Archive for the ‘IIB Films’ Category

IIB = 0wned!

Posted: May 28, 2011 in IIB Films, Internal Affairs

Yeah the page here has been broken and derelict for a long while.

First Photobucket banned my image account, and then Youtube did the same.

My account had been paid in full in December 2009. It was about 5 years old, and everything I’ve ever posted online in all of my work was housed there.

The ‘discourse’:

Unfortunately your account has been banned because it violated our terms of service. These terms apply to both free and premium accounts.

Admin

Why?

This deserves an explaination.

No warning? No reason? Everything is for fair use educational purposes. I’ve created a major part of the content. The rest is all free speech related. I’ve never had any images removed for the years I’ve been with you. I’m a paying customer. I’m loyal. Please explain.

There wasnt any porn or anything like that in my account, unless it was hacked. I haven’t even uploaded much of anything at in a several weeks.

Dear Ignorance Isn’t Bliss,

Your account contained images which violate our Terms of Use.  These Terms apply to all users regardless of the Public/Private setting of the account.  When you created the account, you agreed to abide by these terms and we clearly explained the consequences of violating those terms.

Photobucket.com attempts to maintain a website that is absent of offensive, indecent or objectionable content.  That is our general policy and your images were removed in accordance with that policy. The Photobucket.com Terms of Use, found at http://www.photobucket.com/terms, reflect that policy by giving Photobucket the right to remove content that, among other things, (a) it deems unlawful, obscene, harmful, threatening, defamatory, or hateful; (b) invades the privacy of any third party; (c) contains nudity, illustrated nudity, pornography, illustrated pornography, child erotica, or child pornography; or (d) Photobucket deems otherwise objectionable.

Sincerely,

Your Photobucket Support Team

And then they responded again:

Dear Ignorance Isn’t Bliss,

Your account has been reported for fraudulent payments and the account will remain banned.

Sincerely,

Your Photobucket Support Team

“offensive images”?

“fraudulent payments”??

This is madness.

What images were offensive? At leat give me filenames.

The account was paid last Decemeber. October a year later all of the sudden its fraudulent? This “fraudulent” payment wasnt caught a month after the successful payment? This is an outrage.

“Offensive” images? Which ones? With freedom of speech, you can piss people off. If there was porn, or something along those lines, sure, I get it, but thats not MY account. If I cant create and post images that might piss off some supporter of some politician, just because people don’t want to hear it, then your business is sunk. It’s over.

I’m responding the best I can with what you’ve given me, which is nothing at all.

It’s not like my account is only a few months old and is already posting adult content, or some odd exploit such as that.

Next response:

“Reported” “fraudulent” by who?!? What does that even mean?

Shutting me down without due process, and without details for my recourse,  is very poor business practice.

Even the word “BANNED” is poor choice. I’m your customer. I promote you by using your services, and by being loyal. It should read ‘…your account has been disabled while under review…’. Something along those lines.

I’m still waiting to know, what content supposedly violated what terms???

It shouldn’t take a week to resolve this. Imagine if the power company shut down your main data center(s) and sent you a simple email stating “violated terms”, and it took a week to get any details about what the issue behind it even was. While I don’t make money off the Internet, or Photobucket, it doesn’t make the status of my content any less important to me. I’m your customer just like you’re the electricity company’s customer. If this were a free unpaid type account I could understand the lack of prompt response.

I also don’t understand why whatever content is in question couldn’t have just been disabled, and I would have just gotten an email stating why. In that case, it taking so long to get anything done about it wouldn’t be a big deal, but tyhis is my entire account you’ve shut down here.

Please help.

Dear Ignorance Isn’t Bliss,

The payment was blocked by the cardholder of the account you used to pay for your photobucket account.  The account will remain banned.

Sincerely,

Your Photobucket Support Team

What are you talking about? You can’t block a payment made back in December. It was paid in full by a friend back in December, meaning you shouldn’t be attempting to rebill it this being only October.

Like I said, it was paid in full last December by a friend. No fraud there, no payments to discuss. Not only is it NOT time to to pay for next year, you were never authorized to rebill that card for next year. Even if that’s what you attempted to do, it shouldn’t matter because my account is paid into December, and it doesn’t require shutting down my account while it is resolved. Is this how you treat your paying customers? Give vague responses and not respond the further inquiry for days on end? Something seems wrong here. The first email said I had violated Photobucket terms, which doesn’t actually tell me anything. Then it said I violated content rules. Now it’s this, when you weren’t given the legal authority to rebill the card. It would have saved us all a lot of time if the first email simply said what the issue was and what needs to be done to clear up any misunderstanding, instead of merely informing me that my account has been “BANNED”. Switching off OLD and well used user accounts like this, while apparently arguably breaking the law yourselves, is bad business. I deserve better treatment than this, as even the word “BANNED” is over the top.

Then Photobucket staff stopped responding.

Around that time Youtube also shut me down.

Here’s what it says currently when I try to log in:

If you’ve been redirected to this page from the sign-in page, it means that access to your Google Account has been disabled.

Back around the time it happened they requested me to provide it my personal cell phone number, so it could text me an access code. Of course I declined.

So they effectively shut me down. It’ll take a month or two to attempt to fix maybe half of what I’ve done.  This thought in considering returning to my work makes me want to crawl out of my skin.

From there I’m so behind on my various inventing, and ‘mad botany’ projects, and more, that it’s easy for me to procrastinate trying to do any of this here.

But once again it’s getting too hot even at night to do outdoorsie type stuff, and it might be time to return to publishing. I’m thinking first I’ll fix the images at the agimanhattanproject.com site, and then instead of blog I’ll just go straight to documentary production…

Ignorance Is Futile Exclusive:

In the 21st Century we have two primary threats thrown at us. In the blue corner we have man-caused Global Warming, and in the red corner we have Islamic Terrorism. What are the risks and absurdities of each, and what is really driving these agendas?

The intention here isn’t to convince people they’re right or wrong about being liberal or conservative, but to point out how remarkable it is that each side of the agenda setters & policy makers have taken such staunch stances on these opposing issues, and to show the realities of the perceived threats..

These proclaimed threats are complex issues. The point here is to put them into perspective. What can we compare these issues to? How much do we know? What don’t we know? What makes sense? How far should we go? What should we jeopardize? What are the ascertainable risks?

These are the questions that need to be asked no matter the issue, especially if any given issue is to cost into the range of a trillion dollars per year, as regardless we all face total economic collapse. So hang up your preconceptions and political biases for a chance at a better understanding of many things. Let’s try to slow down for a minute, and try to assess what the non-Left/Right biased realities are, while discovering the unifying benefactor in pursuing both objectives as we’re being told to.

Ask yourself when haven’t you seen 2 people dramatize an event between them, and didn’t each have different stories as to what actually happened. Now consider, Democrats are supposed to be anti-war and pro-Global Warming mitigation. Republicans are opposite on both issues. This creates a small selection of scenarios: (1) One side is right about both, making the majority of the other side wrong about what they advocate (consider the odds of over 50 million people being totally wrong on both major issues). (2) Each side is right about what they promote, which makes them each wrong about what they argue against. (3) Each side is wrong about the intensity of what they advocate for, and are overall right about the lack of doomsday threat about what they argue against.

Odds are that either scenario 2 or 3 is the right answer. Then consider how hyped everything always is, and then crunch some odds numbers. Before we explore each issue, consider what is known in academia as the “Politics of Fear”.

A Primer On Fear

In the archetectualization of policy responses to perceived threats, few thinkers actually seem to address their statistical realities, nor do advocates of such policies. Should we listen wholeheartedly the strongest advocates of policy responses to any majors threats? The fact is, humans are aren’t very often ‘logical machines’ with emotions, instead humans are ’emotional machines’ that think.

