The Free Energy Conundrum

Is Humanity Ready for Abundance?

Wade Frazier

Revised July 2014

 

A Summary of the Free Energy Conundrum

My Journey and Primary Lesson

Laying aside the Mind Crutches

Pitfalls and Unproductive Paths

What Can Be Done about the Conundrum?

Footnotes

 

A Summary of the Free Energy Conundrum

Note to readers: This essay was first published in December 2005, and it became grist for subsequent essays, such as this one in August 2008, this one in April 2010, and what will likely be my last huge essay, in August 2014.  Those other essays will likely be more informative essays than this one, but I decided to retain it, while revising it to align with my site as it stands in 2014.

  1. There are two prominent motivations for making free, forever renewable, non-polluting energy a daily reality for humanity:
  1. Such free energy sources exist and have been extensively developed in the United States and elsewhere, however:
  1. Far less than 1% of the world's population has constructively engaged that situation, the proportions falling somewhat along these lines:
  1. If an effort to overcome the suppression and public inertia is going to have a realistic chance of succeeding, that final group needs to grow to thousands of people, to form a critical mass.  The effort needs to reach far beyond the small and insular alternative energy community.  Simply becoming aware of the issue and engaging in constructive dialogue may be all that is needed.  The primary qualification for a member of that critical mass group is nearly incorruptible integrity.  The task is formidable, because people of that level of integrity are less than one-per-thousand in the USA's general population, but that approach appears to have the best chance of success with the least risk to the participants.

The bold contentions in this summary are explored at depth in this essay.  Perhaps the above summary is incorrect, but nobody that I trust with significant experience in that milieu denies its basic thrust.

 

My Journey and Primary Lesson

My journey into alternative energy began in 1974, after my first professional mentor invented what was considered the world’s best engine for powering an automobile.  Today’s “cutting edge” cars are using innovations that my mentor invented long ago, such as hybrid cars recycling the energy absorbed from applying a car’s brakes.  I dreamed long ago of changing the way that humanity produces and uses its energy.  I eventuality chased my dream, only to have it become a nightmare.  My journey was filled with numerous lessons, and many were reluctantly learned.  I know of no effort in world history of higher profile or of more persistence or closer to success in bringing significant alternative energy to humanity than Dennis Lee’s efforts, and I was with him during some of his adventures’ darkest chapters.  I think that he did his most interesting work before I met him.  There is no teacher like experience, and I am writing this essay with my hope being assisting those few who try bringing alternative energy to humanity, and perhaps help heaven on Earth come into being. 

My primary lesson was one that I resisted for many years, until I finally had it beaten into my head: personal integrity is earth’s scarcest commodity, and applying a sufficient pool of it to the free Energy conundrum is the key to making it happen.  If an alternative energy effort does not begin with people of the highest possible integrity, it will not get very far.  Almost without exception, when I have mentioned that harsh lesson and its ramifications, people have responded by ignoring it or presenting irrelevant counter-examples or dismissing it as of minor consequence.  It is not an enjoyable realization, but it is today’s reality.  While denial may seem to be a valid defense mechanism, it is ultimately self-defeating in the free energy field and potentially fatal.  True skepticism is a virtue (which means getting out of one’s armchair and honestly investigating before launching opinions), but I have rarely experienced a genuinely skeptical reaction, which reinforces my primary lesson.  I expect my work to be greeted with skepticism, as it is so alien to the average person's experience, so this essay is peppered with footnotes and links that lead to evidence that illustrates my points. 

First of all, what follows is why a lack of integrity dooms alternative energy efforts.  All economies for all time have been primarily dependent on energy.  Today’s energy industry is the world’s most powerful, and a new energy source, particularly one that could easily replace conventional energy sources, has long been the subject of novels, motion pictures and other mass media.  The economic value of such an energy source is beyond the dreams of avarice.  Several trillion dollars of revenue are generated annually by the energy and related industries, such as transportation.  Even that vast sum misleadingly minimizes the importance of energy, because without energy to run the show, industrialized civilization would quickly grind to a halt.  The early stage benefits of a free energy revolution would measure in quadrillions of dollars, which is beyond mind-boggling for most people.

