2001 - WEEK 43 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-22/25553 From: J J Dewey Subject: Alternative Energy Part II Thanks for the references on alternative uses of sunflowers Mindy. They cover the use of sunflower oil and the use of cast off hulls for fuel, but I couldn't find any site about using the whole dried sunflower as a fuel as I mentioned in my last post. As I said, this sounded very promising, but I haven't heard another thing about it since reading the article decades ago and there seems to be no site ion the web discussing it. Dehara quotes my statement as follows: "Solar Power. As far as being a clean energy solar power is a definite improvement over oil or coal. Some see it as free energy and completely pollution free, but this is not quite so." And then she says: "To my horror ... JJ's words, "but this is not quite so" appears to no longer be a true statement ... not after today, anyway." I do not understand your horror here and cannot even find where you disagree with me. Perhaps you can explain. You mention a company whose website is www.greenmountain.com As if their green energy policy somehow nullifies or contradicts my writing, but such is not the case. I checked out their site and they do mention that solar energy is a source of power but do not claim to actually have any electricity from solar energy available. I think they throw in the solar energy graphic to deceptively increase sales to people who want to help the environment. As far as wind power goes they say they supply electricity from windmills to 2500 homes in a select area of Pennsylvania. Apparently, if you do not live there, wind energy is not available. If you do sign up with them and are willing to pay extra for the clean energy it appears that you will receive electricity generated from natural gas or hydro electric. This extra charge thrown in while stressing wind and solar (which seems to be not available) sounds deceptive and also expensive. You say they want to charge you $109.91 for 1001 kWh. Idaho power who supplies our electricity from similar clean energy (hydro electric) only charges us $52.74 for this same amount. A thing to consider is that there is only a limited supply of natural gas and hydro power and all the electricity generated from these two sources will be sold. If we go out of our way and pay a surcharge for energy from one of these two sources it will not reduce power generated from other sources. It will merely mean that the guy who cannot purchase them will get his energy from some other source. I mentioned that a drawback of ethanol is that it burns hot. Chris sent me an interesting piece of information on this: A Company in Melbourne Australia has developed a Ceramic Automotive "Propulsion Unit" which allows fuel to be burned 10 times hotter than the conventional Internal Combustion Engine - and contain the heat inside the engine .. resolving all other problems. The first prototypes were built 10 years ago - specifically for the purpose of burning Ethanol produced in the Sugar Refining Process .. A Major Oil Company provided some research capital in exchange for technology patent rights .. and when the research was completed (several cars went on the road with this engine) the whole project was shelved. There are now moves afoot ( and the project has been revived) to create a hybrid Ethanol/steam powered unit to overcome the locked up patent - but it has required the development of a new bio-impregnated ceramic .. Needless to say that, even though we have another prototype, details are being closely guarded. However, the Government has stepped in to force a couple of oil companies to share research on the production of an Ethanol + Petrol fuel mix - as a result of the successful prosecution of one oil company for restrictive trade practices. (End Quote) The next alternative of which to discuss the pros and cons is wind power. Altogether renewable sources (namely wind & solar,) only supply about 2.4% of the electricity for the United States. Of these two wind shows the most promise at present. When I first passed some windmills traveling through California I thought it was cool that they were making use of non polluting wind power, but then as I passed by more of them the thought occurred to me that a few of these would be OK, but if they were everywhere (in an attempt to replace coal or nuclear) that which was pleasant to the view as a novelty would become quite an eyesore as they became ubiquitous. One or two dandelions in a lawn can be charming, but a whole yard full of them can drive you crazy. Even so, if windmills ever supplied more than 10% of our power needs, they would become a major source of eye pollution. I personally would be willing to put up with it if there were no reasonable alternative, but I would much prefer a source that does not clutter up thousands of acres of landscape. On the positive side wind is probably the cleanest source of commercially viable power there is. It even beats solar, which has solar panels that use polluting cadmium compounds. Even so it also has a number of drawbacks. One of them is very similar to solar in the fact that the materials for construction also require a considerable outlay of energy (probably from coal) to produce. One of the greatest drawbacks is that there are a very limited number of areas where there is sufficient wind to make windmills economically feasible. We would then be limited in using this source even if we decided to move ahead full speed with it. Another problem that limits locations for wind power is that if they are built in an area where there are many birds, the poor fowls tend to fly directly into the blades to their death. Windmills have destroyed numerous birds of prey and even some endangered species such as golden eagles. This problem has put the squeeze on available land for windmills. Now a windmill power station has to do a study of an area as to its impact on the bird life before they build. Below is an informative web site that expands on this subject. http://www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/2001/02/02092001/windbird_41856.asp Another little known problem is noise pollution. When they have been built close to homeowners the sound of the whirling blades became so disruptive that numerous lawsuits resulted. If future windmill plants have to be built a distance from any homeowner to avoid litigation this will further restrict land selection. Many think that when windmill construction is complete that the power plant is home free expense wise, but it turns out that repairs have been higher than projected. One will often see non working windmills because of some operating problem waiting for repairs. A final problem is their unreliability. The wind does not blow consistently the same 24 hours a day and since electricity from wind power cannot be stored there will be gaps where power generated at one time may be only half as much as the day before. I would imagine that a community that uses wind power would have to have a backup source of power for windless days. Some fairly large companies who have invested in wind power have later abandoned the project because of financial loss. But then there are other mostly smaller companies that persist in perfecting this source in the hope of a better cleaner world. We wish them well. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-23/25554 From: "~ B." Subject: RE: Alternative Energy Part I re Green Mountain Energysm dehara wrote about Green Mountain Energy... "Steve explains much during our conversation. He's purpose is to contact potential energy clients/customers for cutting edge electricity offered by wind power, i.e., Windmill Power in TEXAS. Only he is located in Northern United States calling Southern states. Steve volunteers to be calling from Pennsylvania where Green Mountain Energy's Headquarters is located." AND "Reliant Energy. In lieu of finding my current bill (We just cleaned up for God's sake) . . . yet from memory remembered 1001 kWh for $105.55. Steve figures my costs from Green Mountain minus extra fees, new total is $109.91 as compared to $105.55. My savings would be a minus = - 4.36. No savings at all, instead an increase of $4.36, yet I would be helping the environment" And now a few words from ... me: My in-laws are customers of Green Mountain (but not for much longer, they plan to switch back to the local power company). Their electrical bill is more than TWICE what my wife and I are charged on a monthly basis. And, according to my in-laws, Green Mountain's customer service is atrocious. Just wanted to pass that along. Maybe Green Mountain is cleaning up their own act as they move into Texas. But I wouldn't hold my breath. ~B. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-23/25555 From: "~ B." Subject: ABC News - Alternative Energy Options This story was reported April 26, 2001: "From Wind to Pig Waste, Research Offers an Array of Energy Options "Some power alternatives, such as wind and solar power, have been highly developed and are now widely available. But emerging technologies can harness power from corn, artichokes, muck on the ocean bottom, even from water itself. " Full story: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/energyalt_part2_010426.html Dude, can I bum an artichoke off ya till, like, Tuesday? Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-23/25556 From: DeHara Subject: Re: [keys-l] Alternative Energy Part II Sorry about the confusion JJ - nope, I am not disagreeing with you. I read your partial statement, "this is not quite so" as to mean this service was not yet an available option in the here & now... Wind power or the appearance of such is/was not quite perfected... as pointed out ...not yet common reality, yet. My 'horror' was to realize that while true production may not be actual as in real, there was and is an entity offering this service to other's And the voice on the phone reported the company initiating this illusion began in Austin, Texas in 1997. When the telemarketer's start calling or traveling around the country, offering something, it gives the appearance of realness & availability to an idea and/or product. My concern is for the individual's within the household's contacted. Each locale or home contacted will produce at least one person who begins to consider the sales talk as true. Whether they believe the hype of the sale's call or not, the seed is planted. I'm sure this phenomena is not unknown to you JJ, since you do identify yourself as a worldly, life long salesman, right JJ? This is my 'horror' seeing how the seeds of illusion are planted moment by moment upon the general public. Planted by those who intentionally misrepresent truth for a sell/sale... whether a dollar amount is involved or not. Much like repeating the same erroneous information within a question to say ... a list of 327 members. After the minority of responders respond and are considered as representative of the majority, this group 'thought' takes hold. Reinforced by continual reiteration of false information seen or heard enough times, the false becomes the seed planted and grown on our planet. Especially when the answer within their response, is valid and somewhat reliable in that 3-6 answer's are seen as representative of the silent majority. This is the "horror" to which I refer to with my post. Sorry you, JJ that U saw it as me disagreeing with You. Yet, I suppose your used to that, other's disagreeing with U. And you have only have two (2)options, as U see it here Defend or Offend. So U choose Both. . . It is no wonder U could not find where I am disagreeing with U. CAUSE ... I AM not disagreeing! peace keepers My contention is that we need to find another way. Se La Vie . . . Now I went back to that site and for the life of me, cannot locate your statistic of 2,500. Instead, I again find 5000 quoted as initially posted by me. Where did U get this number from, pray tell 2,500? Ps. What is the reference for this Quote, please? JJ quotes: However, the Government has stepped in to force a couple of oil companies to share research on the production of an Ethanol + Petrol fuel mix - as a result of the successful prosecution of one oil company for restrictive trade practices. (End Quote) Additionally, it appears there is at least one other state currently producing wind Power. Thank All, yes, U ,too JJ for your patience. However there does appear to be another state that is currently producing wind powered electricity and that is Texas as reported by Green Mountain Website quoted below: 550 kW wind turbines near Fort Davis, Texas (Photo by Brian Smith courtesy National Renewable Energy Lab) "The central issue is the fact that West Texas has existing generation totaling 4,800 MW," Donohoo told a Texas Renewable Energy Industry Association meeting last year. He said there was "a load of 3,100 megawatts with a 1.0 percent to 1.5 percent per year growth, a transmission transfer limit of 1,100 MW, and exportable generation of 1,700 MW." "Add to this scenario the wind generation capacity to be developed under the Renewables Portfolio Standard, and you have created quite a challenge," Donohoo said. The Renewables Portfolio Standard requires retail electric providers to buy an additional combined 2,000 megawatts of Texas renewable electric generation capacity statewide by January 2009, from sources that include wind, solar, hydroelectric, biomass or geothermal. Among the options being considered are construction of new high voltage transmission lines from San Angelo to Rio Pecos, Rio Pecos to Permian Basin, and Permian Basin to Moss; the addition of many new lower voltage transmission lines and autotransformers to make the switch. "Over $119,000,000 could be spent to improve the flow from West to East by the summer of 2003," Donohoo said. Some of the windpower that will flow through the state's grid this year will be generated on the King Mountain wind ranch in West Texas 50 miles south of Midland. The energy generated by 214 wind turbines will be coming on-line in June and August. Upton Wind is handling the development, Renewable Energy Systems is doing the construction, and Cielo Wind Power will take care of the operations and maintenance. Cielo Wind Power has developed several projects including a 107 turbine operation near McCamey, currently Texas' largest wind farm. Development is also under way by the same group on two major projects including a 242 turbine, 160 megawatt ranch in Pecos County and the 214 turbine, 279 megawatt wind farm in Upton County. [End of Quote] Peace, Prosperity, Productivity & JoyFuLL Visions ~dehara Post-No.: keys-1/2001-10-21/25557 From: Subject: Editor's Note: No message Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-23/25558 From: Mark D Williams Subject: Fwd: Free electricity project national tour I had received this some time ago, but have had little time to check it out. Mark From: joy_164@... Subject: Free electricity project national tour Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:44:32 -0700 You recently requested more information about our electricity project. Over two thousand people have registered under this offer in the last few months. We were wondering why you haven't taken advantage of this incredible opportunity. It's possible that you haven't had a chance to review the material yet. We know how busy everyone is these days. If this is the case, we want to remind you of the web address, http://elec4u.20m.com/Offer.htm. The web site also has a Q&A page, http://elec4u.20m.net/FreeElecQA.htm, which answers the most commonly asked questions. You may be skeptical of our claims about being able to make electricity with no ongoing operating costs. You can a chance to verify our claims for yourself. UCSA has started our third national tour. You can learn about the tour on this page, http://elec4u.20m.net/2001tour.htm. We are demonstrating our existing products and some of our free electricity technology. Everyone is invited to bring their own test equipment to check out claims for yourself. If you want to bring you own test equipment, you will need an amp probe that can take 3-phase readings and a volt meter. Most scientists say that what we are doing is impossible. We are so confident of our claims that we invite you to bring a physicists (from you local college or university) or electrical engineer with you. Have them bring their own test equipment. If you think our offer is scam or may be illegal, please invite someone from you state's attorney generals office to come to the show. If you want to be removed from our email list, send an email with a subject of "Remove" to its_optout@excite.com. The removal is an automated process. So, it is important that you follow the instructions exactly. Joy Jenkins Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-23/25559 From: Subject: Re: [keys-l] Alternative Energy Part I J J Dewey wrote: "Wow, Rick. Run a car on music? I have to admit that is one that I have not heard of before. The principle you describe sounds accurate though. "If I ruled the world I'd give you a grant and see what you'd come up with. It would be interesting." I look forward to the day when I can do full time research on future technologies. It's an interest of mine that I suspect I have been working on for several life times. When we did past life regressions, at the first gathering, I sensed having been a certain individual that helped developed electricity 200 years ago, but out of humility reported no success with the regression experiment. "Brian also gave good references and made the excellent point that instead of threatening the oil industry with extinction that they should be encouraged to shift some of their attention to alternative fuels so they will not go out of business when we make the shift." Here's a report I just received: "A Company in Melbourne Australia has developed a Ceramic Automotive "Propulsion Unit" which allows fuel to be burned 10 times hotter than the conventional Internal Combustion Engine - and contain the heat inside the engine resolving all other problems. The first prototypes were built 10 years ago - specifically for the purpose of burning Ethanol produced in the Sugar Refining Process. A Major Oil Company provided some research capital in exchange for technology patent rights and when the research was completed (several cars went on the road with this engine) the