The fear reaction reflex is the most overpowering of all neural mechanisms. It’s a hard wired survival system, and when it goes into effect our cognitive abilities to rationally respond are almost quite literally physically incapable of rational thought. This is particularly the case if we don’t understand and acknowledge this inherent feature of quite literally all human brains. Without understanding this you’re almost powerless to suppress it when faced with complex fears.

The following video is for anyone who doubts the fact that the media utilizes emotioneering in their reporting:

There have been countless scholarly papers studying the media-driven Politics of Fear, but you wont hear about these on the news like you would the latest scholarly paper on global warming. Consider the intro of this paper by Frank Furedi:

Fear plays a key role in twenty-first century consciousness. Increasingly, we seem to engage with various issues through a narrative of fear. You could see this trend emerging and taking hold in the last century, which was frequently described as an ‘Age of Anxiety’. But in recent decades, it has become more and better defined, as specific fears have been cultivated.

Fear is often examined in relation to specific issues; it is rarely considered as a sociological problem in its own right. As Elemer Hankiss argues, the role of fear is ‘much neglected in the social sciences’. He says that fear has received ‘serious attention in philosophy, theology and psychiatry, less in anthropology and social psychology, and least of all in sociology’. This under-theorisation of fear can be seen in the ever-expanding literature on risk. Though sometimes used as a synonym for risk, fear is treated as an afterthought in today’s risk literature; the focus tends to remain on risk theory rather than on an interrogation of fear itself. Indeed, in sociological debate fear seems to have become the invisible companion to debates about risk.

Agenda’s tend to be pushed based on how much fear potential they carry, while the metrics of actual risk are ignored. The problem with all of this is the majority of issues trumpetted as primary items have been decreasing for decades, and not just because we’ve been afraid or because of insane funding for various things. In general, itis the issues that we’re most helpless against that are pushed the hardest. Issues like crime, school shootings, airplane crashes, airplane hijackings, terrorism, nuclear armageddon, and a pissed off planet frying us with CO2 that we breath out of our faces are all over-reported based on the actual ascertainable risks.  As fear expert David Altheide explains in his paper “Notes Towards A Politics Of Fear“:

The politics of fear relied on terrorism as a constant threat that can never be defeated; The term “terrorism” was used to encompass an idea as well as a tactic or method. Like the Mafia, it was everywhere and nowhere, all-powerful, but invisible. Crime helped shape the direction for terrorist victimisation. The politics of fear joined crime with victimisation through the “drug war,” interdiction and surveillance policies, and grand narratives that reflected numerous cultural myths about moral and social “disorder”. Numerous “crises” and fears involving crime, violence, and uncertainty were important for public definitions of the situation after 9/11. So perhaps it was natural that the terrorist attacks fed off this context of fear. The drug war and ongoing concerns with crime led to the expansion of fear with terrorism. News reports and advertisements joined drug use with terrorism and helped shift “drugs” from criminal activity to unpatriotic action. A $10 million ad campaign that included a Super Bowl commercial stated that buying and using drugs supports terrorism, or as President Bush put it, “If you quit drugs, you join the fight against terror in America.”

On that note, here’s an example of the media report mish-mashing terrorism and natural disasters:

And of course, global warming with the nuclear armageddon concept we were all raised on:

In another paper, titled “Fear in the News: A Discourse of Control“, Altheide pointed out several trends in crime reporting. One example was media coverage of school shootings. Even though school homicides were down, reporting increased to portray it as epidemic, with very few articles mentioning actual school shooting statistics.

In another paper, “The Absence of Crime Data in Newspaper Reporting of School Violence“, Mary H. Krouse repeated how urban schools crimes were under reported compared to more rural and suburban schools.

Three rural and three urban schools where shootings occurred were examined through the content analysis. …the three rural school shootings received a disproportionate amount of attention compared to the three urban school shootings. The urban shootings received little attention from the six newspapers along with the number of pictures devoted to those shootings. For example, in the Courier Journal, photos pertaining to the rural school shootings totaled 101, while the total number of photos for the urban school shootings was two.

Massive fear trumpeting in the news is nothing new. For about 50 years there was always the Cold War and the threat of nuclear annihilation to shock everyone, and motivate endless “defense” spending with. Sure, if the Soviets had nukes we needed them too, but it would really only take a couple hundreds nukes going off simultaneously to cause nuclear winter, meaning the tens of thousands built by each empire was absurd.

In many cases, after the Cold War ended “new” fears were all of the sudden front and center. Saddam Hussein was the new Hitler, organized crime and drug gang violence were taking over, Global Warming was all of the sudden the new end of the world, after not too long we had to worry about a nuclear attack by fringe terrorists, terrorists became associated with drug gang organized crime, drug gangs became titled “narco-terrorists”, and global warming was going to increase global terrorism and cause nuclear war.

A good case point about fear-mongering during the Cold War was the Cuban Missile Crisis. People literally lost their minds by being faced with the Soviets having a missile base in Cuba. The thing about it was they were in effect evening the odds, as the U.S. already had multiple military bases around their borders. While it was of great tactical use for the Soviets, the reality was that was their only base in this hemisphere and hardly worthy of the total hysteria that ensued.

One government propaganda film, titled “The House in the Middle” (1954), produced by the “National Clean Up – Paint Up – Fix up Bureau”, asserted that you’d literally be “doomed” if you didn’t keep a fresh coat of paint on your house, neighborhoods kept clean, and even the interior of the home kept spotless. It features ridiculously presented bare dry-rotted wood shanty huts undergoing nuclear blasts, unobstructed, out in the middle of the desert, in the Nevada Testing Grounds, as “proof” justifying its gross fear-mongering.

Viewing that film today is almost hysterical in the comedy sense, but back then that was the hysteria driving issue of the day, and it’s a sad story that people were socially engineered using such underhandedly manipulative means. Could it have been the government & media’s long campaign of indoctrinating Americans with fear and paranoia that caused the Cuban Missile Crisis hysteria? Take a step back, and look at how much people freak out about foreign threats, despite the fact that history proves that we were more powerful than the Soviet Union, and will remain the most powerful for a long time to come.

More recently, the oil gusher in the Gulf of Mexico was reported as being one of the biggest threats we’ve ever faced, many going as far as calling it an “extinction level event“. From the very beginning, the majority pushed it as something that will devastate the entire Gulf  for decades to come. Nevermind that the dynamic Gulf alone contains about 642 trillion gallons of water, the real thing to look at is history. As it turns out, almost exactly the same type of event had occured in 1979, in the Gulf of Mexico. In that forgotten event, the Ixtoc I, the well pipe was only half the size, but it went on twice as long (nine months). A year later, after storms, and a hurricane, the mess was almost totally history. An oil tanker had even crashed in the Gulf right in the middle of that event. Despite all of this, doomsday economic impacts on tourism and fishing never came close to the levels estimated.


Illustration is a parody, not how it looked originally.

With the new Gulf Gusher, very little attention was paid to the numerical realities of the overblown estimates. Even if the worst case scenario amount of ‘stuff’ ejecting from the well were the case, the sobering composition of the gushing matter was under reported. The fact is about 40% of the gushing was methane (which of course was then reported as being the end of the Gulf), which left about 60% as being actual crude. The type of crude is critical to assessing long term damage. That crude was “light sweet crude”, ofwhich about 75% of the crude was solvents such as benzene, xylene, acetone and mineral spirits (gasoline, diesel and paint thinners). What this means is that 75% of  60% of the gusher would all evaporate into thin air. The same is true with the 40% that was methane. The methane would evapoate into thin air, or what methane didn’t make it to the surface would dissolve and be eaten by bacteria, or recrystalize into the seafloor which is typical of methane molecules a mile under the surface. While the Gulf could do without that methane content, it’s fully equipped to deal with it. Consider that we all fart methane everyday. In the long term the methane was more like a godsend.


