joel carlinsky wrote:

Modern science went off the rails starting in the 1830s, when Faraday discovered that rotating wires in the field of a magnet induced a current that flowed along the wires. He jumped to the wrong conclusion, that his Faradic current was the primary force and what had previously been know as electric fluid was only a secondary manifestation.

 Ever since, there has developed a whole technology of faridic current, while the real primary force is denigrated as static electricity and almost ignored. If science had stayed on the original track, we would now have almost 200 years further advancement along the lines begun in the 1930s by Reich, but stalled at his death due to the lack of acceptance by the mainstream, a lack of acceptance due only in part to the differences between mainstream and orgonomic theories and in no small part also to the eratic personality of Reich himself, along with his unfortunate habit of including his personal opinions on such other, untestable, and thereefore unscientific topics as sex, childraising, psychotherapy, and politics as a part of the same package.

Meanwhile, in the 1830s again, the chemical industry was first able to synthesize organic compounds, giving the impression that life, formerly thought to be due to a vital force, was only a matter of chemicals. This remains the basis of all modern biology and medicine, while the much more important energetic factors are ignored.

But science was delt a third blow when it went from being based on direct observation of nature to being stuck in strict experimental procedures impossible for an average observer without special and expensive equipment. No more hobbyists like Van Leuenhoek or Thomas Jefferson are now able to compete with the big, well-financed laboratories that determine what shall be consider science and what shall not.

So science has gone from observations of the visible world that any inteelligent person can make to observations of artificial set-ups that reveal nothing of the real world, but only more and more of a fantasy-world that exists only in the artificial set-up of the experimenter's lab.

But the cult that has grown up around Tesla over the last 30 years is a pathological hero-worship that has little to do with reality either. Tesla did not work with the ether or with any concept of a biological vital force. He was, in fact, one of the founders of the modern era of electrical technology, the Faradic current era, and all his work is now in everyday common use. Far from being the great genius of legend, he did not even invent the means of using alternating current. That was done by William Stanley a full year before Tesla stole the idea from him and presented it to the gullible New York reporters as his own.

William Stanley, Jr. - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Teslaphiliacs have created a cult of Tesla-worshipers that lives in a fantasy-world of instant gratification by means of free energy devices that magically grant wishes, lacking all grounding in the real world and how the background energy of the universe really functions. The free-energy enthusiasts start from trying to make a machine to do what they want it to do, instead of starting by observing how nature does things and then trying to imitate it. They may sometimes get a wheel to turn around, but a real understanding of how the ether works and how it interacts with matter will still elude them.

And that is all to the good since they are mostly mechanistic power-tripers hell-bent on gaining power over nature, and their insane fantasy of a world of free energy would result in ecological disaster if they ever succeeeded in discovering what they seek. Free energy would only make it easier and cheaper for mechanistic humans to wage their eternal war against the earth, freed of the constraints imposed by energy costs.

Feel free to forwards this to any person or group that may be interested.

On 7/14/2012 7:48 AM, Mitchel Cohen wrote:

> Hi,
> I hitched from the Rainbow Gathering in Tennessee with a couple of
> researchers traveling to Asheville, North Carolina, where they're
> working on some wild Tesla-related energy projects, independent of the
> government. They work out of an old metal silo in Asheville that was
> pretty cool, based n the work of Stanley Meyer, John Badini, Marco
> Rodin, and Vortex-based mathematics and his Rodin-coil.
> The head of the "silo" research is Gregor Arturo, a young fellow. He's
> very much into the "Thrive" free-energy stuff and tyroidal energy.
> (Check the "Thrive" video online, of which I am pretty critical but
> which also has some interesting stuff in it.) The fellow I hitched with
> goes by the name Eden (aka Jeremiah), and he was very interesting, very
> political, and had just arrived the week before from Colorado before
> starting to do research at the institute.
> I haven't read any of the books they recommended, so I can't say what I
> think of any of it, but they recommend:
> Stanley Meyer, "The Birth of New Technology"
> Margaret Cheney, "Tesla, Man out of Time"
> "Keely and his discoveries, 1893" and
> Keely, "Sympathetic Vibratory Physics"
> Patrick J. Kelly, "Practical Guide to Devices"
> and <>,
> especially an article posted in April 2012.
> Know anything here?
> Mitchel
> ----------------------

Petros Evdokas wrote:


The ideological, philosophical and scientific dead end of conventional science ("scientificism") was highlighted again recently with the "God particle" (the Higgs boson) fiasco. Notice how they all dropped the appellation "God particle" the very next day, after using it and hyping it for more than a decade continually?

Same as the string theory and other particle based models of Cosmology. They all keep bumping up on glass ceiling which they can not penetrate.

Part of that reason is because conventional physics has abandoned and suppressed the branch that was born from its own body and loosely referred to as "visionary physics" about thirty years ago.

Another reason is that conventional science is unwilling and incapable of appreciating Orgonomy, which provides many answers to the most basic deficiencies in the currently existing "officially sanctioned" Cosmology.