whole project was shelved. There are now moves afoot (and the project has been revived) to create a hybrid Ethanol/steam powered unit to overcome the locked up patent - but it has required the development of a new bio-impregnated ceramic. Needless to say that, even though we have another prototype, details are being closely guarded. However, the Government has stepped in to force a couple of oil companies to share research on the production of an Ethanol + Petrol fuel mix - as a result of the successful prosecution of one oil company for restrictive trade practices." [== cw ] "The bottom line is that big business must eventually take an interest in alternative fuels to make them a success. Solar Power. As far as being a clean energy solar power is a definite improvement over oil or coal. Some see it as free energy and completely pollution free, but this is not quite so. Producing the materials (vast quantities of steel, glass, and concrete) for deployment of a solar hardware requires about 3% as much coal burning as producing the same amount of electricity by direct coal burning. In addition to this solar panels often use cadmium compounds which are very poisonous and must be replaced and disposed of periodically." There are other ways of harnessing solar power, without using solar panels. Mirrors could be used to focus light to turn water to steam. "The most efficient solar collector available is right under our noses produced by nature. This is the giant sunflower plant. These flourish in the hot sun, grow very quickly and store a high percentage of the sun's power. "The idea was to grow large fields of these plants in sun rich areas of Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and other Southern states. After they are mature we would then harvest and dry them. The dried sun flowers would then be taken to a specially built power plant and burned for fuel to be turned into electricity." You can also extract the oil from sunflowers and soybeans to make fuels and plastics. I worked with some chemists, years ago, that figured out how to make fuel and plastics out of thin air, but they found it much cheaper to do using existing oils. Unlike petroleum, you can grow a new batch of sunflower or soybean oil every year (corn oil too) and it is a better use for these plants than eating them. If we used these plants to replace petroleum, there would be an unexpected bonus, increased world health, due to burning less petrol and eating less of foodstuffs poorly suited to human digestion. Rick I support Unification http://www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=8 *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:* I'm only in it for the thrill Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-23/25560 From: (Melva Broderick) Subject: Re: [keys-l] Re: Question A couple years ago I read an article in the Chicago Tribune about recycling the oil from the deep friers at fast food restaurants and using it as a fuel to power city buses. & the exhaust smelled faintly of french fries. I am not making this up. Melva Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-23/25561 From: "Mindy Burge" Subject: OT Music seminar Hi all Margaret Leach, one of the Keys members, will be presenting a seminar on "MUSIC; A SOUND INFLUENCE!" in Sterling, Illinois on November 16 & 17. Several of you were fortunate to hear Margaret present some information on music and its affects at the Gathering. She covers ideas such as, "How are bodily functions affected by sound? How does music enhance learning and healing? How are emotions affected by sound? How does sound bring harmony/alignment or discord/disorder to the body?" Margaret knows her stuff :-) She's done tons of research. Her enthusiasm on the topic is contagious. You're all welcome to come hear Margaret. If anyone is interested you can contact Melva at melvabr@webtv.net or myself at burgem@essex1.com for further information. Love, Mindy Post-No.: keys-1/2001-10-22/25562 From: Subject: Editor's Note: No message Post-No.: keys-1/2001-10-22/25563 From: Subject: Editor's Note: No message Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-23/25564 From: J J Dewey Subject: Alternative Energy Part III Hydro Power is a clean option supported by many It is ironical that even though this is a source of power that is as clean and inexpensive as you can get that it is also a prime target of environmentalists. Here in Idaho they are putting tremendous pressure on the state to tear down the dams and return things to their pristine condition. "Save the salmon," is the slogan here. It is thought that we can increase salmon runs by breaching a number of dams. There is a great debate going on in this state over this issue. One side says there are other ways to increase salmon runs - in fact there was a significant increase this year. The pro dam people say that it would take 50 years after the breaching before much natural increase in salmon could be effected through and even then we do not know for sure. In addition to the loss of clean energy the breaching would also be a big disruption to irrigation water for farmers, recreation, boating etc. The only argument for the anti-dam people is that it may increase salmon runs. I personally do not support the breaching fort the following reasons. (A) The electricity lost will be replaced by coal burning supplied power. (B) There are several alternatives to increasing salmon runs that look just as promising as breaching. (C) It would create great hardship on a number of farmers and businesses who are just surviving as it is. It appears to me that the ultra environmentalists would want to breach the dams even if an alternative salmon solution could be found as many of them want to see the land restored to its original condition. This "original condition of the land is sacred" attitude seems to be a zealous religious attitude with them as strong as that of any anti abortionist I have encountered. Hydro power currently supplies 8.3% of the nations power and clean power it is, but most of the available locations have been dammed and because of breaching advocates we are likely to see less hydro power in the future rather than more. Therefore it looks like we should not look to hydro power as a clean solution in there near future. There is also a negative side to this clean source aside from the salmon problem. Dams wear out or develop flaws and break periodically causing many millions in damage and sometimes great loss of life. Up to 4000 people have been killed through the collapsing of a dam. Not far from me in Rexburg, Idaho the Teton Dam burst in 1976 causing a billion dollars worth of damage and the loss of 14 lives. This low loss of life was considered very miraculous as it could have been much worse. Stories of four large dam disasters are related at: http://simscience.org/cracks/advanced/failures.html There are numerous other lesser known alternatives that may one day pay off. And who knows. Maybe out of the blue someone like Rick will come up with something simple in his garage that will fill all our energy needs for next to nothing in cost. However, I have learned some good wisdom in the regard in my short life and that is this. If you put all your eggs in a basket that is not perfected yet you are likely to spill and break the eggs. The loss will be great and the recovery slow. It would be dangerous for any nation to neglect the development of proven energy resources while betting on others to come. Plentiful energy is not only important to our creature comforts, but is an essential ingredient to insure the survival of a free society. The wise course is then to keep the energy flow going with existent technology while aggressively pursuing improvements and innovations. Take a look. The amount of freedom and prosperity in the world very closely corresponds to the amount of available energy at a reasonable price. The are many avenues to pursue here, but some of them may not be feasible for a hundred years. Here are a few. (1) Wave Power. Ocean waves (as well as tides) have a tremendous amount of power in them that has potential to generate power. Some experiments have been done, but nothing practical has resulted yet. One experiment I read about was overwhelmed by the wave power and destroyed. (2) Geothermal. This is a very clean source and there are 39 countries in the world which have potential to receive 100% of their electrical power with this method. Most of these are poorer undeveloped countries that could take a leap forward with this technology. There is some potential here in the United States, but until greater technology is developed to retrieve it from deep within the earth, this will only supply a small amount of our needs. We currently receive far less than 1% of our electrical power from this and the maximum projected would be 4.6%. About a mile away from my home is a neighborhood that has used geothermal power for about 100 years. New Zealand fares best among the developed nations in this regard. It has potential to supply over half if its energy needs from this source. An interesting report on geothermal can be found at: http://www.geotherm.org/PotentialReport.htm (3) Cold fusion is a much hoped for source of clean energy that dreamed up by a couple University of Utah scientists twelve years ago. Unfortunately, not a lot of progress has been made in this area. You can read an update on this in a Newsweek article at: http://www.msnbc.com/news/639202.asp?cp1=1 Mark mentioned a web source on free energy. I tried it out and it wouldn't open, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was something promoted by Dennis Lee. Below is a reprint of a post I made on his company some time ago. Begin Quote I see that the products of Better Technology has come up on the list. They are an interesting and controversial company. A couple months ago one of our customers invited us to a seminar where a guy was to present to us new discoveries in Tesla technology that would lead to free energy. They were excited about the company and were investing some money which they believed would make the a bundle. I have always been interested in Tesla so I invited my friend Wayne to go with me and we attended the seminar. The founder of the company, Dennis Lee, did most of the talking and showed us technology, which if valid could revolutionize the world. He started out by showing us a modified engine that would run on water. His guys started it and it sputtered for a few moments and the backfired. He then complained that it usually worked fine, but that the engine must have been sabotaged by one of his enemies. Then he showed us other discoveries he made, but what made me a little uneasy is that he would pause about every ten minutes and tell us how he had given his life to Jesus. Now I have no problem with anyone dedicating their life to God, but I have found through experience that when this aspect of a persons life seems to be over emphasized in a non religious situation that it is often done for effect to promote some hidden agenda. He went through some interesting technology but his master plan revolved around a system of generating free electricity. He presented a scheme that called for some to invest now so the company could have enough money to go into production. After things got going the first investors would wind up getting free energy for life whereas those who came along later would pay considerable money. My instinct here was that I would lose my shirt if I invested with this guy and Wayne felt the same way. We were both skeptical about the inventions. I felt like the guy could be on to a few things, but did not have them perfected yet. Anyway I hadn't heard anything about this company since until a few days ago the people who invited us to the meeting came in our office again. They were very angry and disappointed at the company and were suing in an attempt to get their money back. Now I see that the company is selling a number of avant guard sounding products on the web and I'm still suspicious. End Quote To be continued... Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-23/25565 From: brennant Subject: OT--Dennis Lee arrested NEWS & COMMUNICATIONS Promoter of "free electricity" scheme arrested in Louisville, Kentucky FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Jennifer Dean (502) 696-5637 FRANKFORT, KY. (October 9, 2001) - Attorney General Ben Chandler announced today the arrest of Dennis Lee, an individual doing business under the name of "United Community Services of America" and promoting a "free electricity" scheme in a seminar held in Louisville, Kentucky, for violating state consumer protection laws. Mr. Lee also does business as "Better World Technologies" and "International Tesla Electric Company." http://www.law.state.ky.us/news/2001rel/026%5F9oct01.htm Rob> It doesn't say that his machine didn't work, only that he failed to follow the law by registering with the attorney general's office and paying $75,000. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-23/25566 From: "Margaret Leach" Subject: Re: Alternative Energy Part I JJ - It seems to me that in your characterization of solar power you are missing one of the most important points that it offers: non-reliance on large energy distribution centers, aka power plants. In my mind, this is the main reason that it has not gained more acceptance: big money/big corporations lose big profits when the consumer becomes his own energy supplier. I wonder too at your characterization of the size of solar collectors needed to generate kilowatt hours. I have no hard and fast facts to put forth, only experience. When I lived in northern New Mexico (Taos) for 6 years, we had 3 solar panels on our roof which supplied approximately 60% of the electricity for our home which included an electric water heater, water pump (for our well), separate freezer, and the usual refrigerator, TV, stereo, computer, printer, keyboard, etc. paraphernalia in addition to the electric lights. The savings were significant and the biggest loser was the power company. This was a number of years ago. I understand the efficiency of the solar panels has increased a great deal over the last 15 years. Our review of alternative energy sources must also include a review of energy distribution systems. I believe that the emphasis will be turning to small and independent sources rather than big business, especially as our culture moves out of the material mind-set into a more sharing, spiritual mind-set. Margaret Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-24/25567 From: J J Dewey Subject: Alternative Energy Part IV I left out an important comment on hydro power. One more very important drawback is that a large dam could be a prime target for a terrorist. If a suicide plane were to crash into one it could cause more loss of life than happened at the twin towers. Margaret Leach writes: "It seems to me that in your characterization of solar power you are missing one of the most important points that it offers: non-reliance on large energy distribution centers, aka power plants. In my mind, this is the main reason that it has not gained more acceptance: big money/big corporations lose big profits when the consumer becomes his own energy supplier. "I wonder too at your characterization of the size of solar collector needed to generate kilowatt hours. I have no hard and fast facts to put forth, only experience. When I lived in northern New Mexico (Taos) for 6 years, we had 3 solar panels on our roof which supplied approximately 60% of the electricity for our home which included an electric water heater, water pump (for our well), separate freezer, and the usual refrigerator, TV, stereo, computer, printer, keyboard, etc. paraphernalia in addition to the electric lights. The savings were significant and the biggest loser was the power company." JJ I think my information was accurate and it doesn't seem to contradict what you say in any way if you do the math. I am all for being independent and if one can afford solar, is willing to pay for it, and happens to live in a feasible area with enough sunshine a person can indeed gain a little independence as well as have clean energy. I would guess that Taos, New Mexico (one of the sunniest spots in the country) is much more productive for solar energy than New York where you are currently living. I notice that you did not include heat or air conditioning in your list which are the big items where I live. Shortly after the oil crisis in the seventies there seemed to be quite a lot of promotion of solar equipment in my home area. In fact my mother bought a unit at considerable cost for the time. I was disappointed when she told me that she did not seem to have any noticeable savings in her bill. Perhaps such experience is a reason why the market seemed to dry up in this area. Since then, I'm sure efficiency has increased so I checked out the current costs. Providing that I live in a sunny enough area and I wanted to invest $15,000 I could save $300 a year on my power bill. I would have to invest over $30,000 to completely replace the electricity I am using. This is based on Idaho rates where I live, which is lower than most states, but I think you an see here why I am not eager to convert. Some states give a rebate of 20-50% to those who convert to solar, but even here this is not free money, but is paid by the taxpayer and still few are willing to make the necessary investment. I have a nephew who has invented an extra efficient generator using propane or natural gas that sounds like it may be a good alternative. It will only cost a couple thousand and will supply all the power you need at a lower cost than most power companies. The good part is that it will make a person completely self-sufficient power-wise. I haven't seen him for a while, but the last time I talked to him he said he was lining up some big investors. I'll be checking on his progress at the next family reunion. Another alternative is to develop electrical engines powerful enough and that will carry a charge long enough to replace the internal combustion engine. Every so often I hear of some innovative engine and then never hear of it again. For instance, I remember reading a series of articles way back in the 70's about a guy who claimed to have invented a battery that yielded more electricity than went into it and claimed it could run an electrical motor without ever running down. Who knows if there was anything to it? The last I heard of the guy was that he was labeled a fraud by government agencies who refused to run tests the inventor desired. It seems like he was also being sued by some car manufacturer. Now I find it interesting that some Australian inventors are promoting something similar. There is an interesting article on it at: http://www.electrifyingtimes.com/australianinventors.html The fact to consider is that, even if there has been a cover-up of technology the tide today is turning and progress is being made. It is only a matter of time before we have 100% non polluting electrical vehicles. This will be a terrific breakthrough IF the electricity can be supplied from a nonpolluting source. As it is at the present, an all electric car using today's technology would do little to do to reduce pollutants, for the chances are the power for it would be generated by a coal burning plant. The purchase of an electric car may create the illusion we are helping the environment but all we are doing is cutting down the pollution in the immediate area we are driving while contributing to it in the area where the electrical power is generated. Unless... Unless we have a clean source of electrical power. Is there such a thing as a source of economical energy with little pollution using current technology that has the potential to reduce greenhouse gasses and other pollutants as well, as supply clean power for future electrical engines that in turn could drastically reduce our need for oil, perhaps making us completely free of dependency on foreign oil? Perhaps. We will discuss this possibility next. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-24/25568 From: "Jennifer Hampson" Subject: OT: The Real Deal about Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Attacks Subject: [LEANALYST] The Real Deal about Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Attacks Since the media has decided to scare everyone with predictions of chemical, biological, or nuclear warfare on our turf I decided to write a paper and keep things in their proper perspective. I am a retired military weapons, munitions, and training expert. Lesson number one: In the mid 1990's there were a series of nerve gas attacks on crowded Japanese subway stations. Given perfect conditions for an attack less than 10% of the people there were injured (the injured were better in a few hours) and only one percent of the injured died. 60 Minutes once had a fellow telling us that one drop of nerve gas could kill a thousand people, well he didn't tell you the thousand dead people per drop was theoretical. Drill Sergeants exaggerated how terrible this stuff was to keep the recruits awake in class (I know this because I was a Drill Sergeant too). Forget everything you've ever seen on TV, in the movies, or read in a novel about this stuff, it was all a lie (read this sentence again out loud!)! These weapons are about terror, if you remain calm, you will probably not die. This is far less scary than the media and their "Experts," make it sound. Chemical weapons are categorized as Nerve, Blood, Blister, and Incapacitating agents Contrary to the hype of reporters and politicians they are not weapons of mass destruction they are "Area denial," and terror weapons that don't destroy anything. When you leave the area you almost always leave the risk. That's the difference; you can leave the area and the risk; soldiers may have to stay put and sit through it and that's why they need all that spiffy gear. These are not gasses, they are vapors and/or air borne particles. The agent must be delivered in sufficient quantity to kill/injure, and that defines when/how it's used. Every day we have a morning and evening inversion where "stuff," suspended in the air gets pushed down. This inversion is why allergies (pollen) and air pollution are worst at these times of the day. So, a chemical attack will have it's best effect an hour of so either side of sunrise/sunset. Also, being vapors and airborne particles they are heavier than air so they will seek low places like ditches, basements and underground garages. This stuff won't work when it's freezing, it doesn't last when it's hot, and wind spreads it too thin too fast. They've got to get this stuff on you, or, get you to inhale it for it to work. They also have to get the concentration of chemicals high enough to kill or wound you. Too little and it's nothing, too much and it's wasted. What I hope you've gathered by this point is that a chemical weapons attack that kills a lot of people is incredibly hard to do with military grade agents and equipment so you can imagine how hard it will be for terrorists. The more you know about this stuff the more you realize how hard it is to use. We'll start by talking about nerve agents. You have these in your house, plain old bug killer (like Raid) is nerve agent. All nerve agents work the same way; they are cholinesterase inhibitors that mess up the signals your nervous system uses to make your body function. It can harm you if you get it on your skin but it works best if they can get you to inhale it. If you don't die in the first minute and you can leave the area you're probably gonna live. The military's antidote for all nerve agents is atropine and pralidoxime chloride. Neither one of these does anything to cure the nerve agent, they send your body into overdrive to keep you alive for five minutes, after that the agent is used up. Your best protection is fresh air and staying calm. Listed below are the symptoms for nerve agent poisoning. Sudden headache, Dimness of vision (someone you're looking at will have pinpointed pupils), Runny nose, Excessive saliva or drooling, Difficulty breathing, Tightness in chest, Nausea, Stomach cramps, Twitching of exposed skin where a liquid just got on you. If you are in public and you start experiencing these symptoms, first ask yourself, did anything out of the ordinary just happen, a loud pop, did someone spray something on the crowd? Are other people getting sick too? Is there an odor of new mown hay, green corn, something fruity, or camphor where it shouldn't be? If the answer is yes, then calmly (if you panic you breathe faster and inhale more air/poison) leave the area and head up wind, or, outside. Fresh air is the best "right now antidote". If you have a blob of liquid that looks like molasses or Karo syrup on you; blot it or scrape it off and away from yourself with anything disposable. This stuff works based on your body weight, what a crop duster uses to kill bugs won't hurt you unless you stand there and breathe it in real deep, then lick the residue off the ground for while. Remember they have to do all the work, they have to get the concentration up and keep it up for several minutes while all you have to do is quit getting it on you/quit breathing it by putting space between you and the attack. Blood agents are cyanide or arsine which effect your blood's ability to provide oxygen to your tissue. The scenario for attack would be the same as nerve agent. Look for a pop or someone splashing/spraying something and folks around there getting woozy/falling down. The telltale smells are bitter almonds or garlic where it shouldn't be. The symptoms are blue lips, blue under the fingernails rapid breathing. The military's antidote is amyl nitride and just like nerve agent antidote it just keeps your body working for five minutes till the toxins are used up. Fresh air is the your best individual chance Blister agents (distilled mustard) are so nasty that nobody wants to even handle it let alone use it. It's almost impossible to handle safely and may have delayed effect of up to 12 hours. The attack scenario is also limited to the things you'd see from other chemicals. If you do get large, painful blisters for no apparent reason, don't pop them, if you must, don't let the liquid from the blister get on any other area, the stuff just keeps on spreading. It's just as likely to harm the user as the target. Soap, water, sunshine, and fresh air are this stuff's enemy. Bottom line on chemical weapons (it's the same if they use industrial chemical spills); they are intended to make you panic, to terrorize you, to heard you like sheep to the wolves. If there is an attack, leave the area and go upwind, or to the sides of the wind stream. They have to get the stuff to you, and on you. You're more likely to be hurt by a drunk driver on any given day than be hurt by one of these attacks. Your odds get better if you leave the area. Soap, water, time, and fresh air really deal this stuff a knock-out-punch. Don't let fear of an isolated attack rule your life. The odds are really on your side. Nuclear bombs. These are the only weapons of mass destruction on earth. The effects of a nuclear bomb are heat, blast, EMP, and radiation. If you see a bright flash of light like the sun, where the sun isn't, fall to the ground! The heat will be over a second. Then there will be two blast waves, one out going, and one on it's way back. Don't stand up to see what happened after the first wave; anything that's going to happen will have happened in two full minutes. These will be low yield devices and will not level whole cities. If you live through the heat, blast, and initial burst of radiation, you'll probably live for a very long time. Radiation will not create fifty foot tall women, or giant ants and grass hoppers the size of tanks. These will be at the most 1 kiloton bombs; that's the equivalent of 1,000 tons of TNT. Here's the real deal, flying debris and radiation will kill a lot of exposed (not all!) people within a half mile of the blast. Under perfect conditions this is about a half mile circle of death and destruction, but, when it's done it's done. EMP stands for Electro Magnetic Pulse and it will fry every electronic device for a good distance, it's impossible to say what and how far but probably not over a couple of miles from ground zero is a good guess. Cars, cell phones, computers, ATMs, you name it, all will be out of order. There are lots of kinds of radiation, you only need to worry about three, the others you have lived with for years. You need to worry about "Ionizing radiation," these are little sub atomic particles that go whizzing along at the speed of light. They hit individual cells in your body, kill the nucleus and keep on going. That's how you get radiation poisoning, you have so many dead cells in your body that the decaying cells poison you. It's the same as people getting radiation treatments for cancer, only a bigger area gets radiated. The good news is you don't have to just sit there and take it, and there's lots you can do rather than panic. First; your skin will stop alpha particles, a page of a news paper or your clothing will stop beta particles, you just gotta try and avoid inhaling dust that's contaminated with atoms that are emitting these things and you'll be generally safe from them. Gamma rays are particles that travel like rays (quantum physics makes my brain hurt) and they create the same damage as alpha and beta particles only they keep going and kill lots of cells as they go all the way through your body. It takes a lot to stop these things, lots of dense material, on the other hand it takes a lot of this to kill you. Your defense is as always to not panic. Basic hygiene and normal preparation are your friends. All canned or frozen food is safe to eat. The radiation poisoning will not effect plants so fruits and vegetables are OK if there's no dust on em (rinse em off if there is). Iff you don't have running water and you need to collect rain water or use water from wherever, just let it sit for thirty minutes and skim off the water gently from the top. The dust with the bad stuff in it will settle and the remaining water can be used for the toilet which will still work if you have a bucket of water to pour in the tank. Finally there's biological warfare. There's not much to cover here. Basic personal hygiene and sanitation will take you further than a million doctors. Wash your hands often, don't share drinks, food, sloppy kisses, etc., ... with strangers. Keep your garbage can with a tight lid on it, don't have standing water (like old buckets, ditches, or kiddie pools) laying around to allow mosquitoes breeding room. This stuff is carried by vectors, that is bugs, rodents, and contaminated material. If biological warfare is so easy as the TV makes it sound, why has Saddam Hussein spent twenty years, millions, and millions of dollars trying to get it right? If you're clean of person and home you eat well and are active you're gonna live. Overall preparation for any terrorist attack is the same as you'd take for a big storm. If you want a gas mask, fine, go get one. I know this stuff and I'm not getting one and I told my Mom not to bother with one either (how's that for confidence). We have a week's worth of cash, several days worth of canned goods and plenty of soap and water. We don't leave stuff out to attract bugs or rodents so we don't have them. These people can't conceive a nation this big with this much resources. These weapons are made to cause panic, terror, and to demoralize. If we don't run around like sheep they won't use this stuff after they find out it's no fun. The government is going nuts over this stuff because they have to protect every inch of America. You've only gotta protect yourself, and by doing that, you help the country. Finally, there are millions of caveats to everything I wrote here and you can think up specific scenarios where my advice isn't the best. This letter is supposed to help the greatest number of people under the greatest number of situations. If you don't like my work, don't nit pick, just sit down and explain chemical, nuclear, and biological warfare in a document around three pages long yourself. This is how we the people of the United States can rob these people of their most desired goal, your terror. SFC Red Thomas (Ret) Armor Master Gunner Mesa, AZ Unlimited reproduction and distribution is authorized. Just give me credit for my work, and, keep in context. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-24/25569 From: Marylin Subject: Re: Alternative Energy Part I "Margaret Leach" writes: "Our review of alternative energy sources must also include a review of energy distribution systems. I believe that the emphasis will be turning to small and independent sources rather than big business, especially as our culture moves out of the material mind-set into a more sharing, spiritual mind-set." Hi Margaret Thank you for expressing the very question/thought I have been mulling over and over. It's so easy to "fall back" to the way people have thought for centuries. But we are now in a change and it's not the easiest thing to make changes in ourselves. However, if we are to see "New Jerusalem", the changes are necessary. Profits "in the old school" are a thing of the world as it was. Marylin Post-No.: keys-1/2001-10-24/25570 From: Subject: Editor's Note: No message Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-24/25571 From: Travis Tabbal Subject: RE: [keys-l] Alternative Energy Part IV JJ: I left out an important comment on hydro power. One more very important drawback is that a large dam could be a prime target for a terrorist. If a suicide plane were to crash into one it could cause more loss of life than happened at the twin towers. Travis: True enough, but I doubt they will use planes again. At least not soon. Most people are forgetting what would probably be the first law of warfare, strike where they least expect it. We expect planes right now, so they will do something else. Anyone trying to hijack a plane will likely face a mob of 200 people. Better have a really powerful weapon. And even if you did, you would probably damage the plane so much trying to take control of it you wouldn't be able to fly it into anything but the ground. These guys aren't stupid, they know this. Something else will be used in the next attack. As for the dams, an attack on one of them is possible. It would take a lot of force to take one out, but it could be done Hopefully they are watching them and have military forces available if needed. Margaret Leach writes: "It seems to me that in your characterization of solar power you are missing one of the most important points that it offers: non-reliance on large energy distribution centers, aka power plants. In my mind, this is the main reason that it has not gained more acceptance: big money/big corporations lose big profits when the consumer becomes his own energy supplier. "I wonder too at your characterization of the size of solar collector needed to generate kilowatt hours. I have no hard and fast facts to put forth, only experience. When I lived in northern New Mexico (Taos) for 6 years, we had 3 solar panels on our roof which supplied approximately 60% of the electricity for our home which included an electric water heater, water pump (for our well), separate freezer, and the usual refrigerator, TV, stereo, computer, printer, keyboard, etc. paraphernalia in addition to the electric lights. The savings were significant and the biggest loser was the power company." Travis: All this "big business is out to get you" is getting old. In some ways they are, but really, it's not as bad as people make it out to be. As for power plants, they are the most efficient way to generate and distribute power we have. A single large plant can more easily be upgraded to newer technology to get efficiency gains and lower pollution. Local, smaller, generation stations would be wasteful and would not be as efficient. Even after accounting for transmission losses. Most customers are unable to be their own energy supplier. With Solar or otherwise. In some areas solar panels can be useful, like New Mexico. But they will not be able to replace our need for other power or supply a significant percentage of the nations' power needs in the near future from even the most optimistic projections of efficiency gains in solar cells. In local areas, it may make sense to build large solar collection systems to supplement existing generation stations. Power companies are not likely to do it though, the cost/benefit ratio just isn't there. And that is important. If they can't make money, they can't stay in business and nobody gets any power. If it were cost effective they would be doing