The X-Egesis Returns

The day job has been especially demanding and I have a number of new posts in the oven that I just don't have the time to attend to right now. One of the issues I've been mulling over is this weird phenomenon where science headlines blare out claims that the body copy either doesn't back up or actually contradicts- what's up with that? The other is looking at the passages of the so-called "Three World Wars" letters attributed to Albert Pike, meaning the few passages that aren't obvious forgeries, and how they seem oddly familiar...

So it's time to reach back into the archives and find some classic Secret Sun for all y'all to dive into.

Well, since The X-Files is in the news again (for some reason, all eyes were on Gillian Anderson's daughter a couple weeks back- Gillian brought her to the Olivier Awards and it became a major news story. A foreshadowing?) I thought I'd repost a link to my epic X-Files X-Egesis.

I can't think of another mythological allegory in pop culture that's as exhaustively detailed as the one I cover in the X-Egesis (if you can, please let me know). Of course, the first X-Files movie allegorized Orpheus and Eurydice and the second film allegorized a number of different Mystery narratives, but the way they meticulously weaved all the main plot points of the Delta Cycle of Ancient Egypt into a story about ancient astronauts, a coming cataclysm and alien hybrid saviors is something else entirely.

The Center Does Not Hold

Deja vu all over again

Things are feeling...strange. I've written about the strange resurgence of the Flat Earth Theory, a revival that seems more vigorous than anyone could have predicted. I heard someone theorize that movements like that were an outgrowth of reality television, a raging misnomer that has led everyone to question the reality of everything they see.

And since everything everyone sees now is on a screen of some sort it all feels fake, varying degrees of Honey Boo Boo Chile. Everything is a sideshow, everything is CGI.

A few years back we heard a lot about Transhumanism, which according to sites like H+ was a fait accompli. Now instead of robot bodies, Silicon Valley is talking about Timothy Leary's old life extension technology, promising that people will live to be 1000 years old. In fact the first generation of Millennarians are already being born.

This depresses the shit out of me. First of all, I don't believe it. I don't believe we're anywhere near dealing with the normal degradation of biologic systems that determine our mortality. Where are the experiments? Where are the real world examples? Right now, it seems like somewhat desperate wishful thinking on the part of fundamentalist materialists, not real science.

I've often said that Science will really impress me when they do something about the tragically short lifespans of dogs and cats. It seems to me that would be a great place to start with this immortality program. The fact that we're not seeing biotech doubling our beloved companions' lifespans is a pretty strong indicator they're nowhere near doing anything about our own.

It just feels like more empty Tomorrowland promises, meant to take our attention away from an increasingly turbulent geopolitical reality.


One of the shortcomings of Conspiricianity, meaning the metastasis of conspiracy thinking into cosmology, is that it doesn't account for the reality of human error. I keep seeing conspiracy gurus who are invested in the selling of Globalist conspiracies insisting that the increasingly aggressive moves by Russia and China, both militarily and economically, are all part of the conspiracy, that they're just playing "bad cop." But I don't think I believe it.

I think the generation of decision makers nearing retirement age- meaning those in charge of the Globalist project in the West- have been outfoxed and were totally unprepared for China setting up its own World Bank, for instance. And since there are so many entry points left unattended because of the assumptions of Globalist idealism-- vulnerabilities that the Russians and Chinese are taking full advantage of-- there is considerable alarm and consternation within the halls of power.

I can't offer much in the way of concrete examples at the present, besides the almost daily incursions the Russian Air Force is making into NATO airspace, or various rumors at sites like ZeroHedge, it's more a instinctual perception.

But there is a definite possibility that Greece will exit the Euro and enter the BRIC orbit, a victory of almost incalculable symbolic importance. The cradle of Western civilization throwing in its lot with the new sheriffs? That far outweighs Greece's negligible economic power.

And the simple fact is that there hasn't been a genuine economic recovery for the overwhelming majority of Americans and to say the social fabric is starting to fray is being extremely polite. Of course, the Globalists don't want a social fabric, but what happens when it becomes a divided world again? Could the US mobilize a serious military force in the event of a major land war in Asia? I doubt it, but you can ask people more tuned into these kinds of things. I think they'd probably agree with me.

