Science -- What dont we know?

[Star-struck]

I realize and inferred that there are other sources of fuel. Nothing that is ready to take to place of fossil fuel on a large scale though.

[Sayonara]

See my comment above.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by Star-struck

I realize and inferred that there are other sources of fuel. Nothing that is ready to take to place of fossil fuel on a large scale though.

 

Nuclear power would do it, with ethanol or hydrogen for cars.

[Radical Edward]

Originally posted by jakepi7

I believe Roger Penrose attempted to answer that question. Its debated whether we are capable of even knowing the answer. Of course we are now proving Godel wrong. So perhaps its skys the limit.

 

you're saying there is a disproof of godels proof?

[Peter Dunn]

We actually know a lot less than we think we do.

 

This is because we have names for things for which we do not have a complete understanding.

 

Take, for instance, the space aspect of space-time.

 

Space has to be more than just 'room' (ie to move, breathe etc) - it must possess some form of physicality otherwise it could not be acted upon (warped) by gravity. Therefore, if we have no concrete definition of what space: the most fundamental of mediums in which everything else exists, actually is then can we be said to understand anything at all because the most important relationship between any two objects (from quantum particles to planets) is their spatial relationship to one another.

 

There are many such instances where; because we have a name for something, we assume that we (or at least somebody somewhere) has a complete understanding of that phenomenon.

 

Many people also make the mistake of assuming that certain things do not need explanation - that their true nature is self evident - when it is not.

 

 

So - 'what's in a name?" - take a closer look and assume nothing.

 

All the best

 

Peter Dunn

[Guest Jinx]

Originally posted by fafalone

By the time we fully explain this dimension, we'll find new ones we can't explain, and that process will continue.

 

I don't know about any other "dimensions", but I do know that there is more we DONT know about our world, ocean, and the space around us, and we will never understand it all.

 

What about these?

 

............ Why do water molecules, unlike every other element, expand right before they freeze?

............ How do Bees's make honey?

............ How did they find that petrified tree in the Grand Canyon going UP through "100 million years" of layered sediment?

............ Why does my compouter hate me so?

............ Of course there is that really hard one "how did life emerge" but that one has been mentioned already, so I dont have to (wait, I just did).

[Sayonara]

Originally posted by Jinx

Why do water molecules, unlike every other element, expand right before they freeze?

That's really not a mystery. I can't dig anything up right now as I am at work but I can find you the explanation later on.

 

(ps - water is not an element).

[atinymonkey]

Yes it is. Earth, fire, air and water. The best elements.

[Sayonara]

Quiet you.

 

Actually, Jinx can find it with Google.

[Intelligence]

Originally posted by Tau

What aspects of the natural world are there that we cannot explain scientifically? What dont humans know?

 

Well.

 

There really are two reasons why humans to date wouldn't be able to explain something.

 

1. We haven't discovered the scientific tools yet.

 

2. We haven't even given it effort.

 

For number one an example would be the specific of the first 1/4 of a second of our universe.

 

For number two an example might be why there is a ham sandwich sitting on a table on pluto.

 

We don't know about the ham sandwich yet, so we couldn't know why it got there!

 

So I guess would you mean is what we can't seem to find the ability to answer.

 

There's really nothing experimentally - it's pretty much all theoretical approaches (used because experiements are impossible) that hold "us" back....

[Hahnemannian444]

We don't know why and how ultramolecular, subAvogadrean drugs still have medicinal effects.

 

We don't know why and how mere camphor antidotes all homeopathic provings ("tests or trials") and prescriptions.

 

We don't yet know the actual mechanism of the Law of Similars or any other of the 10 Laws of Medicine.

 

We don't know why people maintain faith in allopathy when it has never shown itself anything but abject quackery with no cures of any viral, chronic or psychiatric cases while Hahnemannian homeopaths have.

 

We don't know why people still believe in a Big Bang when the explanation for the red shift was given in the early 1970s, when the notion was first put forward, and was then inadvertently confirmed about cosmic rays on p. 32 of the Jan. 1999 issue of SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, but it is human nature to believe authorities even if they are total fools, as evidenced by the total quackery of modern medicine and yet the blind obedience by boty the masses and others.

