­en­tism, and are largely ignored. For instance, 31,000 sci­en­tists signed a peti­tion that rejects the pseudo-science of global warming, but this has not deterred the Al Gores’ of the world, including Obama, from mar­keting global warming as if it were a sci­en­tific fact!

If Tech­noc­racy is the appli­ca­tion of sci­ence to the eco­nomic system, then its Siamese twin is Tran­shu­manism, which is the appli­ca­tion of sci­ence to the con­di­tion of man in order to achieve char­ac­ter­is­tics of immor­tality, omni­science and omnipres­ence, among others, and to pro­duce a God-like race of post-humans.

Because of the vocal rise of Tran­shu­manism, you now rou­tinely hear calls that immor­tality for humans is just around the corner, as is the case with Ray Kurzweil. Per­haps you missed the Time Mag­a­zine cover from Feb­ruary 21, 2011 issue pic­tured at the left.

Do you think this is all benev­o­lent and benign? Think again. The reli­gious evil that runs below the sur­face of any­thing con­nected to Sci­en­tism is of the greatest mag­ni­tude. It’s a dan­gerous phi­los­ophy for mankind in gen­eral, and espe­cially to Bible-believing Chris­tians in par­tic­ular, because its adher­ents see them­selves as gods, far above mere mor­tals of the une­d­u­cated classes.

For instance, a leading tran­shuman, cloning researcher and nuclear physi­cist, Dr. Richard Seed, stated point­edly in an inter­view for a doc­u­men­tary: “We are going to become Gods. Period. If you don’t like it, get off. You don’t have to con­tribute, you don’t have to par­tic­i­pate. But if you’re going to inter­fere with ME becoming God, then we’ll have big trouble; we’ll have war­fare. The only way to pre­vent me is to kill me. And you kill me, I’ll kill you.” [Dr. Richard Seed, Nuclear physi­cist and cloning researcher. Tech­no­ca­lyps, Part II — Preparing for the Sin­gu­larity]. Yes, he said that; If you don’t believe it, go listen to the entire doc­u­men­tary. [https://itunes.apple.com/us/movie/technocalyps-pt.-2-preparing/id490742472]

Where is this leading? Sci­en­tism, Tech­noc­racy and Tran­shu­manism are headed straight into a Sci­en­tific Dic­ta­tor­ship: That is, the utopian con­cept of sci­en­tific man­agerism whereby all facets of polit­ical, social and eco­nomic life are man­aged solely by the sci­en­tific method and dic­tates of sci­ence. If unchecked, it will put mankind back into the dark ages of a feudal society where a few own every­thing and have all the priv­i­leges while the rest own nothing and have zero privileges.

Fur­ther­more, all of this is coming at us like an express train. Is any­body else paying atten­tion? Appar­ently not, for I am still the only one harping on this week after week and month after month.

You are wel­come to share this article with anyone who might want to see beyond the cha­rade of modern global pol­i­tics and sci­en­tific psycho-babble.

— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.

 

 

10 Responses to “Findings & Forecasts 01/23/2013”

  1. Ed Parise says:

    This idea is the mega-horror show of the ages. Thank God, if you’re per­mitted, that it’s a grandiose illu­sion we seem to live in; that He can know nothing about. My friend, Edgar Allen Poe, had it right: “All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream”. The dream is appearing more scary all the time.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  2. Walter77777 says:

    Faith is actu­ally the danger while Doubt is far less dan­gerous. In the name of reli­gious Faith good Chris­tians burned witches at the stake, killed untold num­bers of non-Christians
    on their way to Jerusalem during the cru­sades, and did other ter­rible evils in the cer­tainty that they were doing the Will of The All-Powerful. Good Chris­tians invaded much of he world during he days of colo­nialism trying to con­vert Mus­lims who had little desire to con­vert and set­ting the stage for today’s Muslim anger which man­i­fests in such ter­rible vio­lence. Good Jews per­se­cuted Bene­dict Spinoza, expelled huge num­bers of Jews from their com­mu­ni­ties for refusing to believe as their brethren believed. In the name of their Faith Mus­lims reacting to the cen­turies of colo­nialism have com­mitted dreadful acts of violence.

    Atheism is also a Faith, a cer­tainty that there is no Supreme Being, and, since this makes athe­ists regard reli­gious Faith as a great evil it resulted in per­se­cu­tion of the reli­gious by Com­mies and other atheist groups.

    Doubt is dif­ferent. No one does any­thing ter­rible because they doubt the exis­tence of a Supreme Being. Doubt results in ques­tioning and this helps to increase knowledge.

