Posted by: graemebird | November 12, 2009

The Velanovins And The Trouble With Giza.

Yesterday I was trying to put up a theory as to when the Pyramids were built. It wasn’t working as a thread nor perfectly as a theory for that matter, since the Pyramids are so unaccountable that people have brought alien intervention into the story. Not to be ruled out entirely by the way.

I will be arguing later that the Sphinx was built BEFORE the Quaternary extinction event and that the pyramids were built immediately in the wake of the extinction catastrophe, and as a reaction to this disaster. I will argue that this is the very last time the human race would have had the where-withal to undertake such a project. That the survivors would have used what was left of their damaged capital goods base, retrieved such stones as were now mostly under water, and cut then polished the bigger ones down to the appropriate size.

These people were amazing. They cut the stones so true that a razor could not be wedged between them. This is an entirely inappropriate level of precision for this earth. In fact this is more akin to the stone-cutting precision we will have to develop in order to economically colonise the moon.


The Main Conundrum With The Big Stones.

But first we have to show just how silly the common view of the building of the pyramids is. And here we will conflate the matter with what was going on, a short 407 miles away, in the area that now hosts the town of Baalbek.

One thing mentally one has to do is to forget about the racial cast of people currently in the region and the boundaries of extant nations. This is not so we can attribute everything magnificent to the celts. Rather it is just to be more realistic about things. It ought to be clear that our best guess is that the people who moved around the huge stones at Baalbek and the people who made the pyramids, were essentially part of the same high-tech society. A society with greater technical capacity then we have today. Not to be confused with the less “ancient egyptians” who we may arbitrarily date from after Egypt became arid, about 5,100 years ago.

“Ancient Egypt was an ancient civilization of eastern North Africa, concentrated along the lower reaches of the Nile River in what is now the modern country of Egypt. The civilization coalesced around 3150 BC[1]”

So sayeth the wikipedia. We have here a new society coming together as distinct from the societies around it, probably directly as a result in the change of rainfall. Now this new society is cut off from the others in the region as a nation state. The first and only nation state until the late middle ages in Europe.

This nation formed on the banks of the Nile river. They become the Egyptian people with their history of the Pharoahs. They were a poxy setup and fundamentally communist. In that they had religion and state as one thing. And in the person of the Pharaoh they had their deity. We aren’t even the least bit interested in these ugly ugly Gypos. What we are talking about is another society that was there seven thousand years earlier again.


We need to make a hard distinction between the amazing people of 12,000 years ago and the poxy Gypos of less than 5000 years ago. They are not to be conflated even a little bit. We Australians could be seen as being closer to the ugly Pharaonic Egyptians. Since we are at the high-tech end of the Quarternary extinction. Whilst the earlier people I wish to focus on were at the high-tech end of what we may call the Mount Toba extinction.

We’ve got to get away from this idea that the Pharaonic Egyptians built the pyramids. These communists had no such capacity. We already know that the Sphinx precedes Pharaonic Egypt. We ought simply assume that this slave society had nothing to do with building the pyramids, until such time as we are proven wrong.

Propaganda to the contrary, this contention that the pyramids were built by the Pharaonic Egyptians, is nothing if not reminiscent of the communist who suggested to Carl Sagan that Shakespeare was surely the greatest of the Russian playwrights.

We ought to view ancient claims that the Pharaonic Egyptians built the Pyramids as just more religious/communist propaganda. Like claiming that Al Gore invented the internet, deserves the Nobel peace prize, an Oscar, along with the fact that Al Gore won the Tour De France, just before cleaning up in the boxing at Caesars Palace-Las Vegas.

I don’t have a name to call these people. But I don’t want them confused with the Pharoanic Egyptians. What to call them? I could call them the ice age technologists. The space age stone-cutters. But the thing is they probably weren’t about cutting stones at all. They likely just cannibalised the stones from the now underwater wreckage of their broken civilisation.