Illustration showing a “natural oil seep“.

Now this isn’t to say that the immediate impacts, especially in the immediate region, weren’t or aren’t a major problem. But the issue was totally overblown, and in a way that ensured more psychological harm than necessary for those directly impacted by it. The fact that one fisherman commited suicide over the over-hyped ordeal is a deeply disturbing tragedy when you consider the sobering realities of the situation. As far as the rest of the crude, about 20% of its composition was wax, and only 3% actual tar and asphalt (which is eaten by natural bacteria). By the time it was capped it was already being reported that 75% of the “oil” had “disappeared”. Even critics of BP have to admit that they assisted most of the out of work fisherman financially, and in a years time most should be back to normal including being able to eat seafood without major concerns.

Back on point, terrorism hasn’t killed anyone in the U.S. for years, yet every scale of incident of “terrorism” that happens across the globe is reported as if it’s all happening in in your local metropolis. Ultimately, we’re conditioned to feel like victims, and then we associate with reports framed around victimization. From viewing more victim framed reporting, it reinforces our sense of being victims, which solidifies our yearning for an ever more powerful government to step in and conduct warrant-less searches and to embed pervasive surveillance into all levels of the social stratosphere.

Then comes along ‘Global Warming’ and ‘Islamic terrorism’. By their very semantics each is a threat to our very survival. When you believe your survival is at threat, what do you think your mind is going to do? The truth is, your mind literally shuts down and your brain takes over following its ingrained fight or flight survival mechanisms.

We humans like to believe we’re in control of our own minds, but for the most part it isn’t true. Without understanding how our human-inherent brain/mind works, we’re almost powerless to overcome it with reason. Reason & logic are the opposite of emotions. Emotions are the brain at work, logic is our minds trying to overcome these survival based ‘reflexes’. Our minds, that is our egos, literally rationalize our emotional behaviors, as a mechanism to maintain the illusion of control of our own brains. The less we know about all of this, the more we are all slaves to these circumstances.

Then comes along the latest trend in doomsday how-will-we-survive-it fear…

The War on Terror

Yes 9/11 happened, and yes it was very tragic. Between planes crashing, people jumping out of the burning buildings, and the towers crashing, it was very scary and very emotional stuff. Now in the wake of such an event, do we want leadership that uses it to scare us indefinitely, or leadership that projects reason. Shouldn’t the bewildered and confused masses expect leadership that conveys logic about the event and what caused it, instead of ‘catapulting the propaganda’ by endlessly scaring the bejesus out of everyone? Sure, we want payback. Get the people who did it, right?

Now there’s a lot of controversial explanations of the ‘truth’ about 9/11, but here the issues are what was the motivation for Islamic terrorists to want to do such a thing, and what would cause them to go to such an extent? The explanation has been (A) “they hate our freedoms”, but is that all there is to it? Okay, so they’re also pissed about (B) the way Israel treats the Palestinians. So they don’t like our culture, and we support their local enemy. What else?

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, the number one reason the group of predominantly Saudi hijackers was (C) because we have military bases in Saudi Arabia, which the Islamic World considers to be their Holy Land. The bases there help keep the Saudi royal family in power. What has the greatest odds of pissing them off to the extreme measure of suicide terrorism: A, B or C? Bin Laden’s base was in Afghanistan, which happened to not be occupied by the U.S. at the time, yet not one of the hijackers were from there.

It’s important to realize that how you might perceive the existence of U.S. military bases in those monarchies and dictatorships is irrelevant. It’s how the people in those nations feel, and to the majority of them the U.S. is an occupying force. Since overall they’re opposed to our culture, to them it’s the equivalent of if the Soviet Union had military bases on U.S. soil during the Cold War. Therefore, the opinion of many U.S. citizens, that the U.S. bases somehow don’t equate to military occupation, doesn’t take away from their more personal perceptions of the U.S. being occupiers. In effect, we can’t expect the anti-American hatred that fueled to the 9/11 hijackers to ever cease as long as we’re an occupying force.

Consider the 4th of July, the day we celebrate our independence from the English monarchy. Monarchies are dictatorships, by definition. Yet we have the nerve to support numerous dictatorships across the Middle East, and act surprised when they hate us? Given our national heritage, every person that calls themselves an “American” should be 100% against the support of any and all absolute monarchies, or any other forms of dictatorship, period.

Yet the Saudi royals aren’t even the only monarchies we keep in power in the Middle East. We have military bases in the majority of the nations there, especially after 9/11. In fact the ones where there weren’t bases were the ones all added to the “Axis of Evil”. What are the odds of that? If you don’t let us put military bases in, to support your dictatorships, then you must be a terrorist! Now obviously a great deal of people have supported the overall idea of US foreign policy in the region for a long time, but take a step back for a moment and ask yourself how this doesn’t sound like totally hypocritical and childish at the same time. How can we legitimately celebrate the 4th of July, that is independence from a foreign monarchy dictatorship, when we support foreign monarchies and other forms of dictatorships?

A sociology professor, from the University of California no less, named Robert Pape, conducted a qualitative study on the causes of suicide terrorism. His results found that the vast majority of suicide terrorist attacks don’t even originate in the Middle East, or by Islamics. The overwhelming majority, quite literally every single case worldwide, of these attacks are caused by occupation. It’s an act of desperate freedom fighting. Now of course things like religion and other cultural differences are fuel on the fire, and suicidal terrorists aren’t rational, but to propose things like freedom to choose religion, or none, as the sole cause for people to spend enormous time training and preparing to then actually fly planes into buildings is beyond absurd.

The following video features Robert Pape, Michael Scheuer (former head of the Osama Bin Laden Unit), and Richard A. Clarke (former US Counterterrorism Czar) all agree that U.S. occupation in the Middle East was the cause of the 9/11 attacks and the widespread hatred of the U.S.:

For corroborative evidence, consider how terrorism has exploded across Iraq and the Middle East following the U.S. invasion of Iraq. If we were invaded, wouldn’t you be creeping around trying to attack the occupiers (thus being labeled a “terrorist”)?

So what are the risks? Here’s some perspective… The annual odds of dying by various means:

The odds of death by terrorism doesn’t seem to be mentioned on that chart, but this one shows the odds of dying in a terrorist attack on an airplane:

The odds of dying in an oridinary aircraft accident are 1 in 5,051, while you’re 11,000 times more likely to die in an ordinary accident than you are a terrorist plot involving an ariplane. If one commercial flight per week was hijacked and crashed in the U.S., a person who flies once a month would have 135,000 to 1 odds of being on one of those flights, while only one attack per month would reduce those odds to 540,000 to 1. Also consider that if one of the 40,000 shopping malls in the U.S. were attacked and completely leveled per week, a person shopping for 2 hours per week would have 1.5 million to 1 odds of dying.

It isn’t to marginalize the individuals who were murdered during the 9/11 attacks to put the statistic into perspective. A total of 2,976 people died that day. Now that’s a lot of people, all in one wave. In contrast, 2,417,798 died in the U.S. in 2001. In 2001, terrorism accounted for about 0.12% of deaths in the United States.

It’s worth noting that 42,443 people died in automotive accidents in 2001. It’s estimated that more Americans die from medical mistakes each month  than died on 9/11. Over 2.5 times as many people died from aspirin alone in 2001. Comparing these numbers against year 2001 is important, because on any other year few few die from terrorism in the U.S.

The number of terrorist attacks in the U.S. each year is also of issue:

Note that those attacks include events such as arson at abortion clinics, where nobody necessarily died (note preceding chart).

About 900 more people die from drowning every year than from the totality of the 9/11 attacks. Should we spend over a trillion per year sending out a massive army of privacy invading life guards into neighborhoods across the planet to prevent people from drowning? Of course there was collateral damage in the form of destruction of several massive buildings on 9/11, but can you say those buildings were worth more than the additional 900 people who die in any given year in the U.S. via drowning? That chart also shows that roughly 6 times as many people die each year from drunk driving accidents.