How we got here

Here are some (not all) of the elements that comprise the roadmap of how conventional science got stuck where it is now. It's like a man who has plucked out his own eyes and complains he can't see. [A woman would not do that!]

1. The maturation of Capitalism into Imperialism that was completed around the beginning of the 20th century, also signaled the invasion, occupation and domination of the lands of Science by forces of Capital. An occupation regime was set up and since that time, Science is ruled by technology.

Since that time and to this day, most people, including scientists, are unable to tell the difference between Science and technology. This is at the root of many problems.

2. One of the early battles embodying that takeover was that between Edison and Tesla. All of the folklore (and mystification) existing today that revolve around Tesla's legacy is due to Edison's war against Science, carried out for Capital in the name of profits.

Here's a short summary of that:

3. The great revolution of the sixties and seventies, due to both its anti-imperialist anti-capitalist character AND to the element of higher Consciousness that it focused on and cultivated, was able to reunite Science and philosophy temporarily, opening up the possibility that Science might get out of the dead end it had entered.

The branch of science known as "Visionary Physics" was created by scientists whose eyes were opened again by the revolutionary process taking place around them and within them. Two works, in particular, produced within that context, held the possibility of a change in course so that science could become Science again.

One was the book titled "The Tao of Physics", by physicist Fritjof Capra:

Among other things in his book, Capra manages to point out the ridiculousness of firing particles through bigger and bigger accelerators at higher and higher speeds in the hope that these will reveal something supposedly profound about the structure of the Universe. The only thing that comes out of those "experiments" is what early computer engineers used to say about programming: "G.I.G.O. - it means Garbage In, Garbage Out". In other words, what you get out of those "experiments" is what you put into them: particle collisions at ever higher speeds and energies, and no way to make sense of them. If you don't cultivate your ability to make sense, you can not make sense out of any of those experiments, nor devise meaningful experiments with relevance to the questions.

This profound guideline was suppressed.

Another significant item of the period was the book titled "Space, Time and Beyond", written by Bob (Robert) Toben with physicists Fred Alan Wolf and Jack Scarfatti:

This book is the definitive source for comprehending quantum theory, tangible reality and Consciousness. It is a presentation - from the point of view of hard physics - of the idea that reality consists of Consciousness congealed into space-time. It is the "Mother of all..." books and movies on the connection between quantum reality and Consciousness.

The mere existence of this book could have helped a restoration of Science take place. But its point of view was suppressed and ignored. In the same way that healthy sexuality when suppressed becomes transformed into degenerate forms like sadism (a "secondary drive"), Visionary Physics became suppressed, distorted, misunderstood, and now thrives in a perverted form that feeds billion-dollar industries of new age dogmatism founded on mystification, ignorance and superstition.

4. The previous anti-Imperialist revolutionary period of the nineteen twenties and thirties was also a historical juncture that created the possibility of a restoration of science to its formerly correct orientation. It produced the branch of science known as Orgonomy, primarily through the work of Wilhelm Reich.

Reich's work held, and still holds, the possibility of providing the glue that can bind together currently existing scientific knowledge into a comprehensive "Theory of Everything". Even though that term is often the target of nervous humour, it is a noble and valid scientific effort to unite what we know from the Theory of Relativity, Quantum Theory, knowledge of Gravity, particle physics, electromagnetism, atomic and nuclear theory AND the Life sciences, into one meaningful whole.

The effort so far within conventional science is to hack at it, nobly, but still with blinders on - you can see a summary of where all this is today, here:

If you read even only the introduction of the above article you'll see that Life itself, and Life's very curious properties, exemplified by the knowledge that the very fact of Life's existence is a violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, are excluded from the parameters that scientists are exploring in order to put together a valid Theory of Everything.

Nevertheless, the quest for a valid Theory of Everything is a good one, and it would be going in the right direction if it included Orgonomy as one of its perceptual or theoretical instruments that could help congeal it all into a meaningful Theory.

But Orgonomy is also suppressed and ignored, its findings and even its name are ridiculed by conventional scientists who have never made time to examine any of the postulates put forth by Reich, which are based on observations and easy to reproduce experiments.

At least Albert Einstein had the decency to try Orgonomy for a bit and tried to figure it out with Reich. But curious circumstances (and perhaps the earth-shattering fear of a dissolving dogmatic Cosmology) eventually diverted him from it.

In my view Orgonomy is still the only way to go in order to help conventional science get unstuck. Orgonomy can provide tools for the "big picture", ie, it can provide help to move forward in the efforts for a unified Theory of Everything, but it can also help the efforts currently being conducted within more narrow, specialized branches of science (such as those listed in Mitchel's letter at the top), to find a context within which what the researchers are doing can make sense.

If you're interested in reading a little more about this please see my short letter published here on the archives of the Orgone Critical discussion group, titled:
"Re: [orgonecritical] Is orgone really a specific energy"


Ring the bells that still can ring,  Forget your perfect offering.
There is a crack, a crack in everything, That's how the light gets in. 
~ Leonard Cohen