When people begin pursuing alternative energy, whether it is in pure or applied research, prototype development, or the more advanced stages of entrepreneurialism, manufacturing and marketing, greed nearly always rears its head and defeats most attempts before they even get started.  Dennis likened the situation to the movie The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, where everybody wanted to wipe out everybody else so they would not have to share their plunder.  The stakes are higher in the free energy pursuit than any other on Earth, and bringing a genuine alternative energy to market that could impact the global marketplace is not something that a lone inventor or entrepreneur can accomplish.  It will take a major effort by many players to make alternative/free energy happen, and stealing a prototype or start-up company is futile, if developing a genuine alternative energy for the public is the goal.  I have watched numerous attempts to steal Dennis’s companies, and the two successful attempts I that witnessed in the 1980s were performed when the GCs had Dennis in a headlock.[1]  Before I met Dennis, his companies were stolen several times by his business associates and once by organized crime, which then pulled off a genuine scam of the public.  I saw some particularly incompetent attempts to steal Dennis’ companies that I witnessed after our days in VenturaSteven Greer calls the GCs “Godzilla,” but the economic jungle is also filled with T-Rexes, velociraptors, and other predators.  The jungle is not filled with gentle, herbivorous beasts and one super-predator. 

After Dennis’s company was stolen in Seattle, I watched several groups fight over the company’s carcass, and none of them did anything productive with it.  Also, if any of them became productive, they would have quickly discovered the hard way why Dennis’s company was defunct when they stole it, but they were blinded by their greed.  Also, the employees not involved in stealing the companies often stole anything that they could on their way out, which was a phenomenon vividly evident in Ventura.  For those people, the GCs' suppression efforts gave them theft opportunities.  Greed is one of the seven deadly sins and is the fear of never having enough.  It is an irrational fear that can never be extinguished by hoarding wealth.  After obscene amounts of wealth are stolen from others, the fear then becomes focused on amassing as much control over others as possible, trying to play God.

When the GCs' hammer came down, those not actively stealing were mainly motivated by self-preservation, and those running and hiding or crawling before agents of the GCs, begging for mercy (or actively helping the GCs, as a way to avoid their wrath), may have provided a more disheartening spectacle than the thievery did.  A third category of ignoble behavior was provided by many of those who did not fall into the first two categories: blaming and attacking Dennis became a favored activity, probably because he was an easy target, particularly when the GCs had him in a headlock.  Many people fell into all three categories.

All of those activities evidenced low personal integrity, and when the dust had settled in Ventura, human behavior could never surprise me again.  There were heartening exceptions to that low-integrity rule, however, with Mr. Professor shining the brightest.  People like him were needles in haystacks.  I have sought people like him ever since and have encountered very few who may have had the right stuff.  Just as nearly everybody thinks they are an adequate housekeeper or a competent driver, nearly everybody thinks that they possess high integrity.  Passing an integrity test of the magnitude that Mr. Professor took often costs one their career/net worth/health/life, so those who have proven their integrity at those levels can rarely join together to make something important happen, because their lives have usually been destroyed or shortened.

 

Laying aside the Mind Crutches

When I staggered out of Ventura in 1990, I realized that whatever I had been taught about the world was probably not true, and for the next twelve years I read around 200,000 pages of material.  A primary thrust was researching what I had been taught, comparing it to my adult researches, and seeing if it held up.  It rarely did.  Although my ride with Dennis radicalized me, I also had some early experiences that aided my receptivity to the lessons, such as my family changing its diet when I was twelve and being introduced to paranormal phenomena at age sixteen.

As I performed my adult research on what I was taught while young, I realized that most of my “learning” that failed under scrutiny was not simply a haphazard assortment of misinformation.  The misinformation was apparently designed to indoctrinate me into certain ways of “thinking.”  Here are some examples of what I discovered during my adult researches.

 

 

I was fortunate to be raised relatively free of religious indoctrination, but I received its secular equivalent in my “education.”  Was I taught anything that was true?  I am not sure.  My indoctrination gave me various “mind crutches.”  Crutches can help people walk until they no longer need them, but they can also produce cripples who cannot imagine living without them.  The mind crutches that I was given are seemingly of the latter variety.  Why do our educational and media systems produce people with an inverted sense of reality?  Apparently, so that people can be manipulated via their mind crutches.  How do mind crutches work to cripple people’s minds?  To a significant degree, they work because they appeal to people’s self-interest and egos, and particularly their vices