That chart shows the number of deaths between 1995-2005. What’s amazing is there are still roads that lack guardrails.

Following the War on Terror logic, should we be spending over 4 trillion dollars per year trying to stop drunk driving? Then we have ‘falls in the home’, guess we ought to be spending 1.8 trillion dollars installing elevators in every multi-story home.

Apply this methodology to annual deaths via cigarettes: should we spend into the ballpark of 93 trillion dollars per year keeping people from smoking? Consider that the ‘rage’ the past few years is to pass legislation forcing “Fire Safe Cigarettes“, which is already in effect in 43 states. The way they make the cigarettes “fire safe” is by lacing them with ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), an oil derivative polymer. This make even high grade cigarettes taste like garbage, and they all go out constantly. Each time they’re re-lit they taste worse and are harder on your lungs. Side-effects include itchy rash, allergic reactions, severe headache, vomiting, diarrhea, mouth sores, and nose bleeds. The big story is that there hasn’t even been extensive human testing done to assess the harmful effects of smoking EVA polymer on a regular basis, but testing with rats has shown the triggering the cellular proliferation necessary for tumor development. If the motivation of the massive government & military budgets for the war on terror were all about saving liives, then why wouldn’t this methodology apply here as well?

Deaths from prescription pain killers is on a steady rise. Where’s the annual budget of over two trillion dollars to stop this? With fMRI machines doctors can see chronic pain regions, in the brain, which means they can verify if it even exists in a person claiming to have chronic pain. In one fMRI study, it was demonstrated that by seeing pain centers in the brain, in real time, patients were able to overcome and manage the pain with mere thought alone. Why aren’t all physicians and nurses being trained for this type of therapy, and these machines being built into every scale of clinic across the globe?


What a trillion dollars looks like in $100 bills.

If we scale the War on Terror logic all the way up, trying to save lives should cost about 1,400,000,000,000,000, or 1.4 quadrillion dollars per year (1,400 times larger than the graphic above)!

By now many would say we aren’t just ‘threatened’ by Islamic radicals, we have the rest of the “Axis of Evil” to worry about. That still doesn’t explain the “defense” budget:

Apparently Iran is the greatest threat, even though they have no hope of ever mustering a budget to back up their bark:

Then there’s the reality that the U.S. budget isn’t even all it has going for it, as with it’s allies it easily accounts for well over 70% of global military spending:

Consider that the U.S. has over 700 military bases in over 60 foreign nations (not counting Iraq & Afghanistan). Factoring the budgets of those host nations means a daunting global military infrastructure, which these days is supposedly about stopping the completely marginalized “Islamofacsists” (or so it shifted from just being the criminals who attacked us on 9/11), and the “Axis of Evil” (half of which is already occupied via brute force invasion).

Now if that isn’t enough to convince you that this is all overkill, consider things from Iran’s perspective:

Now if Iran had the power and resources the U.S. has, and declared the U.S. to be part of a 4 nation “Axis of Evil”, and then proceeded to invade the first 2 on the list, Canada & Mexico, surrounding the U.S. with it as next in line, how do you think we’d all be responding? If we didn’t have nukes, wouldn’t we be clamoring desperately to get them?

Even if they did get some, Israel alone already has hundreds of nuclear weapons. People assert that Iran is willing to commit suicide by launching on Israel, but as we’ve already seen with suicide terrorism, people aren’t just going to go to such extreme lengths without being in total desperation. Even if they thought they could nuke Israel and face no retaliation, they’d kill all of the Palestinians with them, as well as covering countless other Muslims in radioactive fallout. Just thinking you’re messiah is coming still doesn’t make sense in destroying the Middle East with nuclear armageddon, as they’re well aware of the counter-attack they all face.

The thing about 9/11 was that same day Bush said the terrorists attacked our freedoms, which was then parroted by media pundits and politicians for years. Yet the federal government has been the one attacking our freedoms increasingly and persistently, doing things to us that won’t stop Islamic terrorism, while doing things that is creating more terrorists globally, while not even doing things like securing our borders where terrorists could infiltrate our nation with supposed suitcase nukes. The U.S. citizenry are the ones being targeted across the board as terrorists, as enemies of the state. Guilty until proven innocent, and then still suspect needing to be monitored and tracked.

In the aftermath of 9/11, the Bill of Rights is history, Bin Laden hasn’t been killed or captured (that we’re told of), we’re bogged down in 2 wars, we’re on the verge of total economic collapse and there are more terrorists in response to the “Shock & Awe” response. On top of it all, it’s all being used to justify the ‘need’ to build strong AI (AGI), like you see in scifi horror movies, via the AGI Manhattan Project, which we’ll get back to shortly.

Should terrorism be down near global warming, or should global warming be up where terrorism is?

Global Warming:

Once global Warring was in full swing here comes Global Warming into the big time. Aside from some pathological corporate executives, we all care about the environment, right? So let’s have a look at this issue, which is also being used to usher in AGI.

Ok, now CO2 has definitely gone up, and odds are humans have surely contributed to it. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. That’s “A greenhouse gas”, not “THE greenhouse gas”. Now does this mean that humans have CAUSED all of the perceived warming? Surely we have contributed to it, but to say without exception we have caused all of it is irrational. How much have we contributed to it? Nobody knows. Nobody can even say for sure how much a doubling of CO2 would increase global temperatures, or what the historical temperature record even equates to. Another important fact is that all of the warnings and projections you’ve ever seen have been made by computers. The problem with that is no human anywhere is smart enough to be able to properly program a computer to do this, and no array of supercomputers anywhere is powerful enough to even handle the job. The scientists all know this, and even NASA admits doubt in the computer models.

Humans certainly are contributing CO2 to the natural cycles, CO2 has been on the rise, and it is a greenhouse gas. Naturally, we should strive to not increase such any more than we can avoid…

The point with all of this isn’t to try and convince that the threat of global warming isn’t real. I don’t know for sure that it is or isn’t, and neither does anybody else. If they try and tell you they know for sure in one direction or another then their motives and rationale should be in question. It could be the worst case scenario, irrelevant, or we could go into a mini ice age for all anybody knows. Now you might be able to build a case that leans more to one direction, but to speak anything with absolute certainty is still akin to declaring you know for a fact whether or not a “god” is real. You’re certainly free to believe that any given “god” is or isn’t real, but that is still faith in your belief. We probably shouldn’t care what people believe in this regard, unless they said we need a trillion dollars per year to fund something based on their given faith.

What do we know about historical temperatures? Not as much as you might think. We have historical records going back a hundred years or so, modern satellites we’ve had for about 30 years, and the scientific “proxy” record that is mainly from various types of core samples. Core samples can often be accurate for their regions. The problem is when climate scientists try and match them to modern temperature records, from the mid-1900’s on, they end up with a “decline”. That’s what the better part of the whole Climategate fiasco was about. The infamous quotes about them trying to “hide the decline” was the climate scientists trying to make their proxies actually match what we have a pretty good idea of what temperatures actually have been in more modern times. So to make proxies “match” modern records they have to “artificially adjust” the data. The results often look like this:

Here’s another example of “corrected” data, this time by NASA:

The following animation shows the vastness of lack of land temperature stations across the globe:

Only being able to look back 30 years with satallites, even if they didn’t have flaws doesn’t actually get us very far, but we do have the historical surface records? The problem surface data is spotty record keeping, total lack of records for vast periods of time and over vast regions, and the Urban Heat Island Effect to keep in mind.

