When Earth was rolled over

Was Earth rolled over relatively recently?  Was it tilted to about 45% about 13,000 years ago?  My reasons for suggesting that it was are as follows:

  • During my boyhood (a very long time go) I was told that Siberia had been a warm and luscious tropical region; and that, at the onset and prevalence of frigid conditions, the people there had migrated to Central Asia, creating a great civilisation there
  • Antarctica has been described (without credible challenge) as having once been in the tropic/temperate zone
  • Evidence has been found of stone buildings in the Arctic, now covered by ice (which is fast melting)
  • There was a massive world-wide flood, the Universal Flood (about 13,000 years ago), referred to in so many folk beliefs all across the globe; and this had buried an incredible mix of humans, animals, and flora – and silt – in caves all the way north
  • A very large ‘chunk’ of solid space material is believed to have been blown out into space through a supernova explosion; and that this material had entered and travelled through our solar system
  • This gigantic space material had caused perturbations in this system, dislodging satellites, destroying a planet, reversing the spin of one of our planets, etc., etc
  • The gravitational pull of this space material (named Vela by two researcher/authors) could have pulled Earth, through gravity, to rotate in the direction of the transit of Vela (to the sun)
  • The lands in the east would have been moved closer to the north pole, and the lands in the west would have been moved to the south pole
  • Such a strong gravitational pull would have emptied the seas, causing the moving waters to rise very high indeed, and to flow in the direction of the assumed Vela
  • When Vela had moved to its ultimate absorption by the sun, Earth would have naturally remained in its new position
  • Earth’s planets, believed to have been aligned East/West before the arrival of this space material, would now be aligned North/South (as they are today), with Siberia and Antarctica now in frigid conditions
  • Released from Vela’s gravity, the waters of Earth would have flowed back gradually, filling all the spaces available
  • The sudden onset of extreme cold in Siberia, which spot-froze all the animals, and the re-location of Antarctica, can thus be explained.

Cultures everywhere refer to a Universal Flood. It is not for us to know better; or to ask for ‘scientific’ evidence for possible causes and outcomes. We have yet to come up with adequate explanations which suit our theories of how things should have been.

Neither plate tectonics nor crustal slippage (the moving orange-peel effect) offer an explanation of the known disruptions mentioned above. Cosmic catastrophes of a horrifying magnitude seem to be taboo.

Avoiding any attribution to cosmic catastrophes as contributing to such developments as the sudden arrival of fully-formed new or modified species on Earth; of the onset of artistic creativity in known historic ‘cave-men’; of the sudden flowering of conceptual capacities of Early Man; of the whitening of human skin in a band (from East to West) in the northern hemisphere; in the ‘sky falling’ and ‘the stars being scrambled’; the sun not moving for many days (ask the Chinese and the Meso-americans); and so on, is not likely to lead us to understand the long-term history of mankind.

Having Earth tilt would have effectively destroyed the then civilisation. The survivors (Quetzalcoatl and Viracocha, for example), possibly reflecting a high culture prevailing in the pre-Flood era, could have guided mankind as best as possible, calling upon the knowledge, skills, tools and technology which survived the Deluge. Refer Meso-american and Peruvian beliefs.

That there had been a Golden Age prior to the Deluge all over the globe is credible, were it accepted that the continents had previously been lying east to west. Most, if not all, human-occupied terrain would then have been in the temperate and tropical zones!

That Earth was rolled over and tilted recently seems credible. Do we need an Edgar C. Cayce to tell us what happened?

Psychic experiences are real

The following extracts have been taken from the website ‘Wake up world.’ The article is by Phillip J Watt titled ‘Parapsychology: How science is proving that psychic experiences are real’

“ … … we experience extraordinary feats of consciousness and extra-sensory perception (ESP) which blow our minds and hearts out of this world, with profound and ongoing impacts in our lives.