 

We don't know why people still hold with a steady-state Crust when Charles Hapgood and Albert Einstein showed otherwise in the 1960s.

 

We don't know why academics still maintain that civilization started in Mesopotamia when we already know it started earlier in MesoAmerica and was apparently the source of the Sumarian Civilization; and that of course says nothing about the facts that the Egyptian Civilization and the Harappan Culture of the Indus Valley appear on the historical scene without a period of progress because they obviously came from preexisting civilizations.

 

We don't know why people hold to the nonsense of an Ice Age during the Pleistocene when the geomagnetic evidence clearly points to a Pole in Hudson Bay at that time.

 

We don't know why fools continue to ignore the evidence from the flash-frozen mammoths that indicate nothing else than a Pole Shift or cataclysmic shift of the lithosphere as a whole across two pivot points near the Equator could have done that.

 

We don't know why people still ignore Nikola Tesla's work.

 

We don't know why people still believe vaccines are a pretty good idea 30 years after Thomas McKeown showed in THE ROLE OF MEDICINE, inadvertently confirming the views of Hahnemannian homeopaths, that they had nothing whatsoever to do with the disappearance of the contagious diseases that ravaged the world before homeopathy reappeared through Samuel Hahnemann after having been three times previously destroyed by the Church and the Brahmans as Hermetic medicine, Spagyric medicine and an unknown form of homeopathy in the BHAGWAT PURANA.

[Hahnemannian444]

I'm at threads opened by TimOkay if you want to reach me.

 

I'm otherwise too busy to attend to many threads on many sites while we look for help to resolve the mysteries of homeopathic pharmacology.

 

Edited: This of course proved too interesting to ignore once I read responses to the question and found many additional comments to offer.

[Sayonara]

Originally posted by Hahnemannian444

We don't know why academic idiots still maintain that civilization started in Mesopotamia when we already know it started earlier in MesoAmerica and was apparently the source of the Sumarian Civilization

Based on what evidence?

 

We don't know why fools continue to ignore the evidence from the flash-frozen mammoths that indicate nothing else than a Pole Shift or cataclysmic shift of the lithosphere as a whole across two pivot points near the Equator could have done that.

Can you go into more detail about the mammoths? Not heard about this.

[Hahnemannian444]

Sayonara asks and says: "Based on what evidence did the MesoAmerican cultures precipitate the Summerian Civilization?"

 

I've found a number of reliable authors on this, but Ivar Zapp is a new one off-the-scale reliable with loads of evidence.

 

He's a good read too.

 

I know about him only because a friend of mine published him and sent me the book.

 

I believe the core of the argument centers around the reed boats of Peru, reported in detail by Pisarro's men, and the fact that the progenitor of the Summerian Civilization is reported as having come on such a craft.

 

Not having looked at it in a while, and not remembering details because it is so packed with them, I am rather sure he gives a few other details suggesting this is an obvious conclusion.

 

For instance, I am pretty sure he gave linguistics evidence and alphabetic evidence.

 

Other than that, given that we have to rely upon mythology in these old cultures, I believe he went into details about connections between the two cultures.

 

It's hardly the core feature of the book, but I remember it as being a primary premise.

 

One of my favorite recent reads I mean to carefully study next time, for I like books without conflicts with facts.

 

If he's got such problems with facts, I did not spot any the first time through, and I find that exceedingly rare.

 

------------

 

"Can you go into more detail about the mammoths? Not heard about this."

 

Yeah, this is very important.

 

Charles Hapgood is the primary authority here, although his references are extensive.

 

Seems that flash freezing can only happen under very special conditions.

 

The owner of BirdEye Frozen Foods wanted to know how that was accomplished, and Ch. Hapgood was thus asked as the only person studying it in the West.

 

Otherwise, without flash freezing conditions, muscle tissue is destroyed by the ice crystals forming inside of cells, colloquially called "freezer burn."