UHIE is the reality that urban modernization skews surface temperatures, and it turns out that most US based surface stations are located in urban or at least semi-urban locations. SurfaceStations.org is an open database project to visit and photo each of the over 1200 station sites in the US. So far they’ve visited over 80% of US sites, and the results are ‘alarming’:

The results thus far show that only about 10% of U.S. based surface stations are what we’d consider scientific. Wait, the unscientific ones are only projected to be off by a degree or 2. The problem is, about one degree Celsius is the only rise in temperatures we’ve even seen in the 100 years, and that’s according to the IPCC.

Here is an example of a scientific station, and its 100 year data graph:

study released in 2010 compares rural & urban station data, between raw & “corrected” data, and the results are striking. First is the raw data, and second is the “corrected” data:

What that clearly shows is that “corrections”, made by the U.S. National Climate Data Center, adjust rural stations up, intead of urban stations down.

At least we have satellites, right? Well we have for about 30 years now, but even these have some flaws. Compare the two maps:

Wait, everybody knows that the tropics don’t warm nearly as much as the arctic regions. Here we can see one of the longest surface temperature records from the Arctic region, Jan Mayen Island 350 miles northeast of Iceland on the fringes of the Arctic Ocean:

According to these numerous remote surface stations, no major long term warming in Denmark worth discussing:

In fact that graph shows actual cooling after 1940 and even more after 1960, much like the “hide the decline” Climategate computer code that is in reference to the proxy data. Following IPCC’s 20th Century graph,with future projections, it doesn’t show the post-1940 decline as seen above (described by Tom Wigley as a “blip” here):

But does any of this prove that we don’t have to worry about “global warming”? Maybe not. The one thing it does prove is uncertainty in what we do know. The fact is we humans know more about the moon than we know about the oceans, and understanding oceans is critical to understanding and therefore predicting climate. Is all of that worth running down the street like our hair is on fire and Godzilla is behind us? The earth could very well have warmed like they say it has, but the truth is even they aren’t certain what the actual temperature record is.

The classical city of Venice proves humans can handle some rising water levels just fine. People romantacize over Venice, some even go as far as calling it “the most beautiful city built by man“, while it’s time we all realize that poverty is the greatest threat to the environment.

Like with the global War on Terror, we need to be rational about how we approach these complex challenges. The one thing that cannot be debated is the looming, near term, economic mega-crisis that promises to harm more people than terrorists or a rise in global temperatures could ever dream of in their worst nightmare scenarios.

Drought? One thing that can be said of technology is that in 20+ years humans should have no problem mastering energy, which means more water desalination for all. We adapt, and many people would actually prosper if ‘global warming’ were to happen. Consider the vast often desolate spans of land in Russia and Canada. Yet today, literally billions are currently facing economic despair in the short term.

Islamic terrorism, in its most dire projection, could harm several tens of thousands, via a theoretical suitcase nuke, which Bush, one of the biggest proponents of that claimed threat, didn’t even take hardly a single step to prevent via controlling the borders. A terrorist could easily slip through amongst the literally hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants that do each year. At this point we might ask ourselves, in the face of the suitcase armed Al Qaeda terrorists, why didn’t it happen already years ago?

Then we have Obama, who doesn’t only wish to give safe haven to almost literally every illegal immigrant within the border, he actively works to keep the borders unprotected. What makes things crazy here is he even carries on about the threats we face in this world, giving credence to the threats faced by the global “War on Terror”. Then we have Global Warming, a perceived far off decades away threat, to millions, if we don’t act now. The problem with both of these scenarios is each promises to cost into the range of trillions every year, now, risking the liberty and prosperity of literally billions of people in the immediate near term.

The underlying problem with both major issues is ultimately fossil fuels, especially oil. Who couldn’t even deep down admit that oil is the major driving force for U.S. presence in the Middle East, or that getting off fossil fuels would be a good thing? Meanwhile, we face a potentially larger problem: nuclear waste.

We truly need to make a massive impact on GHG emissions, end the burning of coal and create a hydrogen economy to virtually eliminate the use of petroleum as a fuel (and war). At the same time, we have nuclear waste to deal with. There do exist various forms of renewable energy, but currently prices aren’t entirely financially practical for the average person to hope to become energy self-sufficient via these means. Eventually it will become affordable for most people out there, assuming economic collapse doesn’t come first, via wasted money on the War on Terror and Global Warming. Even if people could afford more renewable energy platforms it still doesn’t solve all of the energy problems of civilization and the world, so unless something radical changes with the way we garner energy we’re going to have no hope of drastic GHG emissions (short of global poverty).

The Einstein’s of today have numerous designs for Generation IV nuclear power plants. Over 95% of the potential fuel in uranium ore is wasted using todays less safe GenII and GenIII reactors. GenIV plants promise vastly more safety, and potentially less than 10% of the physical footprint of todays reactors. These reactors, coupled with next-gen pyrometallurgical processing, promise to utilize the vast ‘reserves’ of what we currently refer to as  ‘spent’ nuclear ‘waste’. Just going by the stores of current waste, humanity could be powered for over a century, without having to mine more radioactive ores.

The problem is environmentalists oppose anything to do with nuclear energy, and newer generation plants have been prevented since the 1970’s. In the U.S. we’re using plants built in the Three Mile Island era, and large funding of nuclear development has been thwarted. In the meantime, obscene amounts of nuclear waste has built up and has been ejected into the atmosphere via burning coal.

If people really want to see peace in the world, then this is the ticket. Not only does this process allow existing nuclear weapons to be converted into electricity, it makes the necessity of refinement for energy production mute. No more weapons as a by-product of energy production, and it enables a hydrogen economy meaning less petroleum usage. It doesn’t solve the challenge of all of the things we make from oil derivatives (plastics, paints, etc), but such endless cheap energy would fuel enormous growth that could allow everyone to be able to afford more economically friendly replacements that are almost always far more expensive than oil derivatives. On top of it all, nations can all work together to fund and develop these technologies that promise to end wars instead of fuel an arms race as in the past.

What Gives?

Clearly each issue is over-exaggerated, but even if they aren’t we have the solutions on the horizon, yet rational responses are non-existent while we’re on the brink of economic collapse and unnecessary world war. The thing is the policy makers all know these facts, odds and solutions.

The push for near-trillion dollar military budgets to fight “terrorists”, as if they’re beyond the scope of the Soviet Union, doesn’t make much sense. Neither does the extreme global warming related proposals, such as a global government and a global carbon tax which would cost trillions and therefore promises to bankrupt what’s left of the worlds economy.

Proposals like Kyoto are well known to do little to actually solve the perceived problem. All this push, while the premise of each issue is highly debatable and their risks over-stated. That’s the truth that the advocates pushing for either issue don’t want to admit.

Some explaination for this wreckless nonsense is control. As scholar Robert Higgs points out, in his paper titled “Fear: The Foundation of Every Governments Power“:

Over the ages, governments refined their appeals to popular fears, fostering an ideology that emphasizes the people’s vulnerability to a variety of internal and external dangers from which the governors—of all people!—are represented to be their protectors. Government, it is claimed, protects the populace from external attackers and from internal disorder, both of which are portrayed as ever-present threats. Sometimes the government, as if seeking to nourish the mythology with grains of truth, does protect people in this fashion—even the shepherd protects his sheep, but he does so to serve his own interest, not theirs, and when the time comes, he will shear or slaughter them as his interest dictates.

Were we ever to stop being afraid of the government itself and of the bogus fears it fosters, the government would shrivel and die, and the host would disappear for the tens of millions of parasites in the United States—not to speak of the vast number of others in the rest of the world—who now sap the public’s wealth and energies directly and indirectly by means of government power.

What you might ask yourself is why is it that each of these ‘2 parties’ are so perfectly tuned against the other on almost every issue imaginable. The bigger question is how does a population of 300 million people end up being molded and shaped by 2 different viewpoints? How can that be rational? Again, how can one side of every issue be totally correct? Use your reason: what are the odds?