it. Businesses want to be more efficient, it means they make more money. It costs more to build solar farms than to build traditional power plants. Also the cost for the equipment to convert it to high voltage AC is significant. They have to have those to minimize the transmission losses. Home systems don't need those, they only need 120VAC. The power company needs about 14,400 VAC. The equipment to make 14KV from the low voltage DC output a solar cell produces is very expensive. Factor in the losses from conversion and transmission and you probably lose a good 50% of the energy right there. Again, home systems don't have this problem. Solar is one of the few localized power sources that make sense. And the power company isn't really a loser, there are plenty of people who can't use solar they can sell power to. Solar is really only useful in the southern parts of the country with enough sun to make it work well. It's all about using what works when you can. Just like you did to have solar and utility power and use each where it fits best. JJ: I have a nephew who has invented an extra efficient generator using propane or natural gas that sounds like it may be a good alternative. It will only cost a couple thousand and will supply all the power you need at a lower cost than most power companies. The good part is that it will make a person completely self-sufficient powerwise. Travis: Interesting. The only problem I see is that propane and natural gas are still non-renewable. They are better than coal by a long shot though. Also, power companies started using natural gas for power production. The increased demand outstripped supply and raised costs for everyone. I know people who had their gas bill double or triple in recent years. Some of that is attributed to power generation from natural gas. Sometimes there is more to things than meets the eye. However, if he does manage to get something going I'll be among the first to look into it. I want a backup generator anyway. ;) JJ: Another alternative is to develop electrical engines powerful enough and that will carry a charge long enough to replace the internal combustion engine. Travis: The motors exist. Most people would be shocked to see how powerful we can build electric motors. The problem is the batteries. They weigh a ton, literally, and contain toxic chemicals. The only cost-effective battery technology for electric cars right now is deep cycle lead-acid. While we can recycle the lead, there is still some pollution from them. Not to mention that they can only get about 100 miles on a charge for a smallish car with good aerodynamics. Good enough for most people's little commutes and such, but not enough for a lot of people after factoring the costs and the fact that you need a smaller motor to get that mileage, so you get less power. Fix the battery issue, then we can have electric cars. I've seen pictures and movies of electric drag racers that give sports cars a run for their money. Of course, the range is about 1/2 mile.... ;) The other problem is one you mentioned. You don't make less pollution, you move the pollution to wherever the power plant is. A benefit for the short term since the plant is way more efficient than a car. But the increased power drain from people charging their cars creates an issue with an already overloaded power grid. JJ: Every so often I hear of some innovative engine and then never hear of it again. For instance, I remember reading a series of articles way back in the 70's about a guy who claimed to have invented a battery that yielded more electricity than went into it and claimed it could run an electrical motor without ever running down. Who knows if there was anything to it? The last I heard of the guy was that he was labeled a fraud by government agencies who refused to run tests the inventor desired. It seems like he was also being sued by some car manufacturer. Travis: There is a reason for that. Those people are full of it. For one thing, you cannot "create" energy, only convert it. And at every conversion there is a loss. Those nasty laws of physics again (which I'm willing to be flexible with if someone can provide evidence they are wrong). I've read everything I can find on a few different things like this. And in every case I have found that while they wouldn't run the tests the inventor wanted, the reason is that the tests were scientifically flawed. The inventors often take measurements and don't take into account all the variables. As a result, the come to inaccurate conclusions. When viewed with the light of scientific reason I think you will find that most of those people have no clue and are simply convinced they are right regardless of all the evidence otherwise. JJ: The fact to consider is that, even if there has been a cover-up of technology the tide today is turning and progress is being made. It is only a matter of time before we have 100% non polluting electrical vehicles. This will be a terrific breakthrough IF the electricity can be supplied from a non polluting source. As it is at the present, an all electric car using today's technology would do little to do to reduce pollutants, for the chances are the power for it would be generated by a coal burning plant. The purchase of an electric car may create the illusion we are helping the environment but all we are doing is cutting down the pollution in the immediate area we are driving while contributing to it in the area where the electrical power is generated. Travis: Exactly. And because of the conversion and transmission losses that there are no way around, we end up making close to the same levels of pollution as before. Sometimes even more, depending on the efficiency of the plant the power comes from. We just move the pollution around. JJ: Unless... Unless we have a clean source of electrical power. Is there such a thing as a source of economical energy with little pollution using current technology that has the potential to reduce greenhouse gasses and other pollutants as well, as supply clean power for future electrical engines that in turn could drastically reduce our need for oil, perhaps making us completely free of dependency on foreign oil? Travis: Yep... And we have it. But people don't like it because they are uneducated. Nuclear power. Yes, I used the "N" word. Face it, it's not as dangerous as people think, it's cleaner than most forms of generation, and it can create enormous amounts of power. Radiation is also a non issue, it's very well contained and in a single source. Very careful containment of the waste is more important, but if done properly and with public oversight it can be very clean. A little tidbit most people don't realize is that the combustion of coal produces radioactive elements. Uranium, Thorium, and others. Some even weapons grade. This site has some interesting info.. http://www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html They also mention capturing the elements and breeding them into nuclear fuel for reactors. Something that would be a good idea. And it keeps them from spewing it into the atmosphere like they do now. The spent fuel can be safely stored for decades, and in fact has been. Also, developments in nuclear technology allow for the possibility of reprocessing the spent fuel and reusing much of it. Some of this technology needs development, but it is close. We could also design reactors for weapons grade materials as a way to get rid of it as we decommission the stockpile of weapons we have sitting around. This is not to say it is a panacea. It has problems, like guarding the weapons grade stuff that is created to prevent it from being misused. Just guard it like you would an A-Bomb. Have the military protect the reactors and fuels to prevent such problems. I'm not aware of any nuclear weapons being stolen from the military, so I think they can be trusted to protect it. This would work as a stopgap measure. We get clean power for now. But even with reprocessing the supply of nuclear fission fuel is limited. More research needs to be done on Fusion, hot and cold, solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, and other types of power. Ideally, we move away from fission soon as it still has some of the problems other fossil fuel technologies have. But the problems are more containable and not floating around in the air and water. The technology is coming, solar panels get more efficient all the time. We already are able to make shingles out of them for buildings. Get some efficiency gains, and we may be able to use them more in real life. Fusion (hot) can be produced, but only for a little while. Cold Fusion has shown some development and may yet go somewhere. Wind is already used in many places, but has problems with noise and wildlife. Geothermal should be tapped more than it is. There are numerous places it can be used with good efficiency. And we need better battery technology so we can make electric cars a viable solution. There is much that can be done, but we need to do everything we can for now while working for the future. Travis Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-24/25572 From: Travis Tabbal Subject: OT: The Gift... Yeah, it's not really on topic, but I liked it. In part since my little brother is now in the National Guard and is thinking of going active duty in the Army. Travis ------ THE GIFT T'WAS THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS, HE LIVED ALL ALONE, IN A ONE BEDROOM HOUSE MADE OF PLASTER AND STONE. *** I HAD COME DOWN THE CHIMNEY WITH PRESENTS TO GIVE, AND TO SEE JUST WHO IN THIS HOME DID LIVE. *** I LOOKED ALL ABOUT, A STRANGE SIGHT I DID SEE, NO TINSEL, NO PRESENTS, NOT EVEN A TREE. *** NO STOCKING BY MANTLE, JUST BOOTS FILLED WITH SAND, ON THE WALL HUNG PICTURES OF FAR DISTANT LANDS. *** WITH MEDALS AND BADGES, AWARDS OF ALL KINDS, A SOBER THOUGHT CAME THROUGH MY MIND. *** FOR THIS HOUSE WAS DIFFERENT, IT WAS DARK AND DREARY, I FOUND THE HOME OF A SOLDIER, ONCE I COULD SEE CLEARLY. *** THE SOLDIER LAY SLEEPING, SILENT, ALONE, CURLED UP ON THE FLOOR IN THIS ONE BEDROOM HOME. *** THE FACE WAS SO GENTLE, THE ROOM IN SUCH DISORDER, NOT HOW I PICTURED A UNITED STATES SOLDIER. *** WAS THIS THE HERO OF WHOM I'D JUST READ? CURLED UP ON A PONCHO, THE FLOOR FOR A BED? I REALIZED THE FAMILIES THAT I SAW THIS NIGHT, OWED THEIR LIVES TO THESE SOLDIERS WHO WERE WILLING TO FIGHT. *** SOON ROUND THE WORLD, THE CHILDREN WOULD PLAY, AND GROWNUPS WOULD CELEBRATE A BRIGHT CHRISTMAS DAY. *** THEY ALL ENJOYED FREEDOM EACH MONTH OF THE YEAR, BECAUSE OF THE SOLDIERS, LIKE THE ONE LYING HERE. *** I COULDN'T HELP WONDER HOW MANY LAY ALONE, ON A COLD CHRISTMAS EVE IN A LAND FAR FROM HOME. *** THE VERY THOUGHT BROUGHT A TEAR TO MY EYE, I DROPPED TO MY KNEES AND STARTED TO CRY. *** THE SOLDIER AWAKENED AND I HEARD A ROUGH VOICE, "SANTA DON'T CRY, THIS LIFE IS MY CHOICE; *** I FIGHT FOR FREEDOM, I DON'T ASK FOR MORE, MY LIFE IS MY GOD, MY COUNTRY, MY CORPS." *** THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER AND SOON DRIFTED TO SLEEP, I COULDN'T CONTROL IT, I CONTINUED TO WEEP. *** I KEPT WATCH FOR HOURS, SO SILENT AND STILL AND WE BOTH SHIVERED FROM THE COLD NIGHT'S CHILL. *** I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE ON THAT COLD, DARK, NIGHT, THIS GUARDIAN OF HONOR SO WILLING TO FIGHT. *** THEN THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER, WITH A VOICE SOFT AND PURE, WHISPERED, "CARRY ON SANTA, IT'S CHRISTMAS DAY, ALL IS SECURE." *** ONE LOOK AT MY WATCH, AND I KNEW HE WAS RIGHT. "MERRY CHRISTMAS MY FRIEND, AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT." This poem was written by a Marine stationed in Okinawa Japan. The following is his request. I think it is reasonable..... PLEASE. Would you do me the kind favor of sending this to as many people as you can? Christmas will be coming soon and some credit is due to our U.S. service men and women for our being able to celebrate these festivities. Let's try in this small way to pay a tiny bit of what we owe. Make people stop and think of our heroes, living and dead, who sacrificed themselves for us. Please, do your small part to plant this small seed. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-24/25573 From: Rick Audette Subject: Re: [keys-l] Alternative Energy Part IV J J Dewey wrote: "Who knows if there was anything to it? The last I heard of the guy was that he was labeled a fraud by government agencies who refused to run tests the inventor desired. It seems like he was also being sued by some car manufacturer. "The fact to consider is that, even if there has been a cover-up of technology the tide today is turning and progress is being made. It is only a matter of time before we have 100% non polluting electrical vehicles." Back when nuclear power and weapons were first being developed, much use was made of ancient Sanskrit texts, describing the use of same in Atlantis. These same books also talk a lot about other forms of energy that were used. Since we were all at the tail end of WW2, Governments didn't keep things secret to protect their own. They were trying to keep the "other side" from learning about it. Today, using the internet, even a school child could collect enough information to build any number of new power sources or weapons. There are e-mail lists that spend as much time on this as we do on the Keys of Knowledge. Just one more way that the internet can help bring more light into the world. Hard to keep anything secret anymore, with Yahoo, Google, etc. looking for it 24/7. Rick -- My Home Page http://www.ont.com/users/rea1/ Petra Story http://petracity.intercosmos.com/index.html Seeker's Guide to the Net http://www.synthesisnet.com I support Unification http://www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=8 have you read "The Immortal" http://www.freeread.com *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:* I'm only in it for the thrill Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-24/25574 From: (Melva Broderick) Subject: Let's harness some of this energy! Energy from a Black hole: Forward an e-mail message Science News" Sender: bounce-snglist-537021@snglist.msfc.nasa.gov NASA Science News for October 23, 2001 There are plenty of black holes that gobble energy. Now astronomers have spotted one in a distant galaxy that's giving some of its energy back. FULL STORY at http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23oct_1.htm?list537021 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-25/25575 From: J J Dewey Subject: The Underdog Power Source Good post Travis. I think we are close to 100% harmony here. Concerning the possibility of a battery that takes in more energy than it discharges I agree that such claims are most likely to be flawed. If such a battery does exist then it would have to receive its energy from somewhere. There are some exotic possibilities so I make it a habit to "never say never." Did you have a chance to look at that web page I referenced? Interesting claims, I thought. Here's our current situation. We are very close to developing electrical motors and batteries which can be a clean economical alternative to the combustion engine running on petroleum (and highly dependent on foreign oil). This dream can indeed be realized if we were to have a clean source of additional electrical power. The generation of additional electrical power is indeed essential, for if the day comes that 50% of our vehicles are run on electricity this would require a great increase in the generation of power. The question is - where do we get that power? Let us briefly review available sources. (1) Alternative power - wind, solar, geothermal etc. All these combined only supply 2.4% of our electricity and show little prospect of supplying the great increase in need that we shall require. (2) Hydro Power. This is a very clean source, but dams can be sabotaged or naturally fail at the expense of many lives and billions of dollars. Unfortunately, even with this risk we are maxed out with this source in the United States. Hydro power currently supplies 8.3% of our power and this figure is not likely to go higher. (3) Natural Gas. This is a fairly clean source of power, though it does release CO2, a greenhouse gas. This source supplies 15.3% of our electrical power and like the hydro-electric it is limited in supply and it is not practical to look at this as a source of the vast need we have for future electrical power. (4) Oil. This is the substance we are trying to get away from. Most of the oil used in this country is in our vehicles. We only derive 3.2% of our electricity from this source and this figure is not likely to go up. (5) Coal. This is our largest source of power, supplying a whopping 51.1% of the nation's electrical energy. Coal could be used to increase our electrical supply, but the cost would be great. Here are some facts about our coal plants. (A) The U.S. burns about 1,000,000,000 tons of coal a year. (B) In 1996 coal released 88% of the 19 million tons of sulfur dioxide emitted and over six million tons of oxides of nitrogen, both dreaded pollutants. (C) The use of coal results in yearly emissions of at up to 2,000 tons of mercury, lead, arsenic and other metals. Much of the mercury winds up in our oceans. (D) Coal ashes are about 180 times more radioactive than the level of radioactivity permissible for nuclear power plants and are not required to be buried as is waste from nuclear reactors and uranium mining. (E) Coal mining causes about 20,000 tons of radioactive uranium to be brought to the surface of the earth each year. (F) Coal burning plants add billions of tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere each year, this is the main gas accused of causing global warming. (G) Pollution from coal burning is estimated to cause up to 50,000 deaths a year in the U.S. alone. It looks then like our prime source of electrical power - coal - is not a good bet for long term expansion of our power needs. Let us see. What is left? (6) Nuclear Power. This supplies about 20% of the nation's needs and is perhaps the most controversial source of power of all. But, is this controversy warranted? Questions: Are nuclear power plants dangerous? Why or why not? Is there a safe way to dispose of nuclear waste? Name three illusions circulating around nuclear power. Djwahl Khul said that the release of nuclear energy is an initiation for matter itself. What do you suppose this means? Should we assist matter with its initiation? Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-25/25576 From: Marylin Subject: Re: Let's harness some of this energy! Melva writes: "There are plenty of black holes that gobble energy. Now astronomers have spotted one in a distant galaxy that's giving some of its energy back. "FULL STORY at: http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23oct_1.htm?list537021" Hi Melva This is an interesting site. I had to chuckle though, because I have thought for years that the so called black holes are really "worm holes" or what I like to think of as "quick-time passages". What goes up must come down or in this case, what goes in must come out. Especially when there is no "bottom" to the universe. Marylin Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-25/25577 From: "Dennis Appling" Subject: Ot- The Christian Thing to do A man is in bed with his wife when there is a rat-a-tat-tat on the door. He rolls over and looks at his clock, and it's half past three in the morning. "I'm not getting out of bed at this time," he thinks, and rolls over. Then, a louder knock follows. "Aren't you going to answer that?" says his wife. So he drags himself out of bed and goes downstairs. He opens the door and there is man standing at the door. It didn't take the homeowner long to realize the man was drunk. "Hi there," slurs the stranger. "Can you give me a push?" "No, get lost. It's half past three. I was in bed," says the man and he slams the door. He goes back up to bed and tells his wife what happened. "Dave, that wasn't very nice of you," she says. "Remember that night we broke down in the pouring rain on the way to pick the kids up from the babysitter, and you had to knock on that man's house to get us started again? What would have happened if he'd told us to get lost?" "But the guy was drunk," says the husband. "It doesn't matter," says the wife. "He needs our help and it would be the Christian thing to help him." So the husband gets out of bed again, gets dressed, and goes downstairs. He opens the door, and not being able to see the stranger anywhere, he shouts, "Hey, do you still want a push?" And he hears a voice cry out, "Yeah, please." So, still being unable to see the stranger, he shouts, "Where are you?" "I'm over here," the stranger replies, "on your swing." Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-25/25578 From: (Melva Broderick) Subject: Nuclear Power Questions: Are nuclear power plants dangerous? Yes and No :-) Why or why not? They need proper maintenance. If that is not performed ... then there is a risk for malfunction which does put the immediate area/population at risk. Radiation does cause chromosomal damage. Is there a safe way to dispose of nuclear waste? I don't know if there is a safe way to dispose of nuclear waste. I did read somewhere, once, that sunlight detoxifies it. & so far, sunlight is free. I am sure there are drawbacks to it, but I am blissfully ignorant of them. Name three illusions circulating around nuclear power. The toxic waste takes a "million light years" to break down. (The quotes are my exaggeration.) The water that is returned to the rivers causes mutations in aquatic life. And.... well, can't think of a 3rd one at the moment. Djwahl Khul said that the release of nuclear energy is an initiation for matter itself. What do you suppose this means? The 3 Laws of Thermodynamics state: #1 The amount of energy in the universe is constant #2 Energy can neither be created or destroyed, it only changes form. #3 At each energy conversion some energy escapes in the form of heat. Nuclear fusion/fission are the conversion of matter (atoms) into energy in another form. They change the energy inherently present in the matter into another form. The energy/matter is converted into it's highest form. Just like an initiation for a disciple: going through conversion of consciousness to enter a higher state of consciousness/form. Sources of energy: the atom, consciousness, intent, prayer, souls, spirits and of course the fossil fuels. Should we assist matter with its initiation? Of course. I love matter, it loves me. Melva Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-25/25579 From: "Mindy Burge" Subject: Re: [keys-l] The Underdog Power Source "Djwahl Khul said that the release of nuclear energy is an initiation for matter itself. What do you suppose this means? Should we assist matter with its initiation?" If anyone wants to read a little on atoms presented through AAB http://www.netnews.org/bk/atom/atom1007.html The next few pages pertain also so click 'next' when you finish the page. Then I'd suggest a "hmmmmmmmmmm" as you consider the Law of Correspondences and JJ's questions :-) Mindy Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-25/25580 From: Mark D Williams Subject: OT: Handwriting on anthrax letter JJ, wondered if you had done any handwriting analysis on the anthrax letters. Link: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/ap/20011023/us/1003875546attacks_investigation_wx147.html Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-25/25581 From: Travis Tabbal Subject: Re: [keys-l] The Underdog Power Source "Good post Travis. I think we are close to 100% harmony here." hehe.. sounds like I just skipped ahead. ;) "Concerning the possibility of a battery that takes in more energy than it discharges I agree that such claims are most likely to be flawed. If such a battery does exist then it would have to receive its energy from somewhere. There are some exotic possibilities so I make it a habit to "never say never." Agreed. It's just that I have researched so many that turned out to be wrong that I'm a little jaded on the idea. I would say that while it is possible something like that exists, I would want to see real scientific studies done on it and independent verification done. Along with full disclosure of how it works so scientists can study it. The inventor needs only to file with the patent office for protection so he's safe from others exploiting the invention in the mean time without compensation. Patents are issued from date of filing, so it's not an issue. "Did you have a chance to look at that web page I referenced? Interesting claims, I thought." I'll be looking at it in more detail soon. I only had a chance to skim it. My computer has been having issues I think I only just got worked out today. "Here's our current situation. We are very close to developing electrical motors and batteries which can be a clean economical alternative to the combustion engine running on petroleum (and highly dependent on foreign oil). This dream can indeed be realized if we were to have a clean source of additional electrical power. The generation of additional electrical power is indeed essential, for if the day comes that 50% of our vehicles are run on electricity this would require a great increase in the generation of power." I think you deserve an "understatement of the year" award for that one. ;) The power required would be huge, and our existing distribution system would be unable to handle it. There are areas here in Utah that had to have short blackouts to keep the power company equipment from overheating due to overloading. This is only during the summer when people are running air conditioning a lot, but it illustrates the problem. And we are far from the hottest area of the country. Even if most of the cars recharge at night, it's still a huge burden. Each battery being charged probably needs as much power as an AC system during part of the charge. They talk about charging those things in minutes sometimes, that takes tremendous current. "Questions: Are nuclear power plants dangerous? Why or why not?" No. The controversy exists because of high profile accidents that didn't even leave significant radiation in the surrounding area. Present day reactors are also MUCH safer than the ones used back then. It's like comparing the Model T to a 2001 Mustang. "Is there a safe way to dispose of nuclear waste?" Reprocess what we can, keep the rest under tight security in a protected storage facility. There is a good chance we will learn how to use it in the future. We have stored waste for 30 years without any major problems. I don't see any reason that will change near term. Long term, we are always advancing technology and we may be able to find a way to keep using it over and over till it's no longer radioactive and can just be buried or something. "Name three illusions circulating around nuclear power." Radiation. People seem to think it's a big danger of having a nuclear plant nearby. In reality, a coal plant emits more radiation than a nuclear one does. Meltdown. Not a big issue. The previous problems occurred on older, less safe reactor designs nobody uses anymore. And there is evidence of human error in the Chernobyl case at least. Explosion. People seem to think that because we have nuclear bombs a nuclear reactor is just a controlled bomb. It's not the same, and a reactor can't blow up like a bomb, it will meltdown like Chernobyl. And even then, it's very unlikely. Modern reactors just don't have those kinds of issues. Even with human error, there are many more safeguards in place to prevent failures. It's like saying that because I can make explosives out of household chemicals, all of those chemicals are bad and can only be used that way. Obviously, that is absurd. "Djwahl Khul said that the release of nuclear energy is an initiation for matter itself. What do you suppose this means? Should we assist matter with its initiation?" Interesting take one it. An initiation would be to move to a higher plane. So we would be taking matter to a higher plane of existence. I'm not sure how. When we fission material we make different elements, perhaps that comes into play. I think it would more likely be fusion that works to move higher though, it creates a larger atom from smaller ones. I think that if helping matter in its initiation brings it to a higher state than it is for the greater good and should be done. I just had another thought. Even though fission creates smaller atoms from larger ones, the smaller ones are a more pure form of a material. Perhaps that helps in some way. Travis Post-No. keys-1/2001-10-26/25582 From: Subject: Editor's Note: No message Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-26/25583 From: J J Dewey Subject: The Unholy Trinity Before I begin today's article let me repeat a quotation from Djwahl Khul, a true representative of Christ and the Hierarchy: Concerning atomic energy he said the following around 1945: "As the forerunner of that release of energy which will change the mode of human living and inaugurate the new age wherein we shall not have civilizations and their emerging cultures but a world culture and an emerging civilization, thus demonstrating the true synthesis which underlies humanity. The atomic bomb emerged from a first ray Ashram, working in conjunction with a fifth ray group; from the long range point of view, its intent was and is purely beneficent. "Thus was the new era ushered in; thus was the stage set for a better future. This was the intent and the purpose of Those Who compose the Council Chamber of the Lord. It rests with humanity itself to take advantage of the proffered opportunity which this destructive manifestation made possible." JJ Yes, it indeed "rests with humanity itself to take advantage of the proffered opportunity." He stated that this was an opportunity to supply humanity with such an abundance of economical power that it would "enable mankind to follow the good, the beautiful and the true" and usher in the age of peace. What happened to this wonderful vision? The world was on its way to perfecting safe and economical nuclear power plants and suddenly those who saw themselves as the "enlightened" turned on this innovation and demonized it to the extent that much of pubic opinion has turned and now views this as the great Satan rather than a savior of mankind. Why did this retrogression happen and why is it that the vision of the Masters has not yet materialized as hoped? There are a couple reasons for this. First: Mankind is unpredictable because of free will and what is even more unpredictable is how we handle First Ray energy. In past ages DK tells us that the energy of Shamballa (First Ray) was released to the Hierarchy and then stepped down through them in modified form to humanity. Some time before World War II This powerful energy was released for the first time directly to humanity. Not even the Hierarchy knew for sure what the initial results would be even though the projected end result was sure. The pure energy of the rays, like any power can be used for either good or evil. Money is a prime example of a power that can be used either direction. To pick up the energy of this released First Ray many disciples incarnated into Germany where an opportunity existed to pick up Shamballa energy and direct it to the German for the good of the world. The Dark Brotherhood was also aware of this release of energy and the basic plan of the Brotherhood of Light to pick it up and direct it for the good of humanity. They acted before the disciples of light realized their mission and picked up this great power first through their own disciple - Hitler. As we know Hitler used this power in its destructive aspect and soon had Germany so under his grips that the work of the disciples came to a standstill and many wound up dying there without ever realizing why they incarnated in that country the first place. Some, like Rommel, were even deceived for a time into believing they should support the Third Reich - thinking that maybe this was what their mission was. Fortunately for the world the Allies rose up and challenged the Axis powers and defeated them. They in turn gathered together Fifth Ray disciples from all over the world and harnessed the First Ray energy themselves as manifested in the creation of the atomic bomb and later transmuted the energy for potential good as nuclear reactors for peaceful uses of energy. There is an interesting correspondence which has developed here. Just as the Brotherhood of Light was about to use the Shamballa energy in a political light in Germany, the Dark Brothers jumped in and corrupted its use, turned the tables and choked all light and evolution out of the nation with the world as the next target. Even so, the next major reception of the First Ray was received by the good guys, scientists who worked on the Fifth Ray using theories created by disciples such as Einstein, Bohr and others until the power of nuclear energy materialized. This time the situation was reversed. The Lights manifested the power of the First Ray and the Dark Brothers had to develop a response in an attempt to hinder mankind's progress toward the new age as envisioned by the Hierarchy. They thus developed a plan to launch a counter offensive. Since the genie could not be put back in the bottle the plan was to put the destructive aspect (the atomic bomb) into the hands of as many nations as possible who have the potential of being controlled by negative forces. At the same time they would seek to plant the seeds of delusion and fear around the building potential of this energy (nuclear reactors generating energy) by equating it on an emotional basis with the destructive power of the bomb. If the people's opinion on nuclear energy could be controlled by deceit and fear then the dark forces could seize control of this energy and use it or negate it toward their own ends. Just as there is an Holy Trinity even so there is an unholy use of the Trinity of energies The Trinity of the forces of retrogression work out as The Dragon (Father - Deception) The Beast (Son - unjust authority to secure the deception) and the image of the beast (Unholy Spirit) false prophet - carries out the deception by speaking the words of the dragon). This third group is often people of good intentions who have just picked up the wrong catch phrases and pass them on as gospel since they seem to sound like words of light, but instead are darkness. We've spent many hours together talking about the beast of unjust authority and how it deceives the whole world one way or another. Well, here is an example that is currently staring us in the face and many of our brothers and sisters who we dearly love have been deceived into following the unjust authority of the beast in connection with nuclear energy. One of the things that makes it seem like the beast wants nuclear energy is because it takes large corporations and sometimes governments to build and operate nuclear power plants, but we must remember this. All that is big is not the beast. All that is government is not the beast. All that makes money is not the beast. The beast is none of these. The beast is unjust authority that supports the words of the dragon (deceit) and is followed without thinking as beastly animals follow their herd authority without thinking anything through. The beast does not have to manifest through a large organization, but can manifest through a single individual who is believed through his power of pure emotional energy picked up and mindlessly followed by another individual. Thus does the power of deception and unjust authority reach down through millions of tentacles to tempt every single person on the earth away from the use of his mind and soul and away from the power of the Aquarian age which is ruled by mind (air sign). We thus have the three unholy aspects of the Trinity seeking to suppress the knowledge of nuclear energy as revealed by great lights who have come to the earth. (1) Deceit - "the dragon." (2) The Beast - the misuse of authority to get you to believe a philosophy without examining it with the mind. (3) The False Prophets - the misguided believers who promote and pass on the deceit and unjust authority. We shall discuss how this Trinity of energies is currently playing out in present time. If you think you can identify them or wish to comment in some way be my guest. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-26/25584 From: Marylin Subject: Re: Ot- The Christian Thing to do Dennis Appling writes: "I'm over here," the stranger replies, "on your swing." Hi Dennis This is a nice story, however, I am wondering if you are the stranger asking for help. What can we do for you? (just a small push at first) Marylin Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-26/25585 From: "jaen" Subject: Re: Unholy Trinity JJ wrote: (1) Deceit - "the dragon." (2) The Beast - the misuse of authority to get you to believe a philosophy without examining it with the mind. (3) The False Prophets - the misguided believers who promote and pass on the deceit and unjust authority. We shall discuss how this Trinity of energies is currently playing out in present time. If you think you can identify them or wish to comment in some way be my guest. Judes: Thank You, JJ, for a clear and concise foundation to present my theory of how these unholy energies have been masterminded by the Dark Forces to play out in our present time. Firstly, I believe that the dark forces and their agents were greatly disappointed with the outcomes of WWI and WWII and the birth of the United Nations in 1945. The were also dismayed with the moral character and spiritual fortitude of the American people; whose basis for strength of this sort; lied in their heritage and the very foundation of the nation itself; in founding spiritual freedom away from unjust authority. So, they regrouped their forces; which had been concentrated in the Nazi SS; and who had fled to other countries [mostly into the Americas] after WWII. Then viewing the bigger picture of the dawning of a New Age [Aquarius]; they planned to obstruct the emergence of the 'good manifestations' of this new age and turn them into negative and destructive forces. Their major plan of attack was against America and still is; because America is the nation that during both wars swayed the balance of power away from the dar forces victory. Using the experimentations in mind control and psychological warfare and drugs during the Nazi regime; they then implemented the following plans: 1) Effect the moral character of a whole generation a.)Introduction of the drug culture b.)Destruction of human and family values through film media 2.) Effect the spiritual foundation of an entire generation: a.)Introduction of supposed new thinking and spirituality through channeled information that is misleading and deceptive; although spiritual-sounding through classic mind-control techniques. This one is extremely obstructive; because many disciple of Light that have particular missions relevant to the New Age or being mislead into believing this new channeled information is their mission. Or they are deterred from understanding their mission of God's Plan; because they are no longer following their own soul. So, the very souls who incarnated at this time to help bring in the New Age or abetting the dark forces by the fact that they have abandoned or misunderstood their missions. 3.) Bring bogus conspiracy theory disinformation into the mainstream by filtering through numerous extremist groups of all kinds. 4.) Infiltrate the United nations and spread negative propaganda and disinformation about the New World Order and that the UN is connected with this supposed NWO. This is a major accomplishment in their part in obstructing the New Age; by having many people fear the negative outcome instead of helping to bring in the positive outcome; which could succeed in bringing in the negative outcome by attrition. 5.)Libelous disinformation about the authors and bringers of Light. Also, downright assassination of the brethren of Light {i.e. Anwar sadat, Kennedys, King, John Lennon] 6.)Obstruct technological progress: a) Disinformation being leaked to environmentalist and anti-nuclear activists b.) Glamourization of the simple life of living off the land each to their own [sovereign to oneself- an island]. This is actually de-evolution of the race and is not possible or even part of God's plan for mankind. And so it goes.... Judes Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-26/25586 From: "jaen" Subject: Re: Unholy Trinity: other areas of attack Judes: Hi..I am continuing my last post on this topic; because Spirit is pressing me to mention other areas where there will be an imminent attack by dark forces. 1.The Dragon[the deception]: The erroneous belief that we are approaching over population on the planet. 2.) The Beast [Unearned authority]: a.) Statistical information based on present circumstances; instead of innovative, enlightened, and optimistic planning and insights. 3.) False prophets and blind followers: a.) The younger generations who will be led to resent the older generations for taking up space on the planet; instead of honouring and respecting the wisdom thy hold within the longevity. b.) The younger generation of health professionals who will then propose and endorse possible abuse and overuse of euthanasia, forced birth-control or genocide. 1.) The Dragon:[the deception or lie] Perfection of the body through genetic engineering will assist evolution of the race 2.) The Beast[unjust authority]: a.) The scientific community that purports that the human spirit does not exist and that the genetics of the human will determine their propensities. 3.)False prophets: Ramtha [for one]; Christopher Winter, etc. [I exercise my right to freedom of speech]; and the same astral beings that convinced Hitler that a master race needed to be created; so that they could utilize the bodies for their own incarnations. These astral beings are working through the channelings and the minds of those predisposed to the material plane. The movie, 'Gattica', subtly portrays enlightenment on this topic. Mush intuitive information can be gleaned form this move. I suggest seeing it. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-26/25587 From: (Melva Broderick) Subject: Re: [keys-l] Re: Unholy Trinity I would like to add to Judes' list: The infiltration of the Christian religion's leaders. The infiltration of other world religion's that cause the splinter radical groups. Using the media to create a desire in mankind's mind for products that are harmful to the environment in the manufacturing process and harmful to humans when they use them and harmful to the environment when they are disposed of. One of the products that immediately come to mind is bleach. The manufacture of which, creates toxic by-products, the use of which kills bacteria but in the end creates resistant bacteria that are more harmful to humans, and the disposal of bleach into our rivers is harmful. (There are alternatives to bleach: sunlight being the #1, in my opinion.) Actually bleach is not "all bad" and has a place, but the media was used to advertise it's use on a scale that is harmful. Because bleach is so widely used everywhere...the place where it was used originally and to great benefit: the hospital...it is no longer as effective. Of course, coupled with the indiscriminate use of antibiotics has led to strains of sometimes deadly resistant bacteria. Another infiltration of authority that comes to my mind is the AMA. The AMA started out as a good thing, but it became threatened by change and became entrenched and unable to change except extremely slowly and protesting all the way, trying to maintain a status quo that only the AMA cares about. ----------------------------------- We have a group of people here who are making soul contact, who are using discernment. Are we enough? Melva Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-26/25588 From: "Lawrence Kennon" Subject: OT Show your support of the Principles of Unification I have been going through the log files of the webserver that hosts The Principles of Unification and noticed a lot of hits on the following URL: http://www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=13 "number=13" is Robin Kennon's endorsement page. I know she has been including something like this as the signature of her email: I support the Principles of Unification http://www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=13 Apparently it works as a fair amount of people ended up visiting the website because they saw that link in Robin's email. If you support those principles and want to help spread the message here is an effective way to do it. Include the "I support the Principles of Unification" in your email "signature" with a link to your particular endorsement. If you have endorsed the principles but don't know your number just use this URL to find it: http://www.unification911.org/jsl/endorse Find your name (Control-F in Windows Explorer to "Find") and the number to the left is _your_ number. Then just replace the "13" in the above URL with your number and that will work. Looking to see lots of "hits" in the webserver log for folks here! Use a signature in all you email lists and that will help spread the word. Thanks! p.s. If you have a webpage you can include a link to the Principles of Unification page to. There is a nice graphic you can use for that at (or create your own!): http://www.thenewagesite.com/uny78.gif Lawrence Kennon I support and endorse the Principles of Unification www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=11 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-26/25589 From: (Melva Broderick) Subject: Re: [keys-l] Re: Unholy Trinity: other areas of attack And the Beast seduces people into unhealthy life styles. The end result being people become obsessed with their appearance, their weight, their health. If a person is preoccupied with the physical self, then no attention is paid to the soul. And unhealthy life style choices lead to illness and diseases, which can further increase one's preoccupation with the physical. Example, is the person with end stage COPD (emphysema): the absolute only thing they care about is their next breath. This person is not getting closer to his/her soul: every thought is on breathing. Of course, some people use their disease for growth, but many do not. (I see the ones who don't.) But, I am sure this has all been said before. Melva Post-No.: keys-1/2001-10-26/25590 From: Subject: Editor's Note: No message Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-26/25591 From: "Assaf Friedman" Subject: Re: Unholy Trinity: other areas of attack (to Judes) Judes: 3.) False prophets: Ramtha [for one]... Assaf: Judes, what do you know that makes you state such a thing about Ramtha? Ramtha the Enlightened One is a teacher. I am a student in his school, Ramtha's School of Enlightenment (RSE for short). For more details: http://www.ramtha.com/ Assaf Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-26/25592 From: "Keith Harris" Subject: Re: [keys-l] The Unholy Trinity The strongest vehicle for the false prophet today is television. Television can be used for both good and evil purposes, but for the most part I believe it has been used to push the Dragon's viewpoint. Rapter Keith Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25593 From: J J Dewey Subject: The Red Dragon Thanks for updating us on your plan on the Principles of unification Larry. Sounds like you have a great idea. The other day Rob gave a great link about T.H. Moray from Utah who built a mysterious black box that generated free electricity. My late brother-in-law was a scientist who spoke of him several times as his favorite scientist. He tried to duplicate the box but never succeeded. I have been curious about the guy and it was nice to finally see some printed information on him. I'll repeat the site Rob gave - it is worth reading. http://www.nuenergy.org/excalibur.htm Mark asked me about the handwriting of the anthrax terrorists. I've caught a couple glimpses of the handwriting on TV. I haven't been able to take a close look, but I'll tell you what I can. From the look I have caught it appears that all the envelopes have the same handwriting but seem to be written with different pens. The writing is not the person's regular handwriting. He wrote the addresses very slowly and deliberately obviously in the hope his handwriting could not be traced back to him. The deliberate printing makes it difficult to analyze much. The most obvious trait is that the handwriting goes downhill quite significantly. This usually shows a pessimistic attitude and can indicate depression where the downhill slant is so strong. His pressure appears strong indicating intense feelings. T here is significant space between the lines indicating that he does not like others imposing upon him. Some of the letters have a simplicity that indicates he learned to write English later in life giving evidence he is a foreigner. He is not particularly intelligent. You can't tell the sex for sure from handwriting, but it shows male characteristics. Overall we have a passionate man who probably feels like a victim infringed upon by the United States and is seeking to turn the tables on those more powerful than himself. This person was probably a dupe and not in on the planning of the scheme. If I get a chance to get a better look I'll tell you more if I see anything significant. Yesterday we mentioned the Unholy Trinity. The first of these is: Deceit or "the dragon." Deceit as it related to the attempted destruction of the plans of the Brotherhood of Light originates with the Dark Brotherhood which is sometimes symbolized by the red dragon in the Bible. Christ told his disciples to be "as wise as serpents" and Moses lifted up a serpent which saved the lives of those who looked upon it, so this word is not always used in a negative light. In esoteric writings the serpent is often used in connection with wisdom. No symbol can be interpreted in strict black and white terms, but must be examined in the context with which it is used. In the Book of Revelation John calls the serpent he has in mind, the adversary, one who "deceives the whole world" and persecutes the saints. The serpent John sees here definitely represents the negative aspect of this beast. The first and most powerful line of attack used by the Dark Brothers is the dragon of deceit. In many cases people do not need any coaxing to use some deceit, but in the case of an important work of light that must be stopped, those on the left hand path will seek out ddisciples with deceit in their hearts and implant thoughts in their mind that will use this tendency to thwart a work of light. Could it be true that anti nuclear activists (who appear to just want to make the world a better place) are using outright deceit - that they teach things that are definitely not true and know that they are doing so? The majority of anti nuclear activists have just not checked out all the facts and are sincere in what they believe, but I do believe that some distortions are so obvious to anyone with an elementary knowledge of nuclear physics and reactors that the deceit is consciously embraced by some of the leaders. A month or so ago when I first wrote about nuclear energy I planned on stressing illusion on both sides of the equation. It has been about 40 years since I studied the subject so I did some updated studies and checked the internet and some books to see what both sides were saying. The more I read the more difficult it was to find flaws, deceit and illusion in the pro nuclear writers who are mostly real scientists. But I soon became disgusted with the anti nuclear group (mostly non scientists) with their distortion and deceit. It became obvious to me that they approach their cause with a religious mindset. Instead of looking at the facts and coming to a conclusion, they appear to have reached conclusions and only use data that can be used in some way to prove this conclusion. They often speak with nebulous accusations leaving out details that would reveal the truth. For instance, when they see something nuclear they do not like they will often call it "seriously flawed" but not tell us any details that prove the flaw. On the other hand, the pro nuclear writers usually tend to give enough details so a reader can use them to make up his own mind. If a seeker can obtain necessary facts in a controversial situation he can use them along with his reasoning mind to arrive at the truth. One of the reasons for this difference of approach is that many anti nuclear writers and speakers have little scientific background and just do not know what they are talking about. On the other hand, many pro nuclear writers are scientists who have done actual research and give out reliable facts to back themselves up. One thing we can say for the activists though - they have done a much better job than the dry nuclear scientists of convincing the public that their point of view is the correct one. Next: The Ten Deceptions Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25594 From: Diane Linen Subject: From Gina .. Re: Unholy Trinity: other areas of attack] This posting was sent by "Gina Thies" This is for Judes, if you are a woman: You go girl! I wanted to add but I think you said it all for me, the youth nowadays not only don't have respect for their elders, they have no respect for life in general. Movies and video games also have people conditioned to accept destruction of life. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25595 From: Maryln Subject: O.T. but not O.T. Hi Keysters Just a quick note here to let you know that we passed our 3rd birthday October 23rd. So a belated Happy Birthday to the Keys Of Knowledge List. Marylin I support The Principles of Unification http://www.unification911.org/principles.htm? Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25596 From: "Lawrence Kennon" Subject: Re: [keys-l] The Red Dragon "Could it be true that anti nuclear activists (who appear to just want to make the world a better place) are using outright deceit - that they teach things that are definitely not true and know that they are doing so?" "[We] have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest." ""It is journalistically irresponsible to present both sides [of the global warming theory] as though it were a question of balance." -- Dr. Stephen Schneider, a long time advocate of environmental issues and proponent of the Global Warming _theory_. I would highly recommend reading "Trashing the Planet" by Dixie Lee Ray. Although it covers many environmental issues, it has some particularly good chapters on nuclear power. The late Ms. Ray was a former governor of Washington and chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission. Lawrence Kennon _____________________________________ I support and endorse the Principles of Unification www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=11 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25597 From: "John Zielke" Subject: Unholy Trinity: Other areas of attack. A little birdie told me it was true, so I had to accept JJ's invitation, and return to see for myself. Indeed it is interesting what can be gleaned from the Keys posts. But some of those "gleanings" also raise questions. Q: How does one become aware of "imminent attacks by dark forces"? Q: Who (or what), is "the dragon"? Deception? Deceit? Erroneous beliefs? Q: Are we to understand that "the dragon" represents one person? A "dark brotherhood"? Or, perhaps, just an attribute that any of us can and do have from time to time? Q: If "the dragon" is, say, the attribute of deceit, why not simply refer to deceit as "deceit"? Why the animated disguise? How does that help understanding? Q: In the Bible, there are hundreds of references to the word "beast". The vast majority use the word to describe an animal -- with no apparent symbolism intended. In the book of Revelations it is often used symbolically. But even then, the symbolism varies. As JJ pointed out, "serpent" can be used to represent both good and evil, so also can (and is) the word "beast". So I ask, why not be direct? Let us use the words we mean. If we mean misuse of authority; or unearned authority, let's say so. I submit that will promote clearer communications, than to use symbolic words that can have multiple meanings. Q: Is it productive to close ones eyes to problems; to sweep them under the rug; to merely "pray them away"; or to hope that "positive thinking" will fix them? I submit that it is NOT. And (I must observe) Judes, you are doing the very thing you criticize others for doing, when you claim that "approaching overpopulation on the plant" is an "erroneous belief". What is YOUR source for this? And ... once you provide it, shall we then off-hand discard IT by saying it is an "unearned authority", as you are so willing to do? Q: What is an "unearned authority"? Too often it seems a phrase given to something we would rather not believe might be true. And how is it, that "statistical information based on present circumstances" warrants such a label, Judes? Q: What is a "false prophet"? Someone who teaches something that goes against our own belief system and/or prejudices? Hmm. Q: What is a "blind follower? Could it include those who are too quick to label information as coming from an "unearned authority", so that they do not have to consider other options to situations; alternative theories; or so that they do not have to look at problems or issues they do not wish to see? John Z. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25598 From: "Gloria Lacy" Subject: Renewable Energy Hi Keysters! I was working the other day, (driving a taxi until I can get another high-tech job), and one of my customers was in town for a seminar/conference in Boise for renewable energy. Talk about synchronicity! I told him about our little group here and our topic of discussion, and he gave me his (or his boss's) business card with email address, so that he could answer any questions in his field of expertise that any of you all might have. Here's the information from the card. **************************** Northwest Renewable Energy, LLC Wind Energy Specialist 15931 SE Lake Moneysmith Road., Auburn, WA 98092 Bob Calvert 253-735-1462 Email: bob@nwrenergy.com www.nwrenergy.com ************************ I apologize for not writing more, but I've been working some very long days and been pretty wiped out after 12-14 hours each day, and am still trying to keep my home based business going on Ebay. ************************** Gloria Lacy Glacy's Collectibles Ebay ID: bct23 I support the Principles of Unification http://www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=56 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/21311 (digest-marker)25599 From: "John Zielke" Subject: Alternative Energy -- We can help with the solution. Partly as a continuation of the post I made this morning, I find interesting, and encouraging, all the alternative sources of energy that have been brought forward in this group. And ... while the Keys group may or may not include a lot of inventors, I personally believe that group focus on certain issues, can -- through what I'll call SPIRITUAL OSMOSIS - help generate solutions to the minds of those in the world that DO have the talent to go forward and develop viable, workable alternatives. It's a phenomenon I've seen quite often. Unfortunately, I believe there is, and will conntinue to be resistance to th introduction and spread of alternative energy sources. The reason? MONEY. There are huge investment interests in place surrounding the use of petroleum -- interests that will not likely go away gracefully. Nevertheless, I believe solutions BEGIN with focused thought energy. And that is what I noticed taking place within the Keys group. Actually, solutions REALLY BEGIN with noticing that there is an issue or problem that requires a solution. That is what part of what I was trying to do, in one of my earlier posts. The facts are there ... world population IS growing ... and, global resources are NOT unlimited. There ALREADY has been enough conflict generated over the pursuit of limited oil supplies to fuel (pun intended) a few wars. It is not productive to cling to an illusion that such conflicts will "somehow" just go away. The population growth trends serve to indicate that these conflicts are likely to increase in frequency, magnitude or both, unless and until a solution is developed AND successfully put into effect. The fact that world population is increasing is not "bad" -- it is not "good -- it simply "is" -- and as a result, our world will have additional issues to deal with. I think those issues are real. I think they require real solutions. Identifying these trends is not the work of the "dark brotherhood", or the "dragon", or the "beast". If anything is indicative of those things, it is the attitude of poo- pooing the notion that there is a problem. THAT is the illusion. The path to solution begins at problem identification. From there it proceeds through the exploration of possible alternatives. One of the hardest steps is implementation. Whether it be on a personal level, or global level, change is tough. Again -- there will be resistance. Strong resistance. From personal experience, I know that to effect change requires spiritual preparation. When I try and change before I am ready, failure inevitably sets in (which results in disillusion and discouragement). We may not be world leaders, or even inventors, but we CAN take steps to voice our opinions to those leaders. We can focus our spiritual energy on solution alternatives. There are steps we can take. Peaceful steps. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25600 From: "Lawrence Kennon" Subject: Re: [keys-l] Unholy Trinity: Other areas of attack. John Z: "I little birdie told me it was true, so I had to accept JJ's invitation, and return to see for myself..." Welcome back! ;) "Q: What is an "unearned authority"?" We have many who would like to exercise authority over us. Some are enabled by law, for example a policemen. Others we "enable" by uncritical acceptance of their pronouncements. In regards to the latter case where we are trying to determine whether to "give the benefit of the doubt" to the claims of an authority it is often useful to review to what extent the authority has proven to be correct in the past. An earned authority has a track record of being correct so that you give those opinions more "weight". An unearned authority is one who either you have no "track record" with, or perhaps one you have found to often be incorrect. But at the bottom line you need to test every authority, even earned ones. "Q: What is a "false prophet"? Someone who teaches something that goes against our own belief system and/or prejudices?" Often it is someone who earnestly teaches something that is fundamentally incorrect. Often they are very good people in terms of motives but have simply been deceived. I would bet that most of us, and I definitely include myself, have been a "false prophet" at one time or another. "Q: What is a "blind follower? Could it include those who are too quick to label information as coming from an "unearned authority", so that they do not have to consider other options to situations; alternative theories; or so that they do not have to look at problems or issues they do not wish to see" I think you have something of a handle on this. There are lots of people who are looking for simplistic and absolute answers and really don't want to do the hard work of analyzing all the information. It is certainly a trap I have fell into many times. It is often very easy to believe you have found the ultimate answer and often very discomforting to confront that little bit of evidence that seems to contradict it. Good to hear from you again John! Lawrence Kennon I support and endorse the Principles of Unification www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=11 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25601 From: "jaen" Subject: re: Unholy Trinity "Q: Is it productive to close ones eyes to problems; to sweep them under the rug; to merely "pray them away"; or to hope that "positive thinking" will fix them? I submit that it is NOT. And (I must observe) Judes, you are doing the very thing you criticize others for doing, when you claim that "approaching overpopulation on the plant" is an "erroneous belief". What is YOUR source for this? And ... once you provide it, shall we then off-hand discard IT by saying it is an "unearned authority", as you are so willing to do?" Judes: The 'authority' is the Law of Abundance that JJ mentioned and defined a few days ago. JJ's comments were a confirmation for me of intuitive knowingness that I had already known my whole life. This Law of Abundance has always been a law that I was aware of on a deep spiritual level. This law could be phrased something like this, "There is plenty for all!" or "The more you give and share...the more you have"! "Knowing this Law and trusting this Law will bring abundance to anyone. However, we live in a world where few believe this Law and so many that live by this law are taken advantage of be those that fear that there is not enough for everyone and steal or take energy from those that have created abundance for themselves. So, although abundance can be created; one must constantly protect and keep recreating abundance that others take for their own instead of creating their own abundance. So, we live in a world of doers/creators and the opposing sycophants that feed off the energy of others. And until those that live in Light can teach others that live in darkness or partial darkness how to come up to their level; the world is a realm divided into heaven/hell; and good/evil; and light/darkness. To be aware of the present conditions only means that we must enlighten others to this Law of Abundance and contend against the negativity that believing otherwise [like fearing the world is becoming overpopulated] will bring adverse situations until the coming New Age when a 'critical mass' of humans become aware of Gods Laws and live by God's Laws. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25602 From: "Lawrence Kennon" Subject: Fw: Principles of Unification (Hebrew) Another update on the Principles of Unification in Hebrew. You can simply give out this line (below) as it allows one to choose whichever version they want (male/female). http://www.unification911.org/heb_principles.htm That would be a better way to distribute it. Sorry for the confusion! Lawrence Kennon I support and endorse the Principles of Unification www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=11 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25603 From: "Lawrence Kennon" Subject: Principles of Unification (Hebrew) The Principles of Unification are now available in Hebrew. There are two versions, one for men and one for women (this due to some unique features of Hebrew). They are located at: Men: http://www.unification911.org/heb_men_principles.htm Women: http://www.unification911.org/heb_women_principles.htm Thanks to Assaf for his work on this! If you know anyone who reads Hebrew, pass this on to them! Thanks again!, Lawrence Kennon I support and endorse the Principles of Unification www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=11 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-27/25604 From: Rick Audette Subject: Re: [keys-l] Re: Unholy Trinity: other areas of attack (to Judes) Assaf Friedman wrote: "Judes: "3.) False prophets: "Ramtha [for one]... "Assaf: "Judes, what do you know that makes you state such a thing about Ramtha? "Ramtha the Enlightened One is a teacher. I am a student in his school, Ramtha's School of Enlightenment (RSE for short). "For more details: "http://www.ramtha.com/" Bozo the clown is more enlightened. I mean really, would you buy a used car from this person http://www.ramtha.com/images/home-page/MS2130.9.jpg I think I might feel better riding in a jet full of Muslims. Not sure which one gives the best goose bumps, Ramtha or the seven foot tall Lemurian that lives under Mt. Shasta. P.T.Barnum would be proud of 'em, given their tally of suckers. On Second thought, maybe they aren't any worse than televangelists. I heard somewhere, a REAL Master would never reveal that he is a master, to any but his equals. When someone claims to be enlightened and/or a Master, red flags should go up instantly. I'm at the bottom of the class of those wishing to sit at the feet of a true master, so anyone claiming to be an enlightened master darn sure better be smarter and brighter than I. I've seen JZ Knight's act, seems like something from Las Vegas. I didn't believe it for a minute. She reminds me of a sideshow pitch man and I pat my wallet pocket to be sure it's still there. Rick -- My Home Page http://www.ont.com/users/rea1/ Petra Story http://petracity.intercosmos.com/index.html Seeker's Guide to the Net http://www.synthesisnet.com I support Unification http://www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=8 have you read "The Immortal" http://www.freeread.com *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:* I'm only in it for the thrill Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-28/25605 From: (Melva Broderick) Subject: Re: [keys-l] Re: Unholy Trinity: Other areas of attack/John John, Re: Unearned authority & Blind Followers: I was at a website the other day that seems like the owner is an unearned authority and it seems to attract blind followers. It was Jelaila Star's website that is about the 12th Planet Niburu I was reading excerpts of Ms Star's book and it is for the most part a rehash of Zechariah Sitchin's "The Earth Chronicles Series." Basically is seems, to me, that she has condensed his well researched series into a brief synopsis and then added a couple new ideas at the end. One of her theories is that Niburu is now a hollowed out space ship that is a Noah's ark of the skies..carrying representatives of all space races. Anyway..I was browsing the website and ddecided to talk to some of th others who were at the site (there is a paging system at the site.) When I asked the others that were at the site if they had read Sitchin's series, to a one, they replied, "It's too complicated, too much detail, too boring. Jelaila makes it easy." It seems to me that this is an example of people wanting a simple answer and are willing to let someone else do their thinking. Another interesting thing I noted about the site was the prices that are charged for their services: $100/hour to talk to Jelaila or Jonathan and get your 12 strand DNA activated, $10/hour to join in on a telephone conference call with Jelaila. Understandably, you have to pay for any of the books you want to read. She is supposed to be predicting when Nibiru will return and she posted instructions as to how her followers were to respond to the 9/11 tragedy. It seemed to me to be an Unearned Authority and Blind Followers. Of course, this is just my opinion and others may not agree. Melva I support and endorse the Principles of Unification http://www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=11 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-28/25606 From: "Assaf Friedman" Subject: Re: Unholy Trinity: other areas of attack (to Rick) Rick: "Bozo the clown is more enlightened. I mean really, would you buy a used car from this person "http://www.ramtha.com/images/home-page/MS2130.9.jpg "I think I might feel better riding a jet full of Muslims. Not sur which one gives the best goose bumps, Ramtha or the seven foot tall Lemurian that lives under Mt. Shasta. P.T. Barnum would be proud of 'em, given their tally of suckers. On Second thought, maybe they aren't any worse than televangelists. I heard somewhere, a REAL Master would never reveal that he is a master, to any but his equals. When someone claims to be enlightened and/or a Master, red flags should go up instantly. I'm at the bottom of the class of those wishing to sit at the feet of a true master, so anyone claiming to be an enlightened master darn sure better be smarter and brighter than I. I've seen JZ Knight's act, seems like something from Las Vegas. I didn't believe it for a minute. She reminds me of a sideshow pitchman and I pat my wallet pocket to be sure it's still there." Assaf: Ah. That thing. Yes. Well. I don't like this style of behavior of Ramtha either. This style of behavior prevented me from making the decision to be a student in RSE for more than a year since I first heard of Ramtha. But then I read some books of his teachings and watched some videos (and there was that behavior of his again), and I looked beyond the image he projected, and saw the message. I observed it, and I accepted the principles and the philosophy. You once told me on the Keys-List that you have a tendency to look at the pictures and skip the text. At first encounter, I make a judgment by the appearance of the entity I meet. As I see it, this is a limitation of mine. Then, after some time passes, I am able to look beyond the image and see the message that this entity projects, and discern for myself to the best of my ability. My beautiful appearance doesn't tell if I am a 'good' or a 'bad' person (you may have a look at my beautiful appearance in the Keysters Family Album). :O) Some time ago, I wanted to send JJ a personal e-letter in order