These feats may occur in many different guises and in a very personal way. Some believe these experiences to be genuinely extraordinary, whilst others explain them away as ‘coincidence’ or ‘figments of the imagination’. Regardless of our personal beliefs, unexplained occurrences and psychic phenomena such as extra-sensory reception, telepathy and even psychokinesis have been recorded throughout the history of all tribal and traditional civilizations, so it’s not just a modern marvel. What is fresh about this phenomenon is the development of a discipline called ‘Parapsychology’, which is essentially a scientific framework designed to study the ‘psi’ or ‘psychic’ experiences of humanity.” … …

“The reason psi phenomenon is not taken seriously by the academic community is because philosophical materialism – which is the unproven and dogmatic ‘belief’ that matter is the fundamental stuff of reality – has hijacked modern-day science. Essentially, this misplaced interpretation of a strictly mechanical universe is the model upon which any accumulating evidence is compared, and if certain data doesn’t fit into the limited paradigm of what science already understands, it is arrogantly and unscientifically rejected and explained away as pseudoscience.

Ironically, this prejudicial dismissal of evidence is itself the definition of pseudoscientific behaviour.

However, not all scientists have fallen victim to the materialist rhetoric. For example, in 2014 a team of over 100 prominent scientists and academics from around the world called for an open, informed study of all aspects of consciousness. These scientists included Daryl Bem (Professor Emeritus of Psychology, Cornell University), Irving Kirsch (Professor of Psychology, University of Plymouth, and Lecturer in Medicine, Harvard Medical School) and Brian Josephson (Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Cambridge, who is also a Nobel Prize winner for his work in the field of physics). Another example in the same year was the creation of a “Manifesto for a Post-Materialist Science … to visualize what an emerging scientific view may look like”. The Manifesto was developed by eight respected scientists, including Rupert Sheldrake, a biologist and author best known for his theory of morphic fields and morphic resonance. Simply, both groups of scientists have called upon the scientific community to face their hypocrisy and transcend their philosophical bias toward the science of psi phenomenon.”

“ … … Notably, despite the stance of materialistic science, extra-sensory perceptions are not considered to be pseudoscience by the majority of average people. In a 2002 CBS News poll, 57% of people surveyed believed ESP to be real.

The reality is that parapsychological studies have accumulated mountains of sound scientific data that provides strong evidence for ‘extra sensory’ perceptions of the human mind. As stated in the Manifesto for a Post-Materialist Science :

Studies of the so-called “psi phenomena” indicate that we can sometimes receive meaningful information without the use of ordinary senses, and in ways that transcend the habitual space and time constraints. Furthermore, psi research demonstrates that we can mentally influence — at a distance — physical devices and living organisms (including other human beings). Psi research also shows that distant minds may behave in ways that are nonlocally correlated, i.e., the correlations between distant minds are hypothesized to be unmediated (they are not linked to any known energetic signal), unmitigated (they do not degrade with increasing distance), and immediate (they appear to be simultaneous). These events are so common that they cannot be viewed as anomalous or as exceptions to natural laws, but as indications of the need for a broader explanatory framework that cannot be predicated exclusively on materialism.”

(Comment: At last! Open scientific minds! My personal experiences need explanation as to how they occurred. There is a whole universe of the immaterial to be investigated, and understood.

At the very end of the psi phenomena is my question – How does my core me, my true and inner me, my soul, convey my past experiences to the current me with my form and substance?  If it is not Consciousness, what is it?

If it is Consciousness, then there must be the equivalent of the ‘worm holes,’ which cosmologists refer to optimistically, available to us – somehow, some time!)     

 

 

 

 

 

Dr. Rhine’s research on e.s.p.

Dr. JB Rhine’s research on e.s.p.

Academic researchers were curious to see if the scientific method could be used to find evidence for life after death, and they were open to that possibility that it could. J.B. Rhine was a scientist, and he was willing to give it a try. So Duke’s administrators, like President William Preston Few, were willing to let him.