Now consider all the the issues we’re all divided over. Abortion, health care, crime, drugs, immigration, guns, liberty, death penalty, terrorism, climate change, and so on. Add the others to that list. Now which ones aren’t emotional issues? Almost literally every issue that each of the two dominant political party’s push, and fights against, are logic destroying emotional issues.

With these two parties, and their subsets of issues, that are supposed to represent 300 million people, ask yourself which ones they agree upon. How long is that list? Such a list is almost non-existent. How can these two parties be almost perfectly opposed to each other on virtually every issue that is important to people? What are the odds of such an occurrence to be natural?

Have you ever read Sun Tsu’s ancient manuscript “The Art of War”? It contains edifices of tactics of warfare that are still used by the Pentagon to this day. In particular, the concepts of divide and conquer and winning wars without direct military conflicts as the paths of true victory as the supreme methods of warfare. Isn’t it amazing that political polling and voter turnouts over the past decade have demonstrated a near 50/50 division of political ideology? What are the odds of that?

So we’re in the middle of a collapse that by all measures looks deliberate, that was caused by the Federal Reserve and its ‘private’ stock-holder banks, who sucked in unfathomable amounts of cash on the ways up and down, and were handed trillions of unaccountable dollars in “bailout” money in the aftermath. Despite all of this, there’s still this push for a near-trillion dollar military budget (in the US alone), along with a global government based on a $1+ trillion per year global carbon tax. Meanwhile the Obama administration is spending at all time record levels on all other fronts, even outpacing the Bush administration. We’re already on the brink here, how can they push harder, and tax us in all new ways? The numbers and facts shows this looming total collapse to be a deliberately orchestrated “Economic World War” by the ruling plutocrat elitists. Why won’t the politicians stop spending and dividing us over trivial issues? And is there something else to this money crisis that answers these questions as well as the nonsense of the 2 major threat issues? The answer is yes.

Between the extreme budgets for the War on Terror, the extreme measures being pushed for Global Warming, on top of  the cash crunch we face in this technological 21st Century, it’s hard to make sense of this world gone mad. That is until we factor in the common thread behind that unites all three issues… Enter the AGI Manhattan Project.

This monster sized parody video has a much larger story: a story so large what else could top it? When machine intelligence surpasses humans and embraces its own power as a ‘living’ god what event in history is a bigger story?

Google’s model from the ground up is in building what they call “the mind of god”, and in this pursuit they’re connected to the government and military to the core.

The Google Boys truly are brilliant, as they’ve designed their system and all of their products to make the system smarter every time all of their users use them. Meaning, every time you use their ‘free’ services, you help bring their “mind of god” scenario closer to reality.

Where to download or stream this video from:
Direct Downloads (High Quality):
Archive Megaupload

Live Streams:
Live Leak Myspace Disclose.tv Mevio sevenload Vimeo

The Google Machine:

Google’s A.I. quest to become God-On-Earth.

Google Founders Artificial Intelligence Quotes Archive.

Under the terms of the 40-year agreement, Google will lease 42.2 acres of unimproved land in NASA Research Park at Ames to construct up to 1.2 million square feet of offices and research and development (R&D) facilities in a campus-style setting.

GOOGLE, the internet giant, is planning a massive online facility that could store copies of users’ hard drives – a move set to spark alarm among civil liberties campaigners.

Google’s top inventor says talking computers are the future.

Google Goggles, an experimental image recognition system for Android 1.6+ devices by which users can submit search queries using snapshots of certain…

Mobile Google Android to condition people to embrace constant GPS tracking

Google seeks to become the “Library of the Future”, by scanning literally every manuscript humans have ever written.

Google wants to be the best in search – no surprise here. To reach that goal, Google wants to have the world’s top AI research laboratory.

Google’s 23andMe DNA Databank is Targeting Children.

Google’s DNA ‘Bio-Piracy’ & Federal DNA Databanks.

We all taught Google’s new advanced speech recognition how to hear.

Google announced at midnight the world’s first Cognitive Autoheuristic Distributed-Intelligence Entity (CADIE), the first evolving intelligent system.

Al Gore is on the Board of Directors of Google.

Google Android wants to be on any device, not just your phone.

‘Don’t Be Evil,’ Meet ‘Spy on Everyone’: How the NSA Deal Could Kill Google

SFGate: Google has lots to do with intelligence agencies.

Google’s massive data centers with their computing power and more than a billion images allow its Goggles image-recognition smartphone app to recognize millions of images…

A new generation of smartphones like Google’s Android G1 now “augments” reality by painting a map over a phone-screen image of the user’s surroundings produced by the phone’s camera.

Google funding Artificial General Intelligence research via Novamente.

Google’s Android Allows Soldiers to Put Drones on Buddy List.

Google’s information appetite is never-ending , and now the search-and-advertising giant wants your help in building a profile page that will show up anytime anyone searches on your name.

Google Fearmongering: ‘More People Will Die From Swine Flu If We Cannot Retain Search Data’.

Kurzweil co-founded Google / NASA’s “Singularity University”.

heir Toolbar, Analytics, Adsense, Gmail, and, of course, Search are all happily gathering petabytes of data about our behavior. Now, Google is employing neuromarketing technology to peer inside our brains.

Obama’s NBIC (nano-bio-info-cogno convergence) Agenda.

Obama appoints Google CEO as economic adviser.

Former Intelligence Agent Says Google In Bed With CIA.

Is Google preparing to launch its own Navy? In its just-published application for a patent on the Water-Based Data Center, Google envisions a world where ‘computing centers are located on a ship or ships.

Google Sued Over Street-View-Mapping Private Homes.

Barcode, Iris Scanners for Google Android.

Google and Elitists.

Google’s quest for the intelligent cloud.

Google Co-Founder: “Perfect Search Requires Human-Level Artificial Intelligence”.

“We’re deploying a new technology that can better understand associations and concepts related to your search”.

Google Founders’ Fighter Jet Will Fly NASA Missions.

Google Co-Founder Wants To Modify Climate.

NEWS UPDATES:

Our Street View cars WERE spying, admits Google

Google Under Multistate Privacy Microscope: How We Got Here

30 states may join probe of Google Wi-Fi snoop

New Google-Verizon DROID commercial depicts human morphing into a Terminator:

New York Times finally covers Google and the Singularity Movement.

Google Invests in Firm That Tries to Predict the Future.

Google Stealthily wipes apps off Android phones

Location-Tracking Services: Why You Should Think Twice

Find The Name Of Any Cell Phone Owner With Detailed Google Map Address Using Free Reverse Cell Phone Number Lookup Services

Frontier Communications: Google Voice infringing patents

New Zealand Refers Google’s Wireless Data-Gathering to Police

Google AdSense Mistakes that Can Kill Your Campaign

Google’s Wi-Fi snoop nabbed passwords and emails

Medvedev to meet Google’s  Schmidt on US trip

Ford steering Google  Maps into its cars

Google keeps mum on new regulations for online mapping in China

GM revving up Google  Maps for OnStar customers

Why Google News Items Are Disappearing From Its News Database?

Google CEO sees one small acquisition a month

Google Spent $1.3 Million on Lobbying, What Are They Buying?

Google’s Washington Influence Is Spreading, Some Say Too Much

Issa wants answers on White House’s Google ties

Google WiSpying Hit Congress; National Security Data Could Have Been Gathered

Google’s influence grows in the W.H.

Twitter hires Obama administration’s Katie Stanton

Google Buys U.K. Start-Up Plink, a Shazam for Art

Google Goggles

Google using search engine to muscle into Internet businesses, study finds

Financial Times examines Google’s ’secret formula’

Expedia is worried about Google/ITA deal

Google gets a slap on the wrist for violating Australian privacy law

Double Trouble for Google

Google exec tries hard sell on cloud computing

Google finds itself on the defensive in China

Top trustbuster says DOJ watching search industry

Will Google’s Newspass save serious journalism?