If Americans believe they belong to the greatest, most benevolent society of all time, then they can rape and plunder the world’s people (particularly the poor ones) with a clear conscience or only passing awareness, because our international acts are obviously designed to help the world’s downtrodden, right?  To question the assumption of American benevolence can lead to cognitive dissonance, and few Americans have proven themselves capable of resolving the dissonance by discarding the false beliefs that they were indoctrinated with.  The truth then becomes unthinkable, and that delusional state provides fertile ground for more delusions to take root, with the deluded paying an immense price in lost sentience.  The human ego explains a great deal of that dynamic, but there are also rewards for playing the game and penalties for failing to.  For instance, I never walked down the halls of my corporate employers and contradicted capitalistic dogma.  If I did, I would have not lasted long.  The result is that Americans are largely a semi-sentient people who mindlessly repeat the catechisms they were indoctrinated with.  A monkey can be trained to wave a flag on cue.  Most people never break free and learn to think for themselves on those subjects.  I recently encountered the observation that America’s official bird should be changed from the bald eagle to the parrot, which is an observation with keen significance since September 11, 2001.

Here are the mind crutches that Americans need to discard (or stop leaning on so heavily) if they want to help a world of abundance appear (a citizen of any nation could also compile a similar list for their country):

 

 

The above doctrines are all based on the scarcity principle, as they exalt one group at the expense of others.  The first three do it quite obviously, the other three more subtly.

 

People cannot help an abundance principle take root when their minds are mired in scarcity consciousness. 

 

The first three doctrines have been prominently used to justify violating others in the "out-group," and have fostered egocentric delusions that provided the justifications, such as the Chosen People, wealth elitism, the Promised Land, Manifest Destiny or its successor Lebensraumpolitik.  Those first three mind crutches form the triune faith of most Americans.  Scarcely an American can be found who does not regularly kneel at one of those altars.  In nationalism, we are elevated above other nations by virtue of our being born here.  My American Empire essay was partly intended as an antidote to American nationalism.  The essays in this section of my website are intended as an antidote to capitalism, which might be the most inefficient economic system yet devised, as it is quickly destroying the planet and provides the rationale for doing so.  Every organized religion has to some extent betrayed the “founder’s” vision.  In Christianity in particular, kneeling at the right altar is the ticket to heaven, and those kneeling at the wrong altars (or those not kneeling at all) are condemned by the Almighty.  People having near-death experiences or those who have learned to explore other planes of existence do not describe anything like a gatekeeper to “heaven,” and those in “hell” are there because they want to be, and leave when they are no longer attracted to it.  The scarcity principle is ingrained into our societies in ways that can seem invisible, such as our sports and games, where there is almost always one ultimate winner and many losers. 

Those last three doctrines are interrelated and subtler than the first three.  Those holding to Enlightenment ideals (I will call them Enlightenment doctrines in this essay) often subscribe to those three.  People can easily pursue experiences that show how false and limiting those doctrines are.  All three doctrines have the denigration of consciousness in common.  Consciousness, in those doctrines, is seen as dependent on biochemistry, and the rational aspect of consciousness is the only one considered important, and phenomena such as intuition, emotion, or love are minimized.  History’s greatest physicists did not subscribe to those doctrines, and anybody can easily be trained to experience paranormal phenomena, which clearly demonstrate that chemistry-based consciousness models are woefully deficient.  Those subscribing to Enlightenment doctrines often ignore or dismiss evidence that we are not alone in the universe and are regularly visited by extra-terrestrial civilizations.  For instance, over the past generation more than three thousand people have witnessed UFOs appearing on request at a Washington ranch.  I first went to see for myself in 2005, and I was not disappointed.[2]  Those subscribing to Enlightenment doctrines also tend to dismiss the notion that the world’s political-economic system is managed by surreptitious means, usually dismissing the notion as a “conspiracy theory,” and almost always deny that the Above Top Secret world even exists, while focusing on the bureaucratic aspect of covert action.  I discovered that many who are great at describing our immense problems do not want to hear about solutions that topple their scarcity-based paradigm

As R. Buckminster Fuller observed, economics has always been the name of the elite game, with politics a mere byproduct; all political actors are "stooges" of the economic interests.  Today’s most radical political and economic ideologies are still based upon the scarcity principle, and all political systems have been primarily concerned with who gets the scarce resources.  Pursuing free energy (or significant alternative energy) is the most radical economic act on Earth today, and only when an effort becomes “threatening” do activists encounter the GCs' gatekeepers.  The billion-dollar bribe that we were offered to stop pursuing free energy is not a “conspiracy theory” but the reporting of our experiences.  Also, those pursuing that path at a level where they threatened to make an economic impact all report similar experiences.  There is no theory about it, but that situation has never been constructively engaged by any political faction that I have encountered, and I have encountered just about all of them. 