China can probably put a million men anywhere on the ground tomorrow in Asia- or more ominously- Europe, while the US Army is falling apart after a decade and a half of quixotic adventures. China and Russia are developing a generation of weapons that make the US Navy's ace in the hole- its aircraft carriers- obsolete.

Russia is sending a fearsome arsenal of anti-aircraft missiles to Iran, a system that negates almost everything in the sky but expensive stealth bombers. Most serious observers say a nuclear Iran is a done deal.

Bye bye, Pax Americana.

We're all used to the assumptions of Globalism, but there are those of us who remember a world before it. And I could be wrong but it seems to me like the BRICS countries are already planning for a world after it. It could be that had been their plan all along, and were simply waiting for a generation of "We Are the World" 60s idealists to leave the barn open wide enough to get what they needed done.

In that context, thinking it's all some grand theatrical performance is a lot more comforting than thinking  world war is around the corner, yet again.

The Flat Earth and Other Strange New Rebellions

You know, the long-held prejudice against science fiction among intellectual types is not wholly unjustified. This is especially true of the kind of science fiction written before the reformist movements of the 1960s and 1970s, as well as later forms such as Cyberpunk (I don't see SF as a viable literary form any longer; it's become a hobby circle medium, largely consumed by people who either produce it or would like to).

As much as I might have enjoyed some of the storylines and concepts of writers like Arthur C. Clarke, for example, he was incapable of writing recognizably human characters. This is not to single Clarke out, he was a veritable student of human nature compared to an Issac Asimov, say, or a Ben Bova.

Even a very good writer like William Gibson misunderstands the reactions people have to the ubiquity of technology, in that the more ever-present and invasive technology and science become, the more the majority of people resent it, not make a fetish of it.

People are addicted to their iPhones and other gadgets, but they are simple mediums- it's the content and not the technology itself that most people fixate on. In fact, studies have shown people are becoming increasingly technologically illiterate as our gadgets become more powerful.

One of the worries of the establishment media-- which is to say the government, since outlets like the major networks, the New York Times, National Geographic, and major magazines and newspapers are merely echo chambers for the government-- is the so-called "Anti-Science movement." This is a misnomer, since there are a number of different, sometimes mutually-hostile movements with often clashing interests put under this umbrella.

But what the government's mouthpieces and the people who fetishize totalizing government as a kind of substitute deity (such as the I Fucking Love Science crowd) are really worried about are people who don't unquestioningly accept the dictates of government and/or corporate science (there's hardly a hint of daylight between the two these days). This has become a pressing concern as the depth of corruption in corporate and academic science has gotten so overwhelming-- the peer review system is in danger of becoming a bad joke, for instance-- that the mainstream media can no longer ignore it.

In fact, many of these so-called "Anti-Science" people have done a lot more of the actual science attached to their pet causes than the I Fucking Love Science types, who in fact usually do nothing at all but post stupid "memes" on their Facebook. Many of them couldn't explain the scientific method to you if you held a gun to their heads.

Science has a become a substitute religion to these people, which is to say government science, which is just another way of saying they actually worship governmental power.  And a vindictive and totalizing power at that.

They may not readily admit to doing so, but will be forced to do if you walk them through the reality of their belief system. What real scientists will admit is that all science of any scale being done today is ultimately controlled by the government, specifically the Defense Department.

It's ironic, for instance, to see how apoplectic liberal scientists like Phil Plait get over Apollo skeptics, since it basically puts them in the position of defending the integrity of the Nixon Administration, SS officer Wernher Von Braun and his Paperclip Nazis and a gaggle of Scottish Rite Freemasons from south of the Mason-Dixon line.

Politics do indeed make for strange bedfellows.

But there's also the reality that the totalitarian control exercised over scientists today is much worse than anything scientists had to deal with from, say, the Medieval Church. In fact, the whole notion that the Church went around smashing science down where ever it found it is a myth.

