Thursday, March 24, 2011

Michael Ruppert: My Assessment

I watched the film made of interviews of Michael Ruppert called “Collapse” the other night and listening to him I considered three possibilities:

One, that he hasn’t heard of Zero Point Energy (ZPE) and truly believes we have a need for oil if we want to sustain ourselves at our present level; or

Two, he has heard of ZPE but discounted it as some “conspiracy theory” and focused his attention solely on the oil part of the picture; or

Three, he is playing the part of one who is on the outside with experience close to the inside (to gain trust), but is deliberately painting a picture that doesn’t even mention ZPE.

About ZPE, it is also called “Dark” Energy, Orgone, and other such names as have been given to observable phenomena working with specific configurations. It fills us and is all around us in the Zero Point Field. It does interact with our world and we can draw motive power from it.

Back to Michael: What are the probabilities of each of these scenarios?

The first one I really do not buy. If he is showing and discussing things of such deep research on all things conspiracy, he would have encountered ZPE. Five percent likely number one is the way things really are.

Number two has a good probability of being so at first brush, but then so does number three…

In number two, given that he is so “intent” on his goals, I would think that he would be inspired to look quite deeply into the information on ZPE out there (past the “trusted news sources”), and quite frankly, there really is a lot of data that suggest very highly (I give it 98% likely) that the Zero Point Field will yield usable energy in abundance. And if the problem we’re trying to solve is a way to sustain richness infinitely, the answer is all in the energy.

Interestingly, I noted his referring to money as energy in this very film. Though many cannot grasp the fact that whatever we use for money, be it good, service or chit, that we can use it in this fashion is in direct correlation to its being something we or our machinery expend/ed in energy.

If all money (or any good or service, really) represents is the energy expended in relation to where it is/what it looks like, with energy freely available, such electronic numbers, pieces of paper, coinage or the need to set up a lemonade stand to raise money to buy that baseball we always wanted – all this will be made moot.

Oh, yeah, right. Back to Michael. So now I have considered things more. Maybe there’s a fourth possibility. He doesn’t get it. He’s scared more of infinite energy and less so of the collapse of civilization.


What’s there to be scared of? All the maniacs who will seize that power and start wiping everyone else away? I give any major issues with the “postal” guy a statistical zero. What I see is a factory operated on a ZPE device cranking out little boxes of ZPE generators which we could plug our appliances to. It costs that factory very little because the cost to run the machinery is gone. So the boxes are cheap!

And we plug ourselves in, have laptops that never lose power, have phones that don’t have to be plugged in, and so on. Sure, there will be a time of transition, but mostly we will be free to move and stay in communication.

I don’t think that’s so bad. And if we come in with a plan, which I humbly offer one of (see The End of Entropy ), and all agree to implement it... Geez. As I show in The Abundance Paradigm ( ), we, as a planet, could thrive.

Because there is far more on this planet than the whole lot of us could consume if we all consumed all we could with no consuming limit whatsoever – the scarcity has always and only been in energy – we could easily set it up that everyone may have what they want. Interestingly, consumption will go down, overall.

So will most waste. The large projects will be accomplished by those who see a need and want to pitch in (like keeping strictly to organic farming by our robots, as an example), with leaders emerging from the ranks. The interweb will facilitate problems meeting solutions.

Without a profit motive, the motives will be love and bliss, whether it means slack, helping others, cooking a special meal for the family, going to parties, learning a musical instrument, apprenticing to a particle physicist, traveling, creating one-of-a-kind pieces of furniture and having others count themselves blessed that you gave them one because everybody wants your lovely creations.

Yeah, if he’s placing a fear of abundant energy above civilization as we know it… Well, I’m thinking pathetic. How about ten percent for that likelihood?

Number three suggests a rather dark possibility. He has “Q” clearance. Well, he never mentioned its being removed… And ZPE removes the concept of “elite.” It means he is working for the side that doesn’t want us free of their control. (Another 98% likelihood that such a side exists, by my estimation.) I want to believe this is out of the question, but Michael himself tells us that there is plenty of evidence of activity behind the curtain of secrecy in this world.

Still… He seems so awfully sincere. So I am not sure I can give this possibility a lion’s share of probability. Say, 5% #1, 50% #2, 25% #3, 10% #4 and 10% for anything I didn’t think of.

I will, however, correct Michael on a couple of errors of perception I think he has made, based on the probability that he has dismissed ZPE. In one part, he rants about the inability to “change physics.” Though he is technically correct, physics has been known to change in the paradigm we use to understand it. From Newtonian to Relativistic to, now, Vortexian. I suspect Michael is still looking at the Relativistic view, with its absence of anything between particles. With Vortexian comes an understanding of the energy we see at zero point (zero degrees Kelvin). With Vortexian we can understand the aether as a field, with particles as vortices (thus having spin), similar to magnetic and gravitation fields.

With Vortexian, we see access to energy of awesome quantities.

The second item is his assumption that “they” are losing control. Sure, it may seem like it, but if the goal is to control, wouldn’t it be better to see a collapse (problem), with its attendant anarchy (reaction), so as to install a fascist authority (solution)? No, they planned this, and will leach every cent they can until it dissolves. Then they will step in with “national guards,” military, and police to force us to their will. Their plans long overarch any single nation’s issues, and they are rubbing their collective hands in anticipation of the crash.

Of course, if we can bring forth the energy we live within, we can foil their plans and live infinitely rich, everyone of us.

Given this, perhaps I bring the “hope” Michael says he is looking for.

No comments:

Post a Comment