 

Hapgood discovered many details about the mammoths that make it impossible they were in other than temperate regions when they died in the last recognized mass-extinction Pole Shift; i.e., the actual last Pole Shift seems to have been the Biblical Flood now recognized only as a "local affair" but nonetheless accurately dated and confirming the date given by arcane sources as 5650 BC (e.g., Zitko said in 1936 in the multi-part LEMURIAN THEO-CHRISTIC CONCEPTION that it was "about 7600 years ago").

 

Still, that was apparently only a "minor Shift."

 

Hapgood found that their stomach contents and teeth spaces had foods indigenous (sp?) to areas akin to the hills east of San Francisco and the highlands of Northern India: buttercups and sage grasses and some others.

 

Interestingly, there are apparently some surviving mammoths in Northern India, including the hump, sloping backbone and curled tusks (Discovery Channel documentary in Usa, although I think it was a BBC documentary originally).

 

There's also something wrong with their skin not being adapted to cold climates, and the finding seems to be that hair has nothing to do with cold-weather adaptation -- rather, it is the amount of fat in the skin.

 

They don't have it.

 

Lots of details are in that chapter and many other books.

 

The point is that they could only have been flash frozen and even gotten into the ground that quickly turned to rock-hard tundra if it was soft and then suddenly turned ice-box cold.

 

A related enigma that makes it clear we are dealing with a Pole Shift at the end of the Pleistocene, 12,000 years ago, is that there was a similar flass-freezing Soviet find of a sabertoothed cat/tiger alongside a 90-ft. fruit tree with fruit still on it on the New Siberian Islands just inside the Arctic Circle, meaning that it was in July or August that the Pole Shift occured.

 

-----------

 

You're a very clever man or woman; you ask good questions and make intelligent replies.

 

I hope I did not offend you at the 2nd homeopathy thread.

 

We're looking for evidence of water polymerization and probably electromagnetism as the mechanism for it.

 

This appears to be the mechanism for homeopathic pharmacology.

 

When this is confirmed, we will be dealing with a paradigm shift the likes of no other, for we will have admitted to the existence of Newton's AEtherial Medium and thus to the AEtheric Plane of existence.

 

Wow and zowie.

 

I cannot imagine a bunch of materialists easily giving in to higher planes of existence since it is a sacred cow to them that reeks of religion to make any sort of admission; however, this is now enevitable with Lo's findings.

 

Know of any lost or misplaced research about water or alcohol polymerization or of electromagnetism to explain pecularities from shaking (succussing) solvent-solutions?

 

Tim and I are hoping that somebody knows of something discovered that got shelved without a place to put it, for most of the discoveries of the last century seem to have had somebody already having discovered something later recognized.

 

We need some help here, though, for there seem to be some missing pieces.

 

I'm not sure what they are, but any little bit of information may be helpful.

[Hahnemannian444]

Another correction: It isn't MesoAmerica but South America where a much older civilization or series of them are being admitted to, begrudgingly.

 

I believe it is Monte Verde that's been dated at 10,000 years ago.

 

Arcane sources go back to 78,000 years ago, though; however, that is not in areas now above sea level due to how Pole Shifts reorient the Equatorial Bulge and thus become the mechanism by which continents "sink" (misnomer).

 

Another issue that Ivar Zapp discovered about MesoAmerica is that the sea level was 400 lower in the area around Central America during the late Pleistocene.

 

That would have made a large portion of the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribean Sea terrestrial.

 

This in turn points to lots of work of underwater archaeology and seems the obvious solution to things like the Bimini Road.

 

He centered his analysis around the stone spheres in Costa Rica.

 

Turns out that they existed, before some were moved by rich Costa Ricans, in triangles that formed intersections with Pacific islands and ancient sites like Stonehenge, Giza, Malta, Crete (Phonecians) and others.

 

His thesis is that it seems to have been an ancient maritime university.

 

Another factor verifying these kinds of notions are the Portolan charts discovered by Charles Hapgood.

 

They will astound.

 

These issues of prehistory are way too numerous to accept the current paradigm of Mesopotamia as the first civilization as other than total hogwash accepted by only the most ignorant and misinformed of people.