 

Pitfalls and Unproductive Paths

Experience may be the only teacher, and the pitfalls and unproductive paths presented here are those I have experienced myself or heard of from firsthand participants.  Just as teenagers often think that their parents do not know anything, many in the free energy community whom I have tried cautioning with tales of pitfalls have denied their relevance as they blithely headed for those very same pitfalls.  It has not been easy to watch.  For a teenage boy, learning some of life’s lessons the hard way is part of growing up.  When pursuing free energy, learning those lessons the hard way often means having one’s life destroyed, if not prematurely ended.  Only those with the incredible persistence of a Dennis Lee get to make the attempt more than once.  I learned many of my lessons the hard way, and seek to help others avoid learning them the hard way.

Here are some of the more important pitfalls and unproductive activities that I have seen.

Denial - This pitfall kills most free energy efforts before they get very far.  The denial relates to many facets of the free energy conundrum (such as that the GCs even exist or are vigilant).  Because the free energy arena is like no other, denial of how it operates is common and can be fatal for its participants.  For instance, except for my years with Dennis, I have spent my entire career in corporate America.  The free energy scene only vaguely resembles how corporate America operates.  Thinking it does is one of the many pitfalls that free energy activists encounter.  Believing in the fairy tales of capitalism and nationalism is particularly dangerous for somebody pursuing free energy.  The most harmful denial often relates to denying that the pitfalls listed below even exist, or believing that they can be leapt over or run past too quickly for them to matter.

Delusions of grandeur - I have yet to meet a human without an ego.  When pondering the implications of free energy, the situation’s immensity can seduce the ego.  Delusions of grandeur can take root, and one must always be vigilant of them.  I had fleeting delusions of grandeur during my early days with Dennis (before I was rudely disabused of them), and I have seen the bug bite others fiercely.[3]

Seeking “humanitarian assistance” and rich benefactors - All free energy efforts have always operated on a shoestring, and all have tried raising money somehow.  Each fundraising method has its pitfalls, and the most futile one that I have seen is seeking a rich benefactor.  If a rich person genuinely tries helping out, they quickly get a horse’s head in their bed.  More often, the “benefactor” tries controlling the effort from the outset or stealing the technology/company or waits like a vulture for the opportunity to take over when they smell easy profits.  Dennis has interacted with numerous billionaires and has never seen one part with a dollar relating to helping free energy happen.  They all seem to heed Bill Gates’ dictum, “You don’t get rich by cutting checks.”  “Humanitarian” groups often hamper efforts like developing free energy, in a bizarre situation where the biggest obstacles to realizing the solutions are the people who say they seek solutions.  "Rich philanthropist" is an oxymoron.

Needing a paycheck - This is related to the above pitfall, and is the primary reason why I have pursued my website work as I have.  If people in a free energy venture must immediately be paid for their efforts, they are already defeated.  Economic need kills most free energy efforts, and when I saw all the employee theft in Ventura, it was because the company owed them one week's wages.  I have seen that need come in many guises, and if a significant free energy effort ever becomes viable, it will be due to people who are giving, not getting.  That is why there is a free energy conundrum - there have not been enough people involved who are more interested in giving than getting.  If the people involved are starving or need regular, corporate-sized paychecks to be involved, the effort is doomed before it begins.

Greed - Dealt with at length above.

Naïveté - I fell into that pitfall regularly during my journey with Dennis.  It took some time to awaken to the free energy milieu’s reality.  Most people will have to negotiate that pitfall to get very far along the path.  The most common reaction that I have heard to the free energy conundrum is also the most naïve, which goes like this: “If this was possible, I would be able to buy it.”  That statement reflects a belief in the magic of capitalism, where the best, brightest and most benevolent always triumph.  Not even Adam Smith believed it.  It also reflects a belief in the fairy tale of American nationalism.  Disbelief is the most common reaction to the billion-dollar bribe that we received, and engineers and technical professionals often prove to be the most naïve of all, as Bucky Fuller observed. Mailing off working free energy prototypes to the GCs, hoping for a tickertape parade, gets the wrong kind of attention.  Naïveté can be a fatal pitfall in the free energy pursuit. 