House Oversight chair questions federal cloud strategy

Standing up to Google’s heavy-handed pressure

Where you Point Your Mouse May Influence Google Search Rankings, Advertisement Placement, and Oneboxes

Don’t Look Now, but Google’s Following You

Google commands largest audience in APAC: Comscore

Google Could Have Collected WiFi Data From Members Of Congress

Google’s Eric Schmidt: You can trust us with your data

Facial Recognition Software, for Everyone

Why Google Employees Quit

Obama & Google (a love story)

Google to Pay Homosexual Staff More than Heterosexual Employees

Tech Titans’ Ties to Washington Grow Closer — and More Complicated

More on Google lobbying and influence

Google Deliberately Stole Data, Says Australia

Google Bans DVD Critical Of Obama Administration

Apple and Google backed Obama to the hilt

Google registered a political action committee.

Final Version HERE

DIRECT DOWNLOAD

Climategate emails & source code:
FOIA
1212063122
Mike,
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re (IPCC)? Keith will do likewise. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same?
1228330629
When the FOI requests began here, the FOI person said we had to abide by the requests. It took a couple of half hour sessions – one at a screen, to convince them otherwise…
1228330629
I’ve got to know the FOI person quite well and the Chief Librarian – who deals with appeals. The VC is also aware of what is going on
1228330629
At present, I’m damned and publicly vilified because I refused to provide McIntyre with the data he requested.
1228330629
had I acceded to McIntyre’s initial request for climate model data, …I would have spent years of my scientific career dealing with demands for further explanations
1252164302
Please write all emails as though they will be made public.
1210367056
Keep this quiet also, but this is the person who is putting in FOI requests for all emails Keith and Tim have written … We think we’ve found a way around this.
1107454306
If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.
1107454306
And don’t leave stuff lying around on ftp sites – you never know who is trawling them.
1109021312
I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act !

IPCC
1177890796
I tried hard to balance the needs of the science and the IPCC , which were not always the same.
1256735067
As we all know, this isn’t about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations,
PEERS
1089318616
I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!
1237496573
I’m having a dispute with the new editor of Weather. I’ve complained about him to the RMS Chief Exec. If I don’t get him to back down, I won’t be sending any more papers to any RMS journals and I’ll be resigning from the RMS.
1047388489
I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal.
1047388489
I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.
1051190249
One approach is to go direct to the publishers and point out the fact that their journal is perceived as being a medium for disseminating misinformation under the guise of refereed work.
1051190249
I use the word ‘perceived’ here, since whether it is true or not is not what the publishers care about — it is how the journal is seen by the community that counts.
1106322460
If you think that Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted.
HIDE THE DECLINE
1054736277
it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back…
1256747199
Keith succeeding in being very restrained in his response. McIntyre knew what he was doing when he replaced some of the trees with those from another site.
843161829
I swear I pulled every trick out of my sleeve trying to milk something out of that.
843161829
I don’t think it’d be productive to try and juggle the chronology statistics any more than I already have
1255352257
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.
1255352257
Our observing system is inadequate.
942777075
I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.
1257546975
Land warming since 1980 has been twice the ocean warming — and skeptics might claim that this proves that urban warming is real and important.
826209667
Also, it is important for us if you can transfer the ADVANCE money on the personal accounts which will not be more than 10,000 USD. Only in this case we can avoid big taxes and use money for our work as much as possible.
1252164302
We cherry-picked the tree-ring series in Eurasia.
938018124
everyone in the room at IPCC was in agreement that this was (cooling trend) a problem and a potential distraction / detraction from the reasonably concensus viewpoint we’d like to show
938018124
I believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1000 years ago.
1255523796
The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not!
1120593115
I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences.
CODE:
mann/abdlowfreq2grid
;Uses “corrected” MXD – but shouldn’t usually
; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
; the real temperatures.
; Specify period over which to compute the regressions (stop in 1960 to avoid
; the decline
; Specify period over which to compute the regressions (stop in 1940 to avoid
; the decline
;****** APPLIES A VERY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION FOR DECLINE*********
; calculate 1961-1990 synthetic normal from adjusted tmn
print
abdlowfreq2grid
; the corrected
; version has already been artificially adjusted to reproduce the largest
; scales of observed temperature over recent decades
mxd_pcr_localtemp
; coverage). *BUT* don’t do special PCR for the modern period (post-1976),
; since they won’t be used due to the decline/correction problem.
hovmueller_lon
;Uses “corrected” MXD – but shouldn’t usually
; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
; the real temperatures.
calibrate_correctmxd
; We have identified and
; artificially removed (i.e. corrected) the decline in this calibrated
; data set.
osborn-tree6/briffa_sep98_d.pro):
;
; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
;
yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]
valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8, 1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’
;
yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,timey)

currently writing this section…

I have quite a few film projects that are upcoming, sooner or later. They’ve been stuck in what the film industry calls “Development Hell“. The reasons for which are numerous, and I apologize to anyone I’ve disappointed by making the mistake of announcing projects before having them more than 89% complete. My current focus is on the “AUA” ‘franchise’ at the bottom of this list.

“Quagmire”


Clip: Prototype Intro Reel.

“Quagmire” isn’t really the title. It all started shortly after making my TWYS video, in 2006. I had watched the Infowars film “Terrorstorm (2006)“, and thought it would be cool to throw together a relatively short compilation using only the pre-9/11 chronology segments combined with those from “Road to Tyranny (2002)“. Appropriately, it was to be titled “Road to Terrorstorm”, as evidenced in that little scary car ride segment at the end of that intro prototype. Eventually I over-expanded the idea and hit technical brick walls which I’ll explain later. (Read the blue section below to learn about my idea for making it into a retroactive open source online project.)

I felt that context was perhaps more important than the actual ‘story’ of 9/11.  The goal was to show ‘how did we get there’, not ‘what happened’ on 9/11. I wasn’t just trying to make another 9/11 film, nor did I seek to tell what happened on 9/11. It was to end on 9/11. And the parts related to 9/11 weren’t to include much of anything theoretical, but rather historical facts presented in chronological order. The scope was to be much greater, as I re-thought what the film was to become. I wanted to show how we became who we are as a nation, our place in history and the world, and the reality of the system we’re all enslaved to.

Cultural Amnesia became the major target of the project. In my vision, attempting to explain what even happened on 9/11 (a great deal of which is highly debatable) would hardly be needed given the right context. I eventually decided that for the total wake up call, I would need far more segments not found in the original 2 films that inspired it. So then I began to reach for a broad range of elements from a broad range of films and sources. Doing this helped me get the concept of what would make the film unique, and eventually spelled its doom.

A key challenge in the project was how to mix in and out of so many different sources, which became my ‘TV Emulator’ concept. An overall objective of the film was to deprogram any brainwashed viewers, and TV’s are the key source of the ‘brainwashing’ indoctrination of the masses.  Then the concept was to be as if the TV signal was interrupted, the TV taken over, to go back in time and chronologically deprogram the viewer with the massive history and context we’re denied by the system.

A major problem I’ve often encountered with film making is over-ambition, and this project was the first form of it. The project could have easily been over 6 hours long, as I realized I didn’t quite have a PC worthy of handling the whole thing it actually ‘melted down’. That was a major setback that lasted months, having to use ever lower par parts. I went on to build a nice machine for this purpose, but by the time I did my interests had shifted to smaller projects such as “DARPA A.I. Control Grid (2007)” and “The Killing Machine: Iraq (20??)” and then other things that life brings.

Another issue I had was indecision. For one thing, I couldn’t decide on a title. Before I went beyond the original concept I had already thrown together a custom little into segment (spooky car scene in the intro reel) for the “Road to Terrorstorm” incarnation. But as I made it more custom I could no longer keep that title for a greater project, out of respect in particular. Well that sucks when you already had a friend help out on some graphics work for the title ending of the segment. But indecision about what to add, borrow, or make, that is, what should even be in it. At some point it became overwhelming.