How did Rhine begin trying to prove this?

Basically, Rhine said we know that when we die, the body dies, the body decays, it’s over. We need to find something about ourselves that exists independently of the body. Otherwise, when we die, that’s it. So if telepathy operates independent of the body, it opens the door to a possibility that there is something within us that can survive death.

What kinds of experiments did he perform while searching for the existence of telepathy?

He started with a test of simple playing cards. He began with children, but then moved on to Duke students. It was basically a simple test: “Can you tell me what playing card I’m holding?” without seeing it. And he found that they could.

He was using a regular deck of playing cards, and he found that people had certain biases—they would guess certain cards more often than others because they were very familiar with a regular deck. So he had a psychologist, Karl Zener, design him a set of cards with completely different symbols. And these are the ESP cards that a lot of people are familiar with, the ones with the wavy lines, a star, a box, a circle, or a cross. Using these cards, he repeated the test with students and found that they were again able to tell him what symbol was on the cards without seeing them.

What other experiments did Rhine and his colleagues conduct?

The ESP cards really were their staple until the end. They refined the experiments over the years—first, they separated the student and the experimenter with a screen. Ultimately, they were in separate rooms, and the tests were done double blind, so that even the person conducting the experiment didn’t know what symbols were on the cards.

The other experiments that they’re known for are tests in psychokinesis, the ability to move objects with your mind. Again, the test that they used was a very simple one—rolling dice. They would see if the students could influence the roll of the dice. The experimenters would use their hands and throw the dice against the wall, but, later on, they were using machines to roll the dice, so it would be more random and the experimenter could not be accused of influencing the roll.

And they found, again, that the students did seem to have some ability to influence the roll of the dice, but the effect was a lot weaker. It’s not like somebody can go to Las Vegas and win a billion dollars with this ability. It was infinitesimally small.

What did Rhine credit these effects to?

Rhine always felt that ESP was something that operated independently from the physical body. He also thought that someday the answer would be found in the study of consciousness and that when we had a better idea of how consciousness worked, or even what it is, it would explain the effects that he found in his experiments.

And Rhine became a household name?

Well, it’s interesting. Rhine is often portrayed as a publicity hound, but he really wasn’t. In the beginning, he turned down a lot of interviews because he saw himself as a serious scientist and an academic, and he thought this kind of publicity was undignified. And so he would say yes to some but not to anything that he didn’t think was serious.

But from the minute they [Rhine and his wife and co-researcher, Louisa] published their first book, Extra-Sensory Perception [in 1934], there was hostility to their experiments from the scientific community. So he started to agree to more interviews than he had originally, mostly just to get the word out that he was in fact doing serious science, and to attract more scientists who might have an open mind—and more subjects—as well.

How did Duke administrators react?

Unfortunately, his two big supporters, William McDougall, the head of the psychology department who lured him to Duke, and Few died not long after the lab opened. So for the rest of his career, he was always on shaky territory. Every time Duke got a new president, they had to make the decision to keep the lab going or not; one by one, they always decided to keep it going. I guess because it brought the university a lot of publicity and, ultimately, a lot of money.

Where did Rhine and his fellow researchers get their research funding?

They got money from Alfred P. Sloan and Chester Carlson, who was the inventor of the Xerox process. The Office of Naval Research gave them money; the Army, at one point, conducted a test with them; the Rockefeller Foundation; and the list goes on. He was very well funded but mostly from the outside. Duke paid his salary and his assistant’s salary and gave them space—desks and stuff like that. It was its own independent lab, and Rhine reported directly to the president.

Where is this kind of work done now?

The lab closed in 1965 when Rhine retired. There was a period where Duke was considering keeping the lab going, and administrators were in talks with Rhine about how that would happen and what it would look like. I found the administration’s initial idea of what it would look like, and I loved it. It was going to be a much more multidisciplinary operation involving representatives from all the different academic disciplines within Duke: people from the hard sciences, psychology, religion, and philosophy. They were going to put people with different expertise to work on the problem.