Seeking specialist opinions - One on hand, seeking specialist opinions may seem prudent, but on the other hand, most scientists, engineers, and technical professionals undergo heavy indoctrination disguised as learning and can rarely think past their textbooks.  For instance, there have been credible experimental results that call into question the Second Law of Thermodynamics.  That “laws” of physics even exist shows how much like a religion physics is.  There are no “laws” of physics, but only theories.  The first person to perform those law-defying experiments died in an American prison, with the USA's government destroying his equipment and burning his books, which Nazi Germany also did.  A scientist who related to me his own experimental results was murdered.  While what Thomas Kuhn called “normal” science is an honorable and necessary part of scientific endeavor, those performing normal science are firmly wrapped within their paradigm and rarely glimpse beyond it or comprehend evidence that challenges their paradigm.  Less than 1% of scientists and engineers have the creative insight and discrimination needed to successfully evaluate novel experimental data or technology, and the best of them are always cautious about saying that something is “impossible,” which my first professional mentor taught me.  Thinking that a physicist or engineer is qualified by their orthodox training/experience to evaluate free energy technology or theory is the height of folly.  Some of the most irrational responses to my work have been by engineers, scientists and academics, and some of their most illogical responses have been regarding areas where they claim expertise.[4]

Failure to separate the wheat from the chaff - Because few with scientific or technical training can properly evaluate novel theory, data or technology, it does not mean that nobody can.  Finding those people is difficult, however, and there are many garage mechanics and electronics tinkerers who think that they invented a free energy machine.  As Adam Trombly once noted, there are many in the new energy field who have never done anything productive and often say that nobody has made them an offer they cannot refuse.  Those producing pedestrian results are not made those offers; the Big Boys are not stupid.  Navigating between the bogus and the genuine is a perilous endeavor for free energy activists.  There is far more chaff than wheat out there, and some is even fraudulent chaff, although not nearly as much as Mr. Skeptic would have people believe.

Thinking that low integrity people can be “managed” - When the BPA Hit Man approached Dennis’s company in 1985, Dennis suspected that he was not who he presented himself as.  Dennis thought he could “manage” him, and actively misdirected him.  When the hit man’s actions cost one of Dennis’s employees her life, Dennis became radicalized in his pursuit of alternative energy.  I became a pile of frayed nerves a few months after the raid on our facilities in 1988, and a business associate asked Dennis if he could become his new protégé.  Dennis knew that the man did not have the required integrity for the job but took him on anyway, while Dennis cautioned him that he would probably betray Dennis one day.  Dennis said that only nice guys have betrayed him, as the cutthroats never get close enough to stick their daggers in his ribs.  Instead, his “friends” always shoved the daggers into his back.  That opportunity for betrayal came a few months later, and that protégé gleefully helped destroy Dennis’s company while he was in jail.  A major problem with people of less-than-high integrity in a free energy effort is that any success attracts the predators.  The predators are not only agents of the GCs, but also the standard predators that populate America’s entrepreneurial waters.[5]  The magnified temptations and dangers of the free energy environment easily corrupt people of less-than-high integrity.  Managing people of low integrity in a free energy effort is like holding a faulty bomb with a lit fuse - you cannot throw it far enough away, and it might still blow up in your hand.  The instances that I encountered of low integrity people and people’s refusal to recognize the danger that they presented during my days of assisting Brian O'Leary helped drive me back into seclusion.

Overlooking low integrity because the person has something to offer - This is related to the preceding point.  I have yet to meet an altruistic inventor.  Discovering that inventors have no more integrity than the general population was the second most important lesson of my journey.  Creativity does not confer integrity, which I learned the hard way.  It took me many years of disillusionment to finally accept the reality.  My first professional mentor is the closest thing to an altruistic inventor that I have met, and my early experience misled me about the real world of inventors.  Whether it is an inventor with an intriguing energy prototype or somebody who offers funding or a business associate who offers an alliance, at the first inkling that their integrity is not the highest, severing the relationship immediately and honorably is the best remedy, because when times get trying, those people will betray the effort for personal gain or self-preservation.  Many times I have watched people overlook low integrity because the person had something else that might contribute to the effort.  It has always backfired when the going got tough, and it always gets tough when pursuing free energy.