    W.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  3. Dale says:

    One tiny cor­rec­tion. I believe that the global economy is about 60 Tril­lion while US GDP is about 14 – 16 Tril­lion, so I think the amount is about the same size as our entire economy. Either way it is ridiculous.

    The problem is that they will make a demand like that and then people (politi­cians) will feel oblig­ated to com­pro­mise and at least meet the demand part way. So instead of com­mit­ting 14 Tril­lion we will commit hun­dreds of bil­lions. It is an amount that we cannot afford, but the left will whine that it is less than a tenth of what is really needed. They will use the fact that hun­dreds of bil­lions pro­duced no results as “evi­dence” that they need much, much more. Because no results will ever be forth­coming, they will be a per­ma­nent drum­beat and drag on our economy.

    They will achieve two basic aims with this strategy: The elite will tap into the majority of funds pro­vided, so they will per­son­ally ben­efit, and the economies of any con­tributing coun­tries will be hob­bled, leading to an eco­nomic crisis large enough to require an “inter­na­tional” solu­tion. A world economy will be formed which will allow even more con­trol by the elites, require more global coop­er­a­tion and pave the way for the enslave­ment of the masses of the Earth.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  4. Ruth Harris says:

    This much sited peti­tion is itself a won­derful example of sci­en­tism. An exam­i­na­tion of the peti­tion found that the only require­ment for signers was that they have a Bach­elor of Sci­ence degree in any field. They did not have to be familiar at any level with cli­mate sci­ence per se.
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=158

    This reminds me some­what of my son’s protes­ta­tion when he went to work at Twitter. He was told that his title was data sci­en­tist, and he loves to show his busi­ness card with that title. What he told the guy in per­sonnel was, “I used to work at NASA. I worked with a lot of sci­en­tists there. I know what a sci­en­tist is. I am not a sci­en­tist.” Still, he has been declared a sci­en­tist, is listed in the employee direc­tory as a sci­en­tist, and as such he could prob­ably have signed the peti­tion. He is a whiz bang code writer, but he knows nothing about cli­mate science.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  5. Patrick Wood says:

    The point of the survey was to ask people who were able to think crit­i­cally and who have some kind of science-related degree. There are tons of people touting global warming to do not have degrees in atmos­pheric science.

    Remember that most of the so-called aca­d­emic (pro) global warming studies have been funded by major par­tic­i­pants such as the Carnegie Foun­da­tion and Rock­e­feller Brothers Fund. They were expected to pro­duce the results that they pro­duced. This is cor­rup­tion, not science.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  6. Ruth Harris says:

    And the cli­mate sci­ence skep­tics have largely been funded by the hydro­carbon energy industry. Finding an unbi­ased study is prob­ably difficult.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  7. Actu­ally, the funding of cli­mate skep­tics by hydro­carbon cor­po­ra­tions is minus­cule to the funding these same com­pa­nies spend to combat “cli­mate change.”

    How much has Exxon given to cli­mate skep­tics? In 2009 it was reported to be about $16 mil­lion. Green­peace reported the Koch Brothers funded cli­mate skep­tics to the amount $67 mil­lion since 1997.

    All of the above seems like a lot of money, but Exxon funded the Stan­ford Uni­ver­sity Global Cli­mate and Energy Project to the tune $100 mil­lion. And the Amer­ican Petro­leum Insti­tute reports that the industry on a whole had invested $58 BILLION, from 2000 to 2008, on global warming research, carbon cap­ture, and other cli­mate change-related projects; often working hand-in-glove with major uni­ver­sity cli­mate programs.

    And it’s not just U.S. com­pa­nies. BP com­mitted $500 mil­lion for an academic-based bio­science project ded­i­cated to com­bating cli­mate change. Saudi Aramco is pouring hun­dreds of mil­lions into carbon cap­ture and other global warming projects. Big money is being spent by Petro-Canada and other for­eign oil com­pa­nies on global warming-related programs.

    And Exxon has favored a carbon tax pro­posal. The Western States Petro­leum Asso­ci­a­tion sup­ports cap-and-trade, as does Chevron.

    All that said, the funding of cli­mate skep­tics by big oil is laugh­able com­pared to the money they’re spending on global warming programs.