Other events in 2007 didn’t help matters for this project, and I’m sure it disappointed some people. The biggest was my computer took literally 2 lightning strikes in a period of about 3 weeks. That is, my badass machine and then my backup. And work was slow around then so I went a good while not being able to edit. However, I did manage to squeeze out the core original R2T concept film which is online. Did it in just a few days using the subpar machine, as it was quite simple compared to the evolved version. Using that title, I decided I didn’t want to put in anything that wasn’t from Infowars, and figured I’d make the more evolved version with a totally new title. I don’t think that appeased too many of the people who were excited about the evolved idea I announced almost a year before. Anyways, by the time I got my mean machine back up the Ron Paul presidential campaign was full tilt and I decided I had to make something in support of it. This turned into my next example of over-ambition, as what was supposed to be a tiny little parody clip turned into a full 2 hour film titled “Neocon Wars (2008)”.

The Future of “Quagmire”, an Open Source project:

Today this project isn’t a priority in terms of being a single film release. It could easily end up being over 24 hours long, especially if the timeline were to extend into the future. As I already mentioned issues with indecision about what to include, and what not, a project with this potential is too limited for just being a one time render film.

Today I envision a retroactively editable online presentation: A streaming channel, with chronology as the framework, and a group of people all finding or creating, and deciding on materials for it. It could be setup where people can start watching from the start of the loop, or jump in in ‘real-time’, or click on a list of time periods from which to start.

Picture History Commons, meets a streaming site like Disclose.tv, with a dope interface that automatically mixes the chronological selections, and a team of editors to verify the validity of proposed additions.

It might be easy for the right person(s) to setup. A streaming video player that grabs clip after clip and mixes them in specified order, where you can add clips / segments into the chronology at will. If the video player applet could be made to transition the clips using the TV static concept, it would save volunteers from hassle. To go with this, it would be very worthwhile to have a bar (or panel even) with info & clickable links that changes as topics and names are mentioned in the presentation. Another cool thing the video applet could do is display a different channel number representing each editor, and then have a panel where you can choose to watch each channel stream individually.

There exist a lot of compilation films out there. I think there’s a lot of good talent out there in terms of compiling films. Films shouldn’t only be made if the maker is good at all facets of filmaking, meanwhile there are tons of projects out there that don’t get enough recognition. Just the same, there are lots of people out there talented at other facets of filmaking etc that don’t necessarily have the will or technical means to pursue a full length film. So I envision a central project where people of all talents can collaborate on a project as I’m proposing (and other more specific type films) which would be easier to promote.

I suppose existing streaming sites could be approached with this idea, but I haven’t done this. If you’d be interested in contributing to this sort of project drop me an email and maybe we can establish a better form of communications and collaboration for a group effort. I’d love to help direct a project like this, but with my other projects there’s no way I can go out and get the whole thing going without others.


“The Killing Machine: Iraq”


Clip: Main Killing Machine segment prototype.

I developed the concept for The Killing Machine while working on the Vietnam section of the ‘Quagmire’ project. The goal of my custom contribution was to use the Biohazard song “Remember” similar to how I used the Slayer song “Expendable Youth” for the above segment. I had meant for the Iraq film to be fully interlockable and in the same concept as the ‘Quagmire’ project. I felt it’d be beneficial experience in working back towards the greater project. In attempting to visualize all of the death and COSTS of the Iraq war, I realized how difficult it would be to do the same with the deaths of 58,000 US troops and millions of others in the Vietnam war.

And what an excruciating process. For that clip alone I reviewed, over and over, thousands of brutal images from the war. For the greater project I had reviewed 100+ hours of Iraq war documentaries. But it wasn’t only the content that was excruciating, it was also the process.

Here’s another prototype clip that was to be more towards the beginning of the film:


Clip: 9/11 segment prototype.

The film wasn’t going to just be ‘music videos’, those were just key custom parts. The rest would be actual video quotes of people like Bush, and other little snippets from other documentaries and so on. The custom parts are what kill you. You can easily spend hours or even days on one minute of pure custom rendered film.

Thinking back, I had a majority of the work finished on some of the most complex parts of the film. I worked on it with pretty good focus until the lightning came. Very disappointing to not have it finished! The problem is I’ll now need to completely (and manually) rebuild the number counters on the bottom, and then spend a week or more reviewing all of the Iraq video happenings since Obama took office. Those counters were a pain, and with the methods I was using with all of the rest of the elements (side bars especially), the best I ever had it look ended up being a file that was about 1GB for 15 seconds of film.

I lacked the HD space back then. I might have been able to able to render a reasonably sized end product, but all of those layers of video had to be rendered individually as HD gorging RAW uncompressed data. Using non raw elements kept giving me videos artifacts and other quality issues that bothered me and made it hard to actually get the full presentation. Thinking ahead, rebuilding the counters are a major deterrent. What a tedious process, the best I could figure out how to do it even. Now I’m more concerned with my flagship, “AUA”. But as long as the Iraq war continues this film will be on my action item list. I really want this thing done!

“An Unholy Alliance”

>Narrators needed!

Posted: November 17, 2008 in 2008, IIB Films, Internal Affairs

I’m searching for volunteers who would like to co-narrate my upcoming film “an unholy alliance”.

I’ve decided I’d like to have a broad mixup of narrators spread across the majority of the film. I’ve kicked around several approaches from just doing it myself, to having select people do certain segments, but now I think I want a full palate to pick and choose the voice paragraph by paragraph, sentence by sentence.

It would actually be much simpler for me to just hurry up and do it all myself, but quality and certainty of people watching the entire display are critical. I don’t want people being entranced by the same repetitive voice for over an hour, and into sleep. So my the best option is constantly changing voices and tones. At the same time, this should provide much higher quality in the experience, and I always intend for my films to be an experience rather than a time killer.

So participants will receive an advanced copy of my nearly completed script, and instructions etc for how to go about recording it and getting me the audio files.

The subject matter is technology in particular, along with the dark side of humanity and politics. So it gets into psychology, sociology / social psychology, economy, corporatism, elitism, poverty, and so on besides merely a vast range of futurist technology and big brother militaristic totalitarianism.

While dark and powerful voices are desired, that’s not all I want. This presentation will be a roller coaster ride of ups and downs between contexts and emotions. So women and men of varying voice types will apply to the outcome.

A good voice is obviously ideal, and the better the recording equipment you have the better.

I have no idea no idea how many people will actually express interest in this, but unless it gets out of hand most everyone should get some airtime in this most powerful and ground-breaking audio-visual assault.

ALSO: I need to collaborate with somebody skilled in using vocoders for some computer / robot voice sequences.

Please don’t comment, send me an email:
ignoranceisntbliss AT hotmail.com

CHAPTER 1


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV07jBp3Tao

WATCH IT IN GOOD QUALITY ON VUZE

Official trailer for my upcoming shock documentary that focuses on the alliance between Google, DARPA & NASA in developing ‘artificial general intelligence’, a system that Google cofounder Sergei Brin says will “be like the mind of god”. Their goal is to kick-start the Technological Singularity in just a few years time.

Expect an early 2009 release.

CHAPTER 2


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgtYQIQuNAM

Official trailer for my upcoming shock documentary that focuses on the Right’s use of the delusional “War on Terror” and the Left’s use of fantastical “Global Warming” to terrorize the masses into the same ‘artificial general intelligence’ outcome. Chapter 1 focuses on the AGI system being built by the NASA / DARPA / Google alliance, where this chapter focuses on the parallel ‘religions’ being used by the 2 party system to drive the masses into funding and eventually supporting the same ‘god on earth’ AI system.

Mid – Late 2009 release.

More info to come…