to ask whether or not he ever heard of Ramtha. So before I did, I made a search on the archive of his posts to the Keys-List. Here is what I found from 10 Jan 2000: "When I saw J Z Knight channeling the Ram I experienced the opposite effect. JZ's voice changed, her countenance was completely altered, she became very masculine, pranced back and forth on the stage speaking with a booming voice as a demonstration of authority and totally turned me off. I was even more turned off when I learned that it cost $3000 or more to ask the Ram a personal question through JZ. "I also read one of her books, one of the last ones I have had time to read, and found no new principles in there plus many statements that were very questionable. For instance, he claims to have overcome all things in one short bloody warrior life. "Obviously (from my point of view) JZ is channeling an astral entity. Typical of these astral ones is great boasting and large financial charges." To this, my answer was: "Well, JJ's pov that is stated there doesn't change my decision to keep on learning from both for the time being. "Here is a quote from that same post that is not referring to Ramtha: "What is the criteria for evaluating a teacher? I have answered this many times, but if you missed it I will answer again. Take the things the teacher says and run it by your own soul. If your soul gives you a positive response proceed. If you get a negative one then run." "This is what I do all the time to the best of my ability." JJ's answer was: "Let me clarify here that all schools of thought have truth in them and if the heart is pure and the student uses discernment then that which is true will be registered. "If the sincere student picks up a few things that are illusionary it will only be a matter of time before he divides truth from error and moves on. "WIT spoke correctly when he said: "As for channels and channeling, I am more concerned with "content" then 'container.' As I have suggested several times before, 'The Truth is Self-Authenticating.'" "It is helpful to know the difference between conscious and unconscious channeling, but in the end the content is that which we must examine. "I may point out something specific about some purported "work of the Masters" that I believe to be in error, but unless one receives verification through his own soul he must always consider the fact that I could be wrong. In addition you will note that I have never attempted to discourage a person from learning from any particular school of thought. We have all been in certain schools, churches, philosophies in the past that we have past through and discarded. Even so, when we look back on them we often realize that the truths we learned and unlearned are very valuable to our present outlook." Here is a quote from Ramtha, addressing his students at RSE: "We do not want to destroy the personality in the school of mastership. But we want to revolutionize it, to bring about a revolution to where the personality is exactly the mouthpiece of the Spirit - and that they are not enemies, that they are one and the same entity - so that the Holy Spirit can ride the body without objection and victimization, because many of you are victims to the concept of being masters and you intentionally make yourself that." It is time to reconsider Ramtha. With Love Assaf I support the Principles of Unification http://www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=18 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-28/25607 From: DeHara Subject: Re: Unholy Trinity: other areas of attack (to Rick) WOH down there fellow Texan . . . However much anyone out there thinks they have "all the answers," could they please be more patient when criticizing others'. We are supposed to be sharing and tolerant, not judgmental or conceited. Not to mention, Rick... when one goes off wild -- as this... your giving your power away more than your receiving, right? Love and Light to U! ~dehara "The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective." Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley, 1958 Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-28/25608 From: J J Dewey Subject: The Ten Deceptions Part I As I was checking out Amazon.com for books on nuclear power I found one that looked interesting and seemed to have good reviews from intelligent sounding people except for one anti nuclear fanatic. I was amused by his words which read: INFINITE NEGATIVE STARS! THIS GUY IS HITLER INCARNATE!, June 24, 2001 Reviewer: A reader from SEATTLE WA USA Nuclear power sucks. Have you seen the movie "The China Syndrome"? That movie tells the truth. We humans are truly the cancer of the earth and our disregard for this fragile planet shows that we need to go. The development of nuclear power shows our egotism is out of control. This guy hates not just children, but, more importantly, all legitimate life on this planet as well. As you might guess, I bought the book and found it very well documented and informative. Unfortunately many activists do not seem to show much more reasoned thinking than this guy. His main source of enlightenment on the subject is Hollywood. This explains a great mystery: How is it that a source of power which has proven itself to be safe, reliable, free of greenhouse gasses and other air pollutants is opposed by the same people who claim to want safety, reliability and the elimination of greenhouse gasses? This dichotomy has never made sense to me and now after I have spent re-examining both sides of the issue it is still difficult to understand how one can examine the data and be so opposed to nuclear power, yet at the same time claim any connection with the power to reason. So what are some of the deceptions perpetrated by the anti nuclear activists? Here are a few. (1) The greatest most persistent deception is that nuclear waste is a great danger to us all and the storage problem is far from being solved. Because of this supposed unsolvable danger the only course for mankind is to cease building nuclear power plants and seek alternative means. The author of the above mentioned book I bought from Amazon makes some good statements on this issue that is difficult to improve upon. "Although most people think that nuclear wastes are the most deadly wastes ever produced, this simply isn't true. The wastes from a coal-burning power plant are potentially ten times more deadly than the untreated wastes from a nuclear power plant. According to waste disposal experts and the U.S. Department of Energy, if all of the air pollutants produced during a single day by a coal-burning power plant reached the lungs of people, these poisons would kill ten times as many people as would die were they to inhale or ingest all of the wastes produced during one day by a nuclear power plant. "Contrary to what you may have heard, nuclear wastes are far from being the "most toxic substances known to man." If you have the least doubt about this statement, consider the fact that over the last 20 years, one million Americans have died from breathing the air pollutants produced by burning fossil fuels. During this same time period, the untreated nuclear wastes held at temporary storage sites haven't killed a single person. These are the facts, and they are hard for a reasonable person to ignore. "Once nuclear wastes are treated, they are only about as toxic as selenium compounds, some of which occur in nature. And, after the treated wastes from a nuclear power plant have been in storage for 100 years, their toxicity diminishes, and is then equal to that of arsenic trioxide, which we often spread around the food crops in our gardens to kill various pests. It is worth noting that while the toxicity of nuclear wastes diminishes with time, the toxicity of arsenic trioxide will never diminish. Whatever arsenic trioxide was added to our gardens this year simply lies on the soil along with all the arsenic trioxide which has been added over the past years. And, each year, we produce enough arsenic trioxide to kill 10 billion people. It would be more sensible if we'd worry more about arsenic trioxide and less about nuclear wastes." From: The Environmental Case for Nuclear Power by Roberty C. Morris Pg 32 (2) Deception Number Two Nuclear Waste will continue to be a deadly toxin for 250,000 to a million years and any storage facility or containers the waste is stored in must be proven to contain the waste for this period of time. Because of this claim and the fear tactics of selling it to the public and many of our representatives in Congress, the safety of storing it in 1000 feet of solid rock is not enough for them. Who knows what may happen in 250,000 years? Maybe a giant earthquake will rip the mountain open and a few moments later a giant meteor will strike and scatter the waste to smithereens. And maybe pigs will fly by my window tomorrow morning. Give me a break. We can't let dangers that have a one in a hundred trillion chance of happening ruin our lives. If we did no one would even venture to the grocery store for fear that a solar flare will melt their car. The sad part of this illusion is that this myth has prevented us from obtaining an extremely safe site at Yucca Mountain. The needless alarm created by activists has caused the government to spend 4.5 billion dollars and 14 years of time in studies of Yucca mountain and storage possibilities, and we seem to be further from going ahead with safe waste disposal today than ever before. Therefore instead of being buried in a thousand feet of rock the waste is... where is the waste? The waste is generally stored in the back yard of the nuclear reactor plants around the country, buried, not in a thousand feet of rock, but no more than 30 feet below the surface in over 100 locations thought the United States. Even though the chances of exposure to the public is about a million times as great as if the waste were stored in one location in a thousand feet of rock at Yucca Mountain, there has not been even one death attributed to the waste. That's a pretty good record considering that coal fired power plants are accused of causing up to 50,000 deaths a year. The actual record proves that storing nuclear waste on site is relatively safe, even though it would not be as secure as storing it in one safe site as Yucca Mountain. Perhaps the greatest danger we would have from the current method of waste storage is if a terrorist were to hijack another plane loaded with fuel and crash into a nuclear power plant. A danger greater than reaching the nuclear core is that such a crash may scatter some of the waste material to the winds. This brings up a point of great hypocrisy. Why have the activists, over a fourteen year period, protested a safe storage a Yucca mountain when the current storage system causes a risk over a million times as great? You would think that in the interest of safety we would pick any reasonable site and go for it. What makes more sense? All the nuclear waste gathered in one location buried in a thousand feet of rock in a sparsely populated area that even an atomic blast could not disturb, or to have it scattered in over a hundred separate locations that are an easy prey to terrorists near large population centers? Are the activists really interested in public safety, or perhaps some other agenda? "But," they complain, "we must protect future civilizations for the next 250,000 years from our waste and we do not even have a container that will last that long." First let me point out that the plan is to encase the nuclear waste in glass which is more difficult to break than most rocks and tests in Canada have proven that it is likely to hold the waste for over 100 million years, far exceeding the 250,000 years goal. In addition to this the glass will be encased in stainless steel to further insure security. But is the 250,000 year goal even necessary? No it is not. The fact is that if we can contain the waste for only 1000 years then the most hazardous of the waste will be reduced in power by less than a billionth of its original radioactivity. As most of you know a half life is the time it takes for half of the dangerous radioactivity to disintegrate. The shorter the half life, the more radiation is given off. The most hazardous waste has a fairly short half life. Cesium-131 poses a health risk because it produces penetrating gamma rays. Strontium-90 produces less penetrating beta rays but can be absorbed into bones because it is chemically similar to calcium. Yet both these isotopes have half-lives of only about 30 years! This means that one half of the radioactive waste composed of these two elements is rendered completely harmless in 30 years. In 60 years only 25% of the waste remains and in 120 years there is only 12.5%. If we continue here we can easily see that we do not need any 250,000 years, for the worst of this waste to become harmless. 150 years = 6.25% remains 180 years = 3.125% 210 years = 1.56% 240 years = .78% 270 years = .39% 300 years = .2% 330 years = .1% 360 years = .05% Then when we get to 1000 years less than a billionth of the initial radioactivity remains, making it less dangerous than the radioactivity I many homes. So where does this 250,000 year danger period that the activists cite come from? This comes from a long-lived waste product called Plutonium 239 which has a longer half life of 24,400 years. They also worry about lesser amounts of americium 243 with a half life of 73,370 years and americium 241 with a half life of 458 years, but these substances cannot be that bad or they would not be used in smoke detectors found in many of our homes. What they do not tell you is that the long half life actually makes Plutonium much less dangerous than the by-products with a short half life. Because it takes plutonium-239 over 800 times as long to shoot off half of its radioactivity than strontium-90 or Cesium-131 this means simply that the amount of dangerous radioactivity it presents is very low in comparison to the high level wastes. So low in fact that radiation expert Prof. Bernard Cohen volunteered to eat some to expose the truth of some of Ralph Nader's claims. Here are his own words: "I offered to eat as much plutonium as he (Nader) would eat of caffeine, which my paper shows is comparably dangerous, or given reasonable TV coverage, to personally inhale 1000 times as much plutonium as he says would be fatal, or in response to former Senator Ribicoff's statement to inhale 1000 particles of plutonium of any size that can be suspended in air. My offer was made to all major TV networks but there has never been a reply beyond a request for a copy of my paper. Yet the false statements continue in the news media and surely 95% of the public accept them as fact although virtually no one in the radiation health scientific community gives the credence. We have here a complete breakdown in communication between the scientific community and the news media, and an unprecedented display of irresponsibility by the latter. One must also question the ethics of Nader and Ribicoff; I have sent them my papers and written them personal letters, but I have never received a reply." From: The Myth of Plutonium Toxicity by Bernard L. Cohen It is interesting that this dreaded plutonium which, according to this nuclear expert, is no more dangerous than caffeine. To top it off he was willing to publicly eat or breathe some to prove it. The total volume of the waste of this element for the whole of the United States, which has caused so much protest, would fit in the average sized living room. Now if we cannot safely dispose of a living room full of substance - no more dangerous than caffeine - we are not as smart as we think we are. We have about ten billion dollars set aside from taxing nuclear facilities to accomplish this. Surely this should be enough money on top of the 4.5 billion already spent! But wait... Maybe the $10 billion is part of the problem and not then solution. Could it be that this money has been earmarked for other projects such as the mating habits of the Borneo beetle and it would be awkward for politicians to cough up the money if we decided to use Yucca Mountain? Is it possible that the money issue is the real reason that many politicians seem to side with the activists, who themselves are well heeled with money? I read one estimate that they have access to over a billion dollars of promotional money a year for their various causes. Post-No.: keys-l/2001-10-28/25609 From: Rick Audette < Subject: Re: [keys-l] Re: Unholy Trinity: other areas of attack (to Rick) DeHara wrote: "WOH down there fellow Texan . . . "However much anyone out there thinks they have "all the answers," could they please be more patient when criticizing others'. We are supposed to be sharing and tolerant, not judgmental or conceited." IF a person is possessed with a burning desire to seek the highest truth, anybody or thing can be a good teacher. A focus on truth will also instill a need for efficiency. Good is the straightest line between yourself and truth. Bad is side roads and dead ends. Efficiency also becomes more important as you grow older, because time speeds up when you get my age. I've been down every dark alley and dead end you can imagine, in a half century, but I know better than to tell anyone what they can or can't do. I make no apology if I roll my eyes up when I see a son or daughter wander down a side road and try to never say 'told ya so', when they return to main street and I point the way up town. "Not to mention, Rick... when one goes off wild -- as this... your giving your power away more than your receiving, right?" Twasn't wild at all. Ramtha and I go back years. I didn't feel any loss or gain for myself. I was only directing a little light on a subject. It's up to U, how many grains of salt to take with it, when some old hippy says, 'been there, done that'. I'm not the teacher here. Mostly what I write is common sense, but it's pretty likely I just picked it up by osmosis, after having flunked and repeating the course so often. If someone brings this topic up at Shoot the Breeze, I'll be happy to add my 2c there. On 10/27/01, a real tuff cookie writes: "Rolling eyes up again," Rick -- I support Unification http://www.unification911.org/jsl/endorsed?number=8 have you read "The Immortal" http://www.freeread.com *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:* I'm only in it for the thrill