But Rhine was afraid that if that happened, parapsychology, and the people with expertise in parapsychology, would just be subsumed by all the others and eventually kind of shoved away. And he was actually right. I found memos between certain administrators who basically said that was what was going to happen. And then they started to talk to other professors who were even more adamant; they were like, “No! No! No! This is our chance to get rid of parapsychology once and for all.”

So a couple of years before he retired, Rhine set up the Foundation for Research on the Nature of Man, and when he retired, he moved over there. It exists today, near West Campus, and is now called the Rhine Research Center.

How would you sum up Rhine’s work?

Rhine—and I would include his wife, Louisa, who was equally critical to all this research, too—refined the controls and the statistical methods for analyzing their results in a way that nobody had before. I went through all the various objections, the critics over the years who accused them of fraud or making mistakes with the math, and I examined all these claims and found that they had no basis.

You might want to come up with other explanations for these effects, but you can’t say they are the result of sloppy controls, fraud, or wishful thinking. Based on these experiments, there does seem to be an unidentified source of information out there. Unfortunately, we don’t know how it’s transmitted or how it’s processed, but these effects nonetheless seem to be real. We also have a lot more to learn about consciousness.

(From the Internet: Duke Magazine Q&A)

Comment: It is difficult to understand why those who want to know what human beings and the Cosmos are about would reject investigations into influences beyond the apparently material. One would not expect scientific researchers to behave like purveyors of individual institutionalised religions. The latter generally offer their certainties of what is, and what is not, based seemingly on some kind of revelation, but not research.

Souls bubbling into existence?

In the field or workplace of scientists, the concept of an aether, an amorphous ephemeral atmospheric all-pervasive essence has not been disproven; probably never will be. The Michelson-Morley experiment was apparently faulty. But it suited the supporters of the prevailing paradigm of cosmology to claim that there is no evidence of this aether.

Denying the existence of the aether will be akin to claiming that there is no God. How would anyone know that? Or prove it? Can anyone prove the non-existence of anything? Or that a fairy or leprechaun does not exist? My little granddaughter and her other grandpa were not able to prove that these entities were not there when I claimed that I could see them (at different times) in a particular clump of shrubs.

Proof is what we need. Faith cannot disprove belief. An agnostic tentative acceptance may, if based (perhaps) on probability (as well as mythology from probable, advanced civilisations from our past) enable further investigation of matters pertinent.

There seems to be a lot of scientific research on the aether. It is, however, easier to believe in an improbable Big Bang cosmogony than in the aether. A cynic may enjoy the thought that an all-enveloping aether which is also within all of us is being rejected as not having been proven.

Assuming (why not?) that the aether is real, why should not souls (as we conceive them) bubble up from it; sort of self-create? It is difficult to imagine; like bubbles forming within a thin cloud. Some of the bubbles may settle back into the Void from which they arose. A few may be projected to slide, through a multitude of progressive steps, into human babies. There would be no point in a soul attaching itself to a zygote, or to some un-differentiated clump of cells, is there?

New souls have a task ahead of them; they thereby need viable babies. However, power-hungry theologians may claim otherwise; or that their God ordained this or that! But to what positive end in relation to understanding the place of humanity in the Cosmos?

Way back in time, some Hindu thinkers (or their extraterrestrial teachers) came up with an aether-like Brahman; and held that Brahman is Consciousness, the ocean from which we humans arose. An extensive cosmology followed. This also placed mankind in the Cosmos. Like it or not, this cosmology is mighty impressive.

The mystery of soul-creation over-rides anthropomorphic theology. Regrettably, Man’s ego stands in the way of cosmic understanding. But the Ocean of Consciousness will, I suspect, bubble on for ever and ever.