 

I like the disintegration of such paradigms, for Hahnemann said in his reply to a Royal looking for somebody to cure insanity in a family member (Duke Klockenbring, an apparent pseudonym to protect the man), a job that Hahnemann got the next summer (1791) and successfully cured with homeotherapeutics, that the prince should look for a physician with a number of characteristics, one of which is that he should be "no stranger for everything else necessary for man as a citizen of the world..."

 

You name it, if academia accepts it, I can likely collapse it as rubbish based upon some basic erroneous assumption.

[Hahnemannian444]

Kylon says:

 

I think in the future better education techniques, biomedical technology will allow us to learn far more than we could possibly ever hope to learn now.

 

I have a pet peeve about allopathic research, so I want to ask a question about the notion of advancements in biomedical technology.

 

How in the world does one arrive at a conclusion supposing that knowledge of cellular mechanisms could possibly outstrip or exceed the knowledge of curative therapeutics provided by the 10 natural Laws of Medicine found in homeopathy, especially when we have already demonstrated that there are no incurable diseases?

 

What more do you want than that, and why is it still ignored by a supposedly scientific world?

 

What is the problem here?

[Hahnemannian444]

Star Struck says:

 

Opec says that we will exhaust the planet of all its majore oil reserves within the next 70 years.

 

A couple of responses belong here.

 

First of all, we have seen that electric and fuel-cell cars are obviously a much better technology.

 

This demonstrates that, unfortunately, our industries are in the hands of a few billionaires (200 is the figure I always encounter) with self-interest shaping how they permit technologies to find a place in the market.

 

A good example, which is shocking, is a story now nearly 70 years old found in THE CRIME AND PUNISHMENT OF I.G. FARBEN: THE UNHOLY ALLIANCE BETWEEN HITLER AND THE GREAT CHEMICAL COMBINE (1979).

 

Rockefeller resurrected the bankrupt Nazi war machine in 1926 by giving them a king's ransom for the world rights to the I.G. Farben patents on synthetic gasoline and rubber.

 

They only initially acquired the gasoline rights, but it seems they have since acquired the synthetic-rubber patents per that contract.

 

The Nazi chemical company (Bayer is one of them) had perfected three major synthetic products that kept Nazi Germany self-sufficient in gasoline, rubber and nitrites (for gunpowder).

 

Interestingly, the war ended three months after the Allies finally bombed the three gasoline facilities, and the manager of one of the coal-hydrogenation facilities for making synthetic fuel remarked in public that there was a "gentlemen's agreement that heavy industry would not be bombed in Germany."

 

Anyway, there is no reason for us to be in the Middle East, no reason for our using petroleum when Exxon (Standard Oil) has the world rights to coal hydrogenation, and no reason we should be driving around anything but very fast, very cheap, very safe and very clean electric cars.

 

So it is irrelevant how much reserve oil there is, for the billionaires rather obviously mean to sell us hokum tell the oil runs out and then provide us with reasonable technologies.

 

And mind you, the petrochemical industry includes the allopathic pharmaceutical industry.

 

They are selling you total hokum, abject lies about everything, folks.

 

You are foder for them, make no mistake about it; for until you demand homeopathy en masse, they have you in agreement accepting No cures for any viral, chronic or psychiatric cases.

 

How stupid and ignorant does that make you to listen to anything allopathic physicians say when that therapeutic incompetence means they are actually total quacks?

 

 

[Hahnemannian444]

Star Struck says:

 

There really isn't a viable replacement for fossil fuel energy. At least not anything that can currently and readily be mass produced, save maybe nuclear energy. You are correct though, there could be via science if politics would only allow it.

 

Uh oh!

 

That's so wrong.

 

Look into that again, please, for you will find that the electric car was killed about three years ago.

 

Some outrageous reason was given for it, and I think that about 2000 or 3000 production vehicles were recalled.

 

The appearance of it is that too many people wanted them.

 

Details, details...

[Hahnemannian444]

Star-struck says:

 

I realize and inferred that there are other sources of fuel. Nothing that is ready to take to place of fossil fuel on a large scale though.