    But why would petro­leum cor­po­ra­tions be so heavily invested in cli­mate change projects and pro­grams? Now that’s the question.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  8. I know this if off topic but I’m looking into starting my own blog and
    was won­dering what all is required to get set up? I’m assuming having
    a blog like yours would cost a pretty penny? I’m not
    very internet savvy so I’m not 100% pos­i­tive. Any
    rec­om­men­da­tions or advice would be greatly appre­ci­ated.
    Many thanks

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Premium Subscriber Access

Email:
Password:
Remember   

Forgot Password

News & Analysis

  • Transhumanism, Technocracy, Total Surveillance Society

    Tran­shu­manism, Tech­noc­racy and Total Sur­veil­lance Society are show­cased in this 3 hour radio pre­sen­ta­tion with Patrick Wood, Carl Teichrib and Kaye Beach. It is a good primer and helpful to bring the lis­tener to a solid basic under­standing of what it … Con­tinue reading

  • Is Trayvon Sparking a Communist Revolution?

    Are you puz­zled by the over-reaction and civil unrest over the George Zim­merman trial? Con­sider this: Com­mu­nist front groups are throwing every­thing they have at fomenting and con­tin­uing the protests for their own agenda. Many of these groups have no … Con­tinue reading

  • Risk of Global Financial Freeze-up Rising

    If you thought it couldn’t happen again, get ready: A new global finan­cial freeze-up could be straight ahead. It’s too bad that eco­nomics, trade, finance, etc., are such boring topics to most people. Well, they actu­ally are boring because they … Con­tinue reading

People want to know…

faq

What is Globalization?

It is the col­lective effect of pur­poseful and amoral manip­u­la­tion that seeks to cen­tralize eco­nomic, polit­ical, tech­no­log­ical and soci­etal forces in order to accrue max­imum profit and polit­ical power to global banks, global cor­po­ra­tions and the elit­ists who run them. It is rapidly moving toward an full and final imple­men­ta­tion of Technocracy.

Posted in: faq

What is the Tri­lat­eral Commission?

Founded in 1973 by David Rock­e­feller and Zbig­niew Brzezinski, the Com­mis­sion set out to create a “New Inter­na­tional Eco­nomic Order”, namely, Tech­noc­racy. The orig­inal mem­ber­ship con­sisted of elit­ists (bankers, politi­cians, aca­d­e­mics, indus­tri­al­ists) from Japan, North America and Europe. Col­lec­tively, they have dom­i­nated and con­trolled trade and eco­nomic policy in their respec­tive coun­tries since at least 1974.

Posted in: faq

What is Technocracy?

Tech­noc­racy is a move­ment started in the 1930’s by engi­neers, sci­en­tists and tech­ni­cians that pro­posed the replace­ment of cap­i­talism with an energy-based economy. Orig­i­nally envi­sioned for North America only, it is now being applied on a global basis. Authors Aldous Huxley and George Orwell believed that Tech­noc­racy would result in a Sci­en­tific Dic­ta­tor­ship, as reflected in their books, “Brave New World” and “1984″.

Posted in: faq

What is Smart Grid?

Smart Grid is the national and global imple­men­ta­tion of dig­ital and Wi-fi enabled power meters that enable com­mu­ni­ca­tion between the appli­ances in your home or busi­ness, with the power provider. This pro­vides con­trol over your appli­ances and your usage of elec­tricity, gas and water.

Posted in: faq

Who is M. King Hubbert?

Hub­bert was a geo-physicist who co-founded Tech­noc­racy, Inc. in 1932 and authored its Tech­noc­racy Study Course. In 1954, he became the cre­ator of the “Peak Oil Theory”, or “Hubbert’s Peak” which the­o­rized that the world was rapidly run­ning out of carbon-based fuels. Hub­bert is widely con­sid­ered as a “founding father” of the global warming and green movements.

Posted in: faq

Who is R. Buck­min­ster Fuller?

A pio­neer in global eco­log­ical theory, Fuller (1895 – 1984) was the first to sug­gest the devel­op­ment of a Global Energy Grid that is today known as the Global Smart Grid. Fuller is widely con­sid­ered to be a “founding father” of the global green move­ment, including global warming, Sus­tain­able Devel­op­ment, Agenda 21, etc.

Posted in: faq

Is the Venus Project like Technocracy?

The Venus Project, founded by Jacque Fresco, is a utopian, modern-day iter­a­tion of Tech­noc­racy. Like Tech­noc­racy, it scraps cap­i­talism and pro­poses that “a resource-based economy all of the world’s resources are held as the common her­itage of all of Earth’s people, thus even­tu­ally out­growing the need for the arti­fi­cial bound­aries that sep­a­rate people.” The appli­ca­tion of tech­nology is the answer to all of the world’s prob­lems, including war, famine and poverty.

Posted in: faq