Thinking that one can run below the suppressors’ radar - A number of free energy inventors and entrepreneurs have tried to invent in secret, distribute in secret, finance in secret and so on.  The GCs have an impressive global surveillance infrastructure.  I have yet to see that strategy work.  In fact, secrecy plays right into the GCs' hands, partly because they are masters of clandestine operations (they prefer operating in dark alleys), and secrecy often leads to paranoia and other delusions, which helps the projects self-destruct before the GCs need to lift a finger.  Maybe somebody will run below the radar one day, but I strongly doubt it, and it the high road appears to offer much more promise and aligns with the ideals of openness and honesty.  A related notion is thinking that the free energy effort can migrate to some free-energy-friendly nation.  I have received that suggestion dozens of times since 1986.  I have yet to see or hear of what nation that might be.  All national governments are corrupt, and the GCs have a truly global reach.  There is no place to run and hide.  There are also many practical limitations to consider in taking it someplace “safe.”  I strongly doubt whether a free energy effort can be launched from a nation that is not already industrialized.

Trying to expose and/or punish the suppressors - The GCs are masters of their game, and trying to beat them at it is a doomed strategy.  Secrecy, deception, violence, arrogance, avarice - those are their hallmarks.  While there have been courageous efforts by whistleblowers and investigators to expose “bad guys” and/or punish them, the danger is great, and ultimately, they cannot be beaten at their game.  Exposing, punishing, beating them at their own game - these are all scarcity-consciousness efforts and are rooted in the victim mentality.  Bringing free energy to the world will take an abundance-oriented effort and must transcend the victim mentality to become successful.  Of course, that is easier said than done, but changing the prevailing paradigm for the past 10,000 years is not an easy task.  If we want love and forgiveness to prevail on Earth, then we need to live it.

Forming a mass movement around a small and/or weak nucleus - I have burned too much of my life’s energy on building alternative/free energy efforts, to only watch them quickly disintegrate when faced with challenges.  If a large nucleus of high integrity people cannot be amassed, then humanity is not ready for free energy and all that can come with it.  It would probably be better to make quilts instead of launch onto the path of disaster and martyrdom that efforts of insufficient collective integrity invariably chart.

Forming a movement around ideologies - Trying to form a movement around an ideology, whether it is economic, religious, political, scientific or social is a tacit admission that the movement’s members cannot be trusted to think for themselves, and herding them along under an ideology’s banner will not work, not for bringing free energy to the world.  All of today’s earthly ideologies are based on scarcity and most are subtly egocentric, and will not help an abundance paradigm take root.[6]

Telling your family and friends about free energy and the toppling of scarcity-based ideologies - Many readers of my work thought that they would introduce their “hip” family members or friends to my work, only to be shocked as they watched their friends and family members go into irrational tirades against my work.  The vast majority of my “peers” - white, educated American men - can only read a few pages of my work before blowing a fuse.  Very few people can currently examine the mass assumptions about reality, as the exercise threatens the “stories” that we tell ourselves.  People addicted to their mind crutches do not want to confront naked reality, and cannot currently pursue free energy.  Again, less than one-in-a-thousand are fit for it.  If that is true, then what is the point of this essay? 

 

What Can Be Done about the Conundrum?

If all those paths of action listed above are fraught with peril or even counterproductive, then what?  A family friend was fond of saying, “Let’s do something, even if it is wrong.”  The free energy situation is a conundrum.  The scarcity principle is being artificially enforced on humanity, and the vast majority of humanity will resist the removal of the chains from their brains.  I learned important lessons along the way, and some relate directly to the free energy conundrum:

As Seth once said, actions inconsistent with the ideal will always fail to achieve it.  Bringing an abundance paradigm to humanity is as idealistic a project as was ever conceived.  However, humanity is apparently not ready for it.  Not yet.  If we were, we would have it, because there are enough people trying to bring free energy and abundance to the world to make it happen, if humanity was ready for it.  But the GCs' shenanigans and the masses’ inertia and easy manipulability are formidable obstacles, with the inertia/manipulability being the biggest factors by far.