Scrolling back I see that I am identifying the disaster that wrecked their civilisation as being caused by the Vela Supernova. Hence I will call their civilisation Vela. I am putting a frame around this and thinking about the generations leading up to the supernova, and the two or three generations immediately after this same catastrophe. Hence I will call these people Velanovins.

The Problem With Giza.

“…….The courtyard of the Jupiter temple is situated upon a platform, called the Grand Terrace, which consists of a huge outer wall and a filling of massive stones.

The lower courses of the outer wall are formed of huge, finely crafted and precisely positioned blocks. They range in size from thirty to thirty three feet in length, fourteen feet in height and ten feet in depth, and weigh APPROXIMATELY 450 TONS EACH. Nine of these blocks are visible on the north side of the temple, nine on the south, and six on the west (others may exist but archaeological excavations have thus far not dug beneath all the sections of the Grand Terrace).

Above the six blocks on the western side are three even larger stones, called the Trilithon, WHOSE WEIGHT EXCEEDS 1000 TONS EACH. These great stones vary in size between sixty-three and sixty-five feet in length, with a height of fourteen feet six inches and a depth of twelve feet.

Another even larger stone lies in a limestone quarry a quarter of a mile from the Baalbek complex. WEIGHING AN ESTIMATED 1200 TONS, it is sixty-nine feet by sixteen feet by thirteen feet ten inches, making it the single largest piece of stonework ever crafted in the world.

Called the Hajar el Gouble, the Stone of the South, or the Hajar el Hibla, the Stone of the Pregnant Woman, it lays at a raised angle with the lowest part of its base still attached to the quarry rock as though it were almost ready to be cut free and transported to its presumed location next to the other stones of the Trilithon.

Why these stones are such an enigma to contemporary scientists, both engineers and archaeologists alike, is that their method of quarrying, transportation and precision placement is BEYOND THE TECHNOLOGICAL ABILITY OF ANY KNOWN ANCIENT OR MODERN BUILDERS ……. ”

There is no need to be in denial of this anymore. The Velanovins were better than us. And they had more time to get to a higher level of technical proficiency than us, because the time between the Velanovins and the prior extinction event was about 60 000 years. Whereas the time between us and the Vela Supernova is, by one estimate, 11712 years ago. Why would the Velanovins NOT be better than us?

That the Velanovins reached a higher level of technological capacity then us is in any case the proposition I will be running with for the time being.



  1. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “The one nagging doubt I have about your theory, Mr Bird, is that how can we believe you on the pyramids, when you can’t even tell if a chick has a dick? As I say, It’s just a slight nagging doubt.”

    Can you stop scaring our girls away Pedro/Warwick?

    Its undignified for you to be so overcome with jealousy and curiosity that you will even create a sock-puppet to try and draw Philomena out on this matter.

    Sinclair ought not have let this rubbish through.

    Thats all good stuff Mark. What is your point?

    12 Nov 09 at 1:19 am
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    It really is unbelievable what blockheads you people are. 179 billion dollars hasn’t lead to anyone finding a scintilla of evidence that CO2 is bad for the biosphere.

    Yet me on my own unpaid can quickly find that its good for the biosphere and can quickly find evidence that Supernova events will lead to local catastrophes.

    And yet you morons get both issues wrong. You get things back to front.

    Just imagine how stupid you people are from the following sentence that I was just about to write before I stopped myself:


    It is really Cambria that is the head blockhead here. We get so much blowback from subsidising morons and then taking these leaden-brain dopes seriously, specifically on the basis that they are rich through our subsidy.

    Imagine dealing with blockheads so utterly dense that you have to offer supplementary reasoning to the question of our survival.

    As you all know I was interested in pyramidal and cone-shaped buildings. Since to raise our living standards we need abundant living and working space. And getting these superior structural types is part of that. All I’ve added is domes to the picture. So its about busting out of our current expensive living space path-dependency.