 

A friend of mine on the inside of that technology at the level of experimental engineer told me that it would take, at most, two years to change over all of the machinery of production and implimentation across each Western culture to electric and fuel-cell cars.

 

It's absurd to not do it, so please rethink that stance.

 

Besides, we're talking about cars so much faster in acceleration and deceleration than fossil-fuel vehicles that we are concievably duscussing crimes akin to J.P. Morgan's not allowing Nikola Tesla to rewire the turbines at Niagra Falls to ultra-high-frequency alternating current (14,000 cycles per second instead of the 60 common in the US and 120 in Europe) that makes him personally guilty for all of the deaths from accidental electricution.

 

We should not be driving around with opposing traffic either, and who the hell is responsible for maintaining deadly situations whereby speeds of 70- and 80-mph impacts exist unless the automobile industry that wants cars replaced rather than made safe and that last?

 

Argh...

 

Fortunately, all of these people will never live again due to too much negative karma and embalming practices sustain their body's etheric patterns, and we will eventually run out of such evil people.

 

tic toc...

[Hahnemannian444]

Peter Dunn makes a truly brilliant remark:

 

Take, for instance, the space aspect of space-time.

Space has to be more than just 'room' (ie to move, breathe etc) - it must possess some form of physicality otherwise it could not be acted upon (warped) by gravity.

 

I quote Richard Kieninger from OBSERVATIONS IV, the last article reproduced in it:

 

[OOps! Will have to come back with it.]

[Hahnemannian444]

Jinx points out:

 

Why do water molecules, unlike every other element, expand right before they freeze?

 

Hey, man, I did not know that.

 

We have nanometer-sized ice at room temperature in homeopathically prepared succussed (vigorously shaken) high dilutions.

 

It seems to be the mechanism by which James H. Stephenson's polymerization hypothesis has found an answer.

 

But how is a big question.

 

I like this fact.

 

What is to be done with it is another question requiring bigger chemistry brains than mine, so I will be interested in what Timokay makes of this fact.

 

Thank you, albeit inadvertently.

 

And please tell us your views on homeopathic pharmacology.

[Hahnemannian444]

Intelligence says:

 

For number one an example would be the specific of the first 1/4 of a second of our universe.

 

Here's this paradigm about the Big Bang and the ancillary construct of a supposedly inflationarily expanding universe that I have collapsed as nonsense for over 30 years that I'd like to hear some of you bright people address since I find it encountering walls every time I have previously presented it.

 

So I will try again and be interested in responses.

 

The whole thing seems to be predicated upon an erroneous assumption, just like all other mistakes throughout the history of science since the Italian Renaissance; to whit: photons do not lose energy to the surrounding space in traveling the vast intergalactic distances that would account for their spreading in wavelength as the red shift underlying the premise of a Big Boop and expansion of the universe.

 

That assumption is a biggie, for p. 32 of the 1999 issue of SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN inadvertently admitted that another class of quantum particles (viz., cosmic rays) "lose energy" and thus dissolve or disintegrate into the cosmic microwave background radiation.

 

Before going on, consider what that means.

 

We have a quantum particle, which can be identified as a particle or a wave, that does something additional: it goes poof into the cosmic microwave background radiation.

 

I still have not figured out what is meant by that, but it seems pretty important.

 

Anyway, that mechanism of lost energy of quantum particles was the explanation given by arcane sources in the early 1970s, when the notion of a Big Bang was first introduced.

 

Now it is nearly four years since that inadvertent admission of this explanation found itself inside of academia without any recognition of its importance.

 

I am inclined to believe that the whole of the scientific community is composed of dullards to not perceive the explanation collapses Big-Bang Theory.

 

What is wrong with my reasoning here?

[Hahnemannian444]

I've got a question for Tau:

 

Where are all of the neutrinos?

 

It is one of my premises about ultramolecular drugs that physicists have admitted to over 20 synonyms for and major manifestations of the AEther over the last twenty years, and one of the latter is Chiu's neutrino flux and H.C. Dudley's independently arrived at neutrino sea in the same year (1960, I believe).