The formation of layers of identities

Accepting the reality that each of us has a layer of identities, how would these identities have been formed? The layer would surely commence with a core identity. Surface identities would then cover that core. Would any of us dare to dig beneath our surface identities to perceive our innate self?

The surface or public identities are fairly obvious: gender, relationship within the nuclear family; if relevant, one’s position within the extended family; linkage by blood (kinship); the cultural surrounds of one’s tribal connections; occupation; and (possibly) one’s position in civil society (community organisations), and in society in general, in terms of one’s influence. Unusual circumstances can also delineate certain evolved identities.

As for the more personal components of one’s identity, one could quite readily identify one’s temperament (reaction potential); and whether one is able to perceive and understand correctly the happenings or events encountered; and whether one is capable of applying a logical process to deal with a myriad of situations, including coping with hardship, injustice, and the like.

Below these layers of multiple identities, is there not a deeper, core layer reflecting the passage of one’s soul through time and space? To state the assumptions upholding this question: Assume that each human being has a soul. Re-stating that: Assume that a soul-entity is encased within a human body while on Earth. Assume too (necessarily) that a soul-entity’s time spent on Earth is NOT a one-shot affair. If it were a single isolated event, would that not equate the life of a human to the life of an insect?

If this were so, we could dispense with the super-structure of religion, ethics, and related considerations. We live, we then die – with no meaning in existence!

Contrarily accepting that human life represents a cycle of rebirths (and there is no way of disproving this belief), then there is a strong probability of each soul recording some memory of previous lives. Could not such memories impinge, influence, or infiltrate a core identity in each Earthly life? Could we not be affected by this insidious impact through life, but necessarily without any awareness of that?

That some children are invariably non-competitive, or tend to anger or unhappiness, or are recalcitrant repeatedly, may be explicable by the proposition above. Better still, I happen to know a few children and adults who have displayed these behaviours without any visible trigger.

Add to that situation those who have intimations intuitively about a significant past life or two, or who have been told by reliable clairvoyants about certain past lives impinging relevantly upon current experiences. Of course, the real-life experiences of a few cannot be denied by a majority through only disbelief or, worse still, by allegedly infallible professional sceptics. The Cosmos does seem to offer inter-connecting ephemeral pathways to understanding the ineffable.

In my view, there is a great plausibility about significant past-life memories impinging in some way upon current life motivations, actions, and responses. As one’s soul transits time and space, it can surely resonate in appropriate circumstances.

This is to postulate that, within each of us, as human beings, each representing a finite soul-entity, there is a vibrational potential reflecting significant experiences in past lives; and that this shapes our core personalities. Insidiously, intangibly, we are also what we have been; our extended past exists within us, shaping us.  

 

‘Native Title’ rights

The following extracts from my book ‘Hidden Footprint of Unity,’ Chapter 3 ‘To have a dream,’ is self-explanatory. As such, it highlights the deplorable behaviour of those opposed to the recognition of these legal rights.

“Then the High Court opened up a very large can of worms when it determined (in the Mabo case in 1992) that the Torres Straits Islanders (and, by implication, the Aborigines) had native title rights under common law. This did not help to contribute land to an Aboriginal or TSI nation. A native title right refers simply to a residual right to share in the use of land, but only in a customary way. Under the High Court’s later determination (in the Wik case in 1996), the rights of the Aboriginal community are subordinate to that of the lessee.

In the Mabo case, the Court said: “Where a clan or group has continued to acknowledge the laws and … to observe the customs based on the traditions of that clan or group, whereby their traditional connection with the land has been substantially maintained, the traditional community title of that clan or group can be said to remain in existence”. Native title refers to the common law rights of access and use of traditional land by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The rights include hunting, gathering, fishing, ceremonies, and just living.

The High Court thus put away for good that useful argument favoured by settlers and Australian jurists that Australia had been an empty land (‘terra nullius’) when occupied by Britain, contrary to all the evidence against that view.