When the dust settled in Ventura, I realized that if 50 people had banded around Dennis and his technical experts the way that Mr. Professor and I did, we had a realistic chance of making free energy a daily reality for humanity.  If it were 100, it would have been easy (what I have called the hundred heroes strategy).  But there may not be a hundred people to find at that level of commitment.  Also, the price it extracts from those few people can be awesome. 

We humans are largely locked into our false personalities, which is the herd mentality.[7]  Being a herd member can seem comforting, until the herd stampedes off the cliff.  The question I have pondered for many years is this: 

 

Does humanity have to attain enlightenment before it can have free energy and abundance, or can its daily reality help catalyze it? 

 

Can a group of people begin the movement toward abundance by simply becoming aware that it is feasible?  Such a strategy asks nothing of anybody but that they think about it, and perhaps engage in dialogue (and maybe even do some research).  If the hundred heroes model is ever tried, those heroes/heroines will need thousands of the awake to provide support.  In addition, the Scarcity Enforcement Team will find that strategy more challenging to derail.  In some ways, that might seem as futile as the other strategies, but almost nobody can currently even think about these issues in an enlightened manner.  Until a sizeable group begins thinking about the issue, the rest seems futile.  Can such a group carry the ball for humanity until they are ready to carry it themselves?  This essay seeks to initiate dialogue on that issue, and find more of those needles in haystacks. 

In 2014, as a result of my studies that led to my big essay, I think that I have an answer to that question above.  For each event in the human journey where a significant new energy source tapped, it led to the changes that humanity then experienced.  Indeed, the first one may have led to the evolution of humanity, and others led to civilization, the end of slavery, and the liberation of women.  Each time, only a relative handful of people harnessed the new energy source, and that increase in energy propelled the next epoch of the human journey, and it changed humanity in ways that were unimaginable to those living before the new energy source was harnessed.  If nothing else, it leads me to believe that I am heading in a direction that at least is consistent with how the previous energy breakthroughs were attained.  For humanity's masses, it will be energy first, and enlightenment later.

Other strategies may succeed, and while some pitfalls are more fatal than others, an effort of direct action by the masses may limp to the finish line while only stumbling into the lesser pitfalls, but no effort so far has really had a chance.  Are we ready to begin pursuing abundance? 

 

Footnotes

[1] The two successful attempts were the theft of the company, engineered by my boss, in Seattle in 1986, and theft of the company when Dennis was in jail in 1988, engineered by a business associate.

[2] Why only three thousand?  Why not three million?  The answer speaks volumes about the USA.

[3] For instance, when I was briefly with Dennis in 1996-1997, one of his volunteers previously volunteered for another prominent free energy inventor.  One day, the volunteer took a nature walk with that inventor and that inventor confided that he thought he was the Second Coming of Christ.  That admission spooked the volunteer, who came to Dennis’s organization soon thereafter.

[4] Recent examples have been various forums where my work has been discussed, particularly in the energy realm.  I present examples of intriguing technologies in my work, such as here and here, and I have watched engineers and scientists, who claim expertise in the energy field, dismiss them as of no consequence, although one was called the world’s most effective engine design by a major federal study, and the other is the best heating system the world market has yet seen.  Such reactions by scientists and engineers used to amaze me, but now I accept them as normal.  Some of my colleagues have had access to academics that run world-renowned science institutions and to others in the scientific establishment’s inner sanctum.  My colleagues’ reports have not been encouraging, as they encounter dogma, arrogance, complacency and a host of vices avidly cultivated by the scientific establishment’s authorities.  Brian O'Leary was one of them.

[5] This quote has been attributed to Howard Scott and others: "A criminal is a person with predatory instincts who has not sufficient capital to form a corporation."  Dennis encountered thousands of them over the years in America’s entrepreneurial waters.

[6] Even the scientific worldviews are often subtly egocentric, such as the current Creation Story as portrayed by the Big Bang and Evolution.  Humans are the crowning flower of evolution in that scientific worldview, and religious ideology, such as the Judeo-Christian religions, present humans as the apple of God’s eye.  Whether coming from scientists or religionists, the basic message is the same - humans are the best that the universe has to offer, and all inferior beings can be treated accordingly. 

[7] The Michael Material deals at length with the false personality and human ensoulment.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The next section: Peak Oil, New Energy and the End of Scarcity – Making New Energy Thinkable (51K)

Return to My Home Page