 

Dudley posed that question because the neutrino has a half-life near infinity; so where are they if they have not dissolved or disintegrated into the AEther?

 

Also, as a fascinating fact about neutrinos, Chiu gave us the calculation that we walk around in a sea of neutrinos that pass right through us in a concentration of 10 to the 11th power neutrinos per cubic centimeter.

 

Where are all the neutrinos?

[atinymonkey]

Originally posted by Hahnemannian444

A good example, which is shocking, is a story now nearly 70 years old found in THE CRIME AND PUNISHMENT OF I.G. FARBEN: THE UNHOLY ALLIANCE BETWEEN HITLER AND THE GREAT CHEMICAL COMBINE (1979).

 

Rockefeller resurrected the bankrupt Nazi war machine in 1926 by giving them a king's ransom for the world rights to the I.G. Farben patents on synthetic gasoline and rubber.

 

They only initially acquired the gasoline rights, but it seems they have since acquired the synthetic-rubber patents per that contract.

 

The Nazi chemical company (Bayer is one of them) had perfected three major synthetic products that kept Nazi Germany self-sufficient in gasoline, rubber and nitrites (for gunpowder).

 

Interestingly, the war ended three months after the Allies finally bombed the three gasoline facilities, and the manager of one of the coal-hydrogenation facilities for making synthetic fuel remarked in public that there was a "gentlemen's agreement that heavy industry would not be bombed in Germany."

............................

How stupid and ignorant does that make you to listen to anything allopathic physicians say when that therapeutic incompetence means they are actually total quacks?

 

Not quite accurate, it's a distortion of actual events to spread a favourable light on event that support a particular argument. The synthetic rubber was produced, but the ‘gasoline’ ( we prefer the term Petrol in Europe ) was simply a thinning of the actual Petrol using composite chemical compounds or ethanol. This research was primarily in the actual engine rather than the petrol. The research for this is still in use today, as the Allies were impressed that the German tanks could run on strong spirits (over 60% proof) as a consequence of that development even modern tanks can run on alcohol if required.

 

"gentlemen's agreement that heavy industry would not be bombed in Germany.&quot, this was only true at the start of the war, Albert Speer is quite explicit about that (that’s an impeachable source for you!). The agreement was broken when a German pilot accidentally dropped his bombs on London thinking he was over the sea. Dresden is a prime example of the bombing policy at the time, ‘bomber’ Harris flattened the entire city with impunity.

 

Plus I can only be stupid or ignorant, I can't be both.

 

Originally posted by Hahnemannian444

Star Struck says:

 

Uh oh!

 

That's so wrong.

 

Look into that again, please, for you will find that the electric car was killed about three years ago.

 

Some outrageous reason was given for it, and I think that about 2000 or 3000 production vehicles were recalled.

 

The appearance of it is that too many people wanted them.

 

Details, details...

 

That's just the US. I'm not sure if that is true. There are more than 3000 electric cars in Paris alone. In the UK the government will give you £6000 towards an electric car if you want to buy one. It’s just no one likes them much, they are expensive to charge up.

[Hahnemannian444]

Atinymonkey, you said:

 

Not quite accurate, it's a distortion of actual events to spread a favourable light on event that support a particular argument. The synthetic rubber was produced, but the ‘gasoline’ ( we prefer the term Petrol in Europe ) was simply a thinning of the actual Petrol using composite chemical compounds or ethanol. This research was primarily in the actual engine rather than the petrol. The research for this is still in use today, as the Allies were impressed that the German tanks could run on strong spirits (over 60% proof) as a consequence of that development even modern tanks can run on alcohol if required.

 

"gentlemen's agreement that heavy industry would not be bombed in Germany.", this was only true at the start of the war, Albert Speer is quite explicit about that (that’s an impeachable source for you!). The agreement was broken when a German pilot accidentally dropped his bombs on London thinking he was over the sea. Dresden is a prime example of the bombing policy at the time, ‘bomber’ Harris flattened the entire city with impunity.

 

Plus I can only be stupid or ignorant, I can't be both.