The Court, by finding that the indigenes of Australia had indeed been in possession of their lands, brought the law in relation to Aboriginal land rights into line with current standards of justice. As the eminent historian Prof. Henry Reynolds said, “Terra nullius was out of step with international standards of human rights, on the one hand, and with fundamental values of common law, on the other …”.

Mr. Justice Deane of the High Court (subsequently Governor-General of Australia in the late 1990s) remarked back in 1985 that “The common law of this land has not reached the stage of retreat from injustice”, in relation to the nation’s recognition of native title.

However, justice did arrive at last — at least, in the legal realm. In the mid 1990s, the High Court again upset the conservatives, the ‘racists,’ and sundry fellow travelers. The resulting outbursts were most illuminative, displaying a range of bitter and irrational assertions, suggesting that professed beliefs in law and justice by many in influential positions (including parts of the media) are not deeply held. As Thomas Carlyle said “Can there be a more horrible object in existence than an eloquent man not speaking the truth?”.

The High Court, by a majority decision (in the Wik case), held that a pastoral lease did not necessarily extinguish native title. In some cases, some native title rights can survive the grant of a lease. However, in any conflict between the pastoralist’s rights and native title rights, the former rights prevail. Reportedly, the decision took into account an official policy dictated from the UK in 1848 that the grant of a pastoral lease gave “… only an exclusive right of pasturage for their cattle and of cultivating such land as they may require …”, but that the lease was “… not intended to deprive the Natives of their former right to hunt over these districts, or to wander over them in search of subsistence, in the manner they have been hitherto accustomed”.

(Comment : That should have settled it. But opportunism (greed?) prevailed. A great new chapter of shenanigans was then opened up. Human rights anyone?)

Th/e ‘black arm-band’ view of Australian history

The deplorable record of the invasion of Australia by the British is undeniable. However, certain influential Australians would prefer to have no mention of this record in the public domain or in our schools.

They insist that the ‘black armband’ view of Australia’s history should be dispensed with. Educators and the media are to refer with reverence to the wonder of multiculturalism having risen from successful settlement.

There you have it. The past should not live in the present, contrary to genetics, psychology; and subconscious tribal memories. I doubt if the Australian Aborigine will agree with this devout attempt to whitewash the past.

The extract below is from Chapter 3 ‘To have a dream’ in my book ‘Hidden Footprints of Unity.’ The thrust of the book is to seek the Australian Family of Man arising from the recently achieved cultural diversity. Yet what was done to the Australian indigene cannot be ignored.

“A few years after the initial ‘discovery’ of Australia by Lieutenant Cook, it was apparently known that the indigenes not only occupied the land and used it with economic purpose, but also (according to the highly respected Dr.Coombs) “… lived in clan or tribal groups, that each group had a homeland with known boundaries, and that they took their name from their district, and rarely moved outside it”. It was also known that they had, and applied, firm rules about trespass, kinship ties, marriage, child rearing and other matters, the hallmarks of an organised society; that they had a “habit of obedience” to their rulers and leaders, a hallmark of a political society; and that they had an ordered ceremonial life, reflecting the sharing of a spiritual vision, a hallmark of a civilisation.

Apparently, they also had their own zodiac, which guided their activities. Their artistic records are also well known and respected.

It has now been accepted that the indigenes did not cede any of their land. As the famous poet Oodjaroo Noonuccal said, “We are but custodians of the land”. Whilst the settlers saw themselves at war, and killed to acquire land, officialdom (later supported by local jurists) preferred occupation to conquest. Occupation follows discovery, of a presumed empty land. How were the natives to establish ownership without a Titles Office?

Because the morally political Australian rejected the idea of an invasion, a Senate Committee came up, in the early 1980s, with prescription. This apparently applies when there is no clear title to sovereignty by way of treaty, occupation or conquest. An extended occupation, and an exercise of sovereignty were apparently enough to vest title in the Crown.