    12 Nov 09 at 1:32 am
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    So Marks quotes have explained everything. Cones, domes and especially pyramids. The building form of choice for survivability. But also the building force for cost-effectiveness in bringing production up and costs down.

    Here is the results of a science project by a kid who is clearly a lot smarter than you blockheads.

    See we have a problem here. Because people in banking and the public service, as well as those like the economists who toady to such people….. UNIFORMLY GET EVERYTHING WRONG and cannot get a damn thing right.

    Its such a simple idea that this kids can get it right.

    12 Nov 09 at 1:36 am
    Leave a Reply

  2. “* One disappointing aspect in the proposed US reforms were the exemptions granted during times of war. Whilst this might on the face of it seem quite reasonably I suspect that in practice it would simply increase the government incentive for war.”

    Exactly right. War means matching ends and means. Thats a time when you need to, more than any other time, find spending cuts, so that strategy is appropriate, and so your act is a well-oiled machine. The costs of war must be taken away from the soldier to the extent that we can do it, and the sacrifice of war placed on the laps of public servants in terms of cutting off their salaries.

    The last thing you want to do is come out of war in debt. Since former friends will now start pushing you around, and the government of the day will have a bias to inflation. Thats one way you can win war and lose the peace. Which is what Americans have become adept at.

    To win wars we must think crisis and anti-Leviathan. We must reverse the historical calculus. War must be what THINS DOWN the state.

    If you look at how pathetic Washington is, its partly to do with how big its gotten. And how many bludger jobs were created after 9/11 when what was needed was a fearful culling as everyone had manifestly failed.

    We want tight money, big surpluses, and Canberra a ghost town, once we go to war (we are at War and we don’t have this. Which is part of how ineffectual we are being). They have to move to Alice Springs if they are serious. Because being serious means killing regime leadership. And there is obviously going to be some blowback from that.

    Comment by graemebird | November 13, 2009

  3. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “Who could drive this car to avert AGW?”

    This is an example of where we have just got to get beyond the foolishness of social pressure. The car looks like it must be a female, getting the full photo-shop treatment to make her look far thinner than she ought.

    But this is basically a motorbike with a metal skin. The most righteous of all vehicles for the peak-time commute and without exception. And if we had road-charging, the sensible thing would be to give cars like this a free ride. Since if thousands of them are taken in their totality, they don’t tend to take up much road space.

    That we haven’t overcome our social aversion to such a motor already, is due to the silliness of non-user-pays road provision, and the delusional nature of man, not weighing up the true risks of being without that metal skin.

    Road charging which gave cars like this a free ride in peak-time, bitch-slapped all peak-time normal car usage, got everyone on the rostering scenario,……

    well already we are getting to the end of the anti-economic congestion problem.

    You may have a magnificent high-performance vehicle in the shed. But if you are not absolutely filthy with the money, and you want to keep to your standard working hours, then the right charging scenario, will have you buying one of these just for the commute.

    And we see this social inhibition and the decades-long path-dependency with relation to houses and real-estate buggering us up as well:

    Everyone ought to see that it is CONES DOMES AND PYRAMIDS that are the natural building forms for the non-famously wealthy. These are the forms that will bring down living costs and allow us to survive the next Quarternary extinction equivalent.

    You don’t have to think of this sort of thing Cambria. You can say “Ho ho I’M alright Jack. Look at me. Look at me. I’m rich”.

    But your industry is subsidised billions each year. And your benefactors don’t always have it together like you and your welfare queen pals. 20 billion people could live on this earth if we had saturation nuclear and high-rise.

    But six billion will die on this earth if we cannot break out of the sort of stupidity that you seem to be so much in love with.

  4. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “You have no idea about banks and banking and even less about economics. go away.”

    See you are just a lying dog mate. I know about banks and banking. I worked in a bank. I’ve studied the theory of banking. The theory behind useful, and dysfunctional, speculation. I understand economics. I finished my last exam still a teenager. Habitually came in the top 5 in all the exams. Studied the ins and outs of four different schools of thought. Understood the various monetary systems going back hundreds of years.