 

First, please believe me that any insult in a generic sense (I don't know what I said) was not directed at anyone personally. I'm not impressed with academia as an institution, but most of my colleagues and friends are academics who are far-sighted people in their fields. Moreover, I'm actually quite impressed with the brain power and knowledge of people at this site, which is refreshing, as Tim could vouge for.

 

However, I am quite positive that it was a whole series of synthetic-gasoline and synthetic-rubber patents that Rockefeller acquired from I.G. Farben and Hitler called coal hydrogenation.

 

I don't know what information you're relying upon, but I am rather certain this is part of the historical record.

 

And I would go so far as to suggest that this is simply not true: "the ‘gasoline’ was simply a thinning of the actual Petrol using composite chemical compounds or ethanol."

 

As far as it being development of the engines, I.G. Farben is the petrochemical conglomerate dominating the whole of Europe to this day; they had nothing to do with engine designs.

 

Where did you get that?

 

Moreover, I believe the Nazi trucks were Swiss vehicles.

 

And your remark that the "gentleman's agreement" having been only applicable at the start of the war and then being voided when London started getting bombed is not relevant since the Nazis did not, to my knowledge, target any heavy industry but instead engaged in attempts to break the will of the British population by bombing cities and thus civilians.

 

Likewise, the remark from the manager of one of the fuel-production facilities was quoted late in the war, not early.

 

As for the firebombing of Dresden, an artistic center with absolutely no strategic target, that was demanded by the Soviets for war crimes on Soviet soil to which the equally evil and ignorant Western Allies acquiesced and thus made us all guilty of that murder of 400,000 civilians.

 

Personally, I despise all men of war, and that is a perfect example of the problems we get into when we permit crazy men with weapons to wreck havock on us as the military and police.

 

Of course, why Truman didn't drop one of the two bombs out to sea in clear view of Tokyo, but instead murdered another 160,000 civilians once and then another 150,000 the second time, is also incomprehensible to me.

 

I personally think we should have executed Truman and all of the generals for those war crimes.

 

It was, moreover, observed by Will Durant (when analyzing Islamic culture and history and the remarkable lack of policemen) that "a society can be judged by the size of its police force."

 

We of course fail compared to Islam, which is quite ridiculous given how foolishly we view Islamic culture and history when compared to the fact that Europe wallowed in filth and ignorance while Islam had lit streets and universities.

 

Anyway, Dresden was not a site with any heavy industry either.

 

I think you are totally wrong in every regard there.

 

I know this history because my father flew in B-17s.

 

Where did you get your information?

 

I've never read Albert Speer, but I'd say he is reliable since he was really mostly just an architect given too much responsibility.

 

In fact, as I recall, it was Speer who told Hitler that the war was over if the bombings of the fuel facilities continued, which they did, for he couldn't continue to skeletonize one facility to keep the others working.

 

Please read that work.

 

It and two others tell a horror story we see to this day: IBM AND THE HOLOCAUST and THE SWISS, THE GOLD, AND THE DEAD.

 

It scares the heebie-jeebies out of me that billionaires appear to control the world and actually openly discussed their Plan (via the International Chamber of Commerce) to divy up the world's natural resources after WWII, which is exactly what arcane sources reported and which is why IBM's owner and CEO, Thomas J. Watson, was a supporter of Hitler and the Nazis and was an evilly illegal smuggler of punch cards and spare parts into Germany all during the war and should have been executed just like so many others, like the many Swiss bankers and industrialists, John D. Rockefeller and all of the executives of Standard Oil, and the owners, executives and attorneys of about 1500 other US firms whose international corporate agreements interferred with our war-time industries for a full two years.

 

Again, fortunately, all people like that will never live again, and we will eventually run out of evil people.

 

Unfortunately, there's a long line of them risen up through college fraternities and sororities indoctrinated from youth with the remark, heard at any campus office of them, that they are the "future leaders of America."

 

We call them Republicans but should call them what they actually are, as shown historically, i.e., fascists, rich-and-powerful "elitists."

 

Argh and double argh...