But, prescription requires a show of authority on the one side, and acquiescence on the other (says Prof. Reynolds, the renowned contributor to the nation’s enlightenment on this black subject). Since the natives never acquiesced to anything, voluntary abandonment was claimed. The Senate’s clever semantic exercise seemed to accept that being killed or driven away is tantamount to voluntary abandonment!

A prominent white Australian sociologist reminded me that cities such as Melbourne and Sydney represented the most effective sites of ethnic cleansing; and that every fence in Australia encloses land that was once the soul, or the shared possession of a particular group of Aborigines.”

Comment: Why should all this be hidden? To ease the conscience of white supremacists?

 

 

 

 

 

 

The continuity of personality and memories

When a person dies, the brain dies too. The knowledge and experiences contained in the brain are lost. The personality of that person is lost, together with the mind of that person. So said the presenter of a recent tv program, obviously an expert about the way the human brain works. Pretty obvious, right?

Not any more! Not in the light of my own extensive experiences, and the experiences told to me by a few reliable friends. A widely-accepted clairvoyant, who has been my guest on a number of occasions, had told me that I could continue my learning after my death (but I had not told him about my need to learn).

Then, the insubstantial spirit of my favourite uncle, who had manifested himself to this clairvoyant, displayed his ability to hear me; to communicate silently with the clairvoyant in English (his second language); to mention his relationship with his sister, my mother; to know what happened to me long after his death; and to refer to my cabin-bag which he had never seen; and to offer sound advice to me!

He had obviously retained his mind, with its knowledge. His personality, his mind and memories, did not die with his body! That was pretty obvious. The reports of a few close friends with comparable experiences confirm the continuity of the human soul into the domain of spirits after Earthly death.

Better still, some of those who had received a heart transplant have reported experiencing personality traits, including tastes and needs, which were not originally theirs. They confirm the view that the heart is the repository of the human soul. That the human mind is attached to the soul is evidenced by the spirit of my uncle.

Conclusions derived from real, unchallengeable experiences cannot be ignored, no matter how many pundits stand on the head of a thumbtack saying ‘It cannot be!’

I certainly believe, partly because of certain impulses and ‘instincts,’ that knowledge and memories are cumulative through lifetimes. Sanity requires such knowledge not to interfere with a current life; but it might be facilitative within certain limits.

Since we are probably reborn into different cultures over time, we could all eventually be exposed to the various viable philosophical/cultural perspectives about life, death, and moral progress.

Learning, without prejudice, will take some time – over many lifetimes. Don’t like all the above? Not relevant! Have patience; wait and see!!

Politicians and pastoralists propagated prejudice

In the 1990s there was a terrible display of prejudice against the Aboriginal people in Australia by a gaggle of conservatives, ‘racists,’ and sundry fellow-travellers. The trigger was a ‘native title’ claim by Torres Straits Islanders and Aboriginal Australians. The motivation was ‘whitefella’ supremacy fused with overt greed.

The following extract is from my book ‘Hidden Footprints of Unity’ – refer chapter 3 ‘To have a dream.’ Unity went out the door when the indigenous peoples sought minimal cultural rights, without any threat to others.

“A white female pastoralist was reported in the late 1990s to have been fearful when her property was the subject of a native title claim by an Aboriginal community. She thought that, if successful, the Aborigines would simply take possession of her property. After she had met the claimants, she knew otherwise. Why had not the government or the media made this clear? Were they in cahoots with the powerful pastoralist lobby groups? It seems so.

She learnt that the Aborigines’ aim was co-existence. They only wanted access to significant sites to conduct cultural activities for young people. She was quoted in the press as saying: ‘When sheep and cattle were moved in, the land the indigenous people lived off was badly affected. They had to find other ways to survive, and the problems were compounded by the aggressive acts of the pastoralists and the local white authorities. During the 1920s and 1930s indigenes were herded together in designated Aboriginal reserves, with little shelter and no water. The communities were split up, their culture fragmented. They gravitated towards the edges of towns … ended up outcasts, on the fringes of white society’.