On the contrary, the Church has long been a patron of science (particularly medical science) and the extreme cases such as Hypatia and Giordano Bruno had more to do with political issues than theological disputes. But try questioning the party line on global warming or any of the other new orthodoxies today and your career in science will be finished.

As political and corporate power exercise increasing control over science, they've branded all opposition to their hegemony as "anti-scientific." This has become one of the epithets you hear coming from progressives, who depressingly have become the absolute mirror image of the Religious Right of the 1980s and 1990s. Onetime independent sites like Disinfo and Salon have become hyperpartisan screech-engines, and are major mouthpieces for the "Anti-Science" propaganda campaign.

As the mask comes off and capital "S" Science reveals itself to be nothing but a submissive lapdog for the Globalists, I think we can expect strange rebellions from the totalizing status quo. Most of these may be marginal but you never know what's going to strike a nerve. I've spent the past couple of weeks trying to wrap my head around one of the strangest new rebellions, the surprisingly vigorous revival of the old Flat Earth Movement, an old fringe movement that's found an eager new audience.

As with most of these movements there's a range of beliefs, but this video is a good place to get the basic bullet points. Essentially, it goes like this:  the Earth is a disk covered by a dome and surrounded a wall of ice that keep the oceans in. The Moon and the Sun orbit the Earth and the planets are just wandering stars. The space program is a hoax and there are no satellites. The Apollo missions were faked because space travel is impossible. All the zero G footage we've seen was done in high altitude airplanes, the same ones astronauts were trained in.

Flat Earth theory tends to be surprisingly Gnostic, in that the planet is a prison and there's no escape. The high altitude nuclear tests that the US and USSR undertook in the late 1950s were an attempt to punch holes in the dome but were unsuccessful. The movement tends to be anti-UFO, which I find a bit peculiar, given that if someone built the Earth as a prison wouldn't they want to keep an eye on it?

Every movement needs a rock star and the Flat Earth movement has Matt Boylan, a Canadian photorealist painter who claimed to have worked for NASA and been initiated into the secret at a party. Boylan doesn't offer any evidence for this and his credibility is somewhat... hazy, given the fact that he pushes the theory in a stand-up comedy act, in which he rolls out the world's worst Denis Leary impersonation.

Boylan also pushes a bizarre Stephen Hawking conspiracy theory that offers up an extremely dodgy interview with an alleged Hawking employee as 'evidence'. I have to wonder how committed Boylan is to all of this since he doesn't exactly project sincerity.

He seems to be a very talented painter, though.

You know me, I love a wild theory. But the only thing I got out of the Flat Earth material was just further evidence that NASA is full of crap. It makes no sense to me that the other heavenly bodies are all spheres but the Earth is not. The entire model just didn't ring true, especially since I've actually, y'know, seen the curvature of the Earth for myself.

But I got some fuel for my own fires, namely my own nutty conjectures that if all this NASA stuff is faked, maybe it's because planets like Mars and Venus aren't what they say they are. But I'm the first to admit that's conjecture- I'm not making YouTubes about any of it.

Flat Earth theorists believe that the globe model is used to diminish the importance of the planet and of humanity but I didn't really find that argument compelling, the same way I don't find the materialist extremists' theories that human life is some cosmic accident and everything is meaningless compelling either.

Poking around I saw a few people protest that the entire movement is a psyop, meant to discredit "Truthers" in general and Apollo skeptics in particular. Boylan's Vaudeville act didn't exactly dissuade me from that argument (one video has him expounding his views while slurping on wedges of grapefruit like a pig, as if consciously trying to be as repulsive as possible) and it certainly wouldn't be out of character for the Cryptocrats.

But animals in captivity are known to display aberrant behavior and human beings are no different. I expect more of this kind of thing as our lives become more controlled and our horizons continue to shrink.

As to science, I'm old fashioned- I think it should be above politics. Scientists may come to rue the day they all threw in with the partisan agenda, no matter how emotionally satisfying it might be to use science as a cudgel against one's perceived enemies.