    And I tell you straight you fucking parasite. You don’t need to raid the treasury and give all the money to bankers. And ponzi-schemes DO NOT (contrary to almost every dummy here), create more resources that can be turned into producer goods.

    The application of economic science does not, in agreement with your relentless base lying, lead to a pol pot or a North Korean scenario.

    You are just a fucking liar. Go away. Beat it. Ssssst.

    I mean what sort of a moron reckons that pyramiding up fake assets creates new wealth? Fucking hell. May as well get David Copperfield running the treasury with assistance from Bernie Madoff.

    You are just a blockhead mate. And you ought not be here getting in the way. You held up proceedings for two days because of your deadhead inability to understand simple concepts to do with ratios and statistics when it came to American productivity growth. And there is still no evidence that you have learnt anything.

    We have to put up with your constant bringing down of the quality of the thinking on this blog. Day after day. Around the clock. You never seem to sleep or go on holidays. Its a constant dumbing down which is of a sort of perniciousness simply not repeatable in others since only the banking industry produces stupid morons like yourself rich enough for people to listen to without any other reason why they ought to.

  5. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    I just resent the smallmindedness of you guys. That this blinkered puny-brained attitude has gotten so bad, that when you don’t agree with a female, you’ve got to make them feel grossed-out, uncomfortable, and dirty, just to be here.

    You didn’t do that to the Prodeo leftist chicks when they used to come around here. They left because THEY didn’t want to know. Now you are scaring women away because YOU don’t want to know.

    Exercise some decent blog standards here will you Sinclair. Warwick/Pedro/Adrien or whoever comes in ….. and its his first post …… and he’s insulting our sheilas in the worst imaginable way?

    Its just terrible what these law firms do to people.

    You never used to treat leftist chicks like that? Its just crazy. I suppose it was because you were all pussy-whipped and it was basically a leftist site when the Prodeo girls were here.

    Or perhaps they were young and single or something. Don’t you people have sisters and cousins and stuff? Aunties? Or are you guys all spoiled brat only children?

    Really I’m just fucking baffled is what I am. John Greenfield was a gentleman compared with you guys. Because when I pointed out that the abuse had gone a bit too long and was a bit strong then he backed off. I wasn’t hassling him for the abuse as such. Just that he’d forgotten how long he had gone with it.

    But you guys don’t seem to know when to back off. So its turned like an hysterical witch-hunt. See you are not rightists. Its our left that goes hysterical over women periodically at least once a decade. You are not one of us. You are all just a feeble tribe within the public sector heckle-and-jeckle, jackal-packs.

  6. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “I do think you might be on the wrong track re pyramids and obelisks, though, Birdie. Both these constructions are forms of megaliths that comprise three categories of structure none of which in the past was really intended for human habitation as such.”

    I never brought up obelisks. It was Fisk that brought them up and you that made them interesting.

    But when you are thinking of pyramids, you are thinking of the Giza pyramid, made of huge airtight rocks. Meant for the moon, any naive observer would have to think.

    Now because the pyramid was made of these rocks its still a mystery how it was built, and its not a practical building for the planet earth, barring all non-normal assumptions.

    By its very nature, being basically airtight, the pyramid doesn’t let air in, and there is a very small amount of space in comparison to the cost of putting it up and the size of it. Probably its building materials might still make it the heaviest structure in the world. But it certainly does not contain the most usable volume of inside space.

    The opposite is the case on moon. That same design, or that design very slightly altered, would be a magnificent thing for the moon. So unless we infer a far different purpose for the pyramid then we heretofore have done so, we have a building that appears to be in the wrong place, built at the wrong time, by people who ought not have been able to build it.

    But you cannot take this same conclusion to pyramids built with modern materials. Anything whose strength relies on long metal girders or poles or something of that nature, rather than short bricks …… pretty much any materials at all, reach their greatest stable volume in the pyramid, cone or dome form.