Where politicians had promised ‘certainty’ to the pastoralists, she reportedly felt that she had been kept in the dark, misled, and betrayed. She was further quoted as follows: “… people like me were being used as tools, in what was obviously a political agenda being used to continue the hurt and dispossession of people who have been hurt their whole lives”; and “… there are people fanning the flames and spreading misinformation”.

She also quoted the Prime Minister of the day as claiming publicly that it would be possible for 78% of Australia to be under ‘veto’ (for development) by Aborigines. Has the government resiled from this ridiculous claim?

er comment to that was: “I’ve no doubt that most Australians would have believed him. If I hadn’t informed myself, I’d have believed him as well”. Her final comments are noteworthy. “I did not hunt the (Aborigines) off their land: but what I have today I have partly because others did. If I inherited the fruits of the pioneers’ achievements, I also inherited a debt to those they dispossessed.”

Ha! Tell that to the beneficiaries of the nations created brutally by immigrants to the Americas and New Zealand.

That says it all. And what a wonderful human being — a beacon of light. This enlightened white lady has reached out to the Aboriginal people. She is also educating people in her situation about the need to work with Aboriginal people. As asked by a respected academic in another, but comparable, context: “If lying comes to seem an acceptable political means to a worthwhile end, what will prevent democracy degenerating into a struggle between elites whose relationship to the electorate goes no deeper than the conduct of an auction …?. In any such auctions, the Aborigines will not be viable bidders.”

The attitudes of prominent politicians and pastoralists was disgusting, considering the way Australia postures and pontificates about human rights – always as applying to other nations, of course. What was displayed was the ugly Australian and his rapacious offsiders.

I will write about the background issues in a later post.

Exploring panspermia

“If … some form of two-way non-local communication can occur between the collective consciousness of DNA in different life forms, then what if, as scientists are now coming to believe, life did not originate on Earth? What if DNA arrived on the planet complete, with genetic instructions to create and evolve new life to its ultimate end?

This thought-provoking theory is known to the world as panspermia (which means ’seeds everywhere’), a concept proposed as far back as the fifth century BC by the Greek philosopher Anaxagoras … … He believed that the seeds of life swarm throughout the Cosmos, and are not exclusive to Earth. More intriguing is that Anaxagoras, who was an influence on Socrates and thus Plato, envisaged these ‘seeds’ not as molecular in nature, but as actual seeds containing the seeds of life itself.

Panspermia would have been accepted as the true origin of life back then had not … Aristotle … come up with the theory of spontaneous generation of life on Earth, which was preferred by the more rationally minded, and remained a workable theory until the nineteenth century, when it was finally disproved by the French chemist Louis Pasteur …

In the wake of Pasteur’s work into microbiology (which included determining that infectious diseases were caused by germs), various ideas were proposed on the origins of cellular life, but it would not be until 1903 that the idea of panspermia would raise its head again. In that year Swedish chemist and Nobel Prize-winner Svante August Arrhenius … wrote that life on Earth emerged from microscopic spores that were propelled across space by what he saw as the radiation pressure of star light.

Arrhenius‘s theories received a fuller treatment in his book Worlds in the making …It answered key criticisms of his theory, including the belief that potentially lethal ultraviolet light rays would kill any microscopic spores that existed in deep space. He was optimistic that at low temperatures the spores could remain intact for extremely long periods of time, and in his final opinion, all organisms in the universe are related, and the process of evolution is everywhere the same.”

The above is an extract termed Exploring panspermia in The Cygnus mystery by Andrew Collins.

It is interesting that Aristotle, who apparently had much to say about many things, once pontificated about the number of teeth in the mouths of women, without ever asking his wife to open her mouth – so I read. Is it not a pity that some speculative philosophers can delay the search for explanations of issues of relevance in explaining the world we live in?