    Think of the flimiest materials that have provided shelter for you overnight. Exluding Nekau or Panga leaves or natural stuff you’ve cut from trees.

    The pup tent. One cannot deny the shape. Since you have just a few pegs, some thin material and a couple of poles, you are looking for the strongest shape for the flimsy materials provided. You naturally make a pyramid, a cone, or with some materials it will be a dome. Always we see the triumphant return of the teepee as the best possible shape.

    Hence it doesn’t matter what materials you are using. The cheapest shape to use for any given volume you want, the cheapest shapes net of real-estate costs, will be cones, domes or pyramids.

    13 Nov 09 at 12:36 am
    Leave a Reply

  7. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    The problem with the Americans is that they allow themselves to get manipulated into a sort of policy drift. And this goes for us too. Whereas I would tend to blame the sponsors in Riyadh and Tehran for the bodies piling up in Afghanistan, still surely it is not a logical contradiction for some people to blame Australians and Americans as the wave after wave (actually dribble upon dribble) of sponsored Pashtun goatherders get killed.

    If you are too gutless to kill regime leadership then it is time to go home. Whereas I blame globalism for the blissful security that the family Saud are in while these Pashtun goat-herders come up against Australians and die and their flesh rots.

    But if some people don’t blame the Sauds AND AFTER EIGHT YEARS start blaming us, then its not like they need to be insane to do so. People get turned by war if its not war but merely senseless mindless killing. And what we are involved in now is senseless mindless violence.

    Gutless cowardly killing as well when viewed from Rudd’s standpoint.

    I wouldn’t say that Philomena has been “turned” by eight years of war. I would say her wrongheaded socialist perspective has been reinforced beyond the power of people to persuade her otherwise. Because who do we blame for this appalling body count? I blame “policy drift” but I cannot prove logically that Australia isn’t to blame.


    War must be war against bigshots. Its got to be that way or its senseless. And its got to be fast and explosive then you go home, or it must be proxy war.

    I wouldn’t bother (CL and Fisk) going after what appears from our perspective to be a perverse perspective of Philomena’s. Because the stupidity and gutlessness in Washington and Canberra has muddied the waters. I blame the Arabs for the mountain of bodies of course. But if some people choose to blame someone else how can we prove them wrong?

    Its like trying to prove Murtha wrong. Murtha goes down to the veterans hospital. Boys coming home from the war except not all of them coming home. Read that again for the double meaning. So what if Murtha says a few stupid things. Do we really expect that he would not be turned around on the war? Its pointless to argue him point to point.

    The lesson is once you have stopped wanting to have leadership dangling from a rope with their legs twitching its time to come home.

    So I say that me, CL, and Fisk ought to concentrate on beating up on globalists. Its globalism that stops us from fighting wars in a crisp, and most particularly SHORT way. We must come home, and bring our treaty signatures back as well.

    Stop funding global organisations. Stop recognising outrages like the EU. And stop allowing banks to practice pyramiding and calling it wealth creation or freedom of contract.

  8. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “Put two and two together, and you will realise that I object to ideological bullshit on both sides of these debates. So, I can be both pissed off that Rudd upheld PIR and think you are off your rocker in thinking that fiscal policy has been ineffectual.”

    I’d want to untangle your confusion here Labour outsider. Banks need to be regulated alright. Since fractional reserve needs to be phased out and outlawed. And we want to be in a situation where prices tend to fall but total sales revenues tend to rise slowly.

    Secondly you may have gathered that Cambria is a moron. If so, you are definitely right in this supposition.

    Thirdly fiscal policy is effective in increasing GDP in the short run as well as average profits. But increasing GDP at all is counter-productive. What policy ought to do is increase nominal GDR. And increasing the share of profits rather than wages is perverse for a labour fellow, be he insider or outsider.

    I can answer all your questions whereas you will get nothing but idiocy from Cambria.

    Its true that the Americans have more total regulations than most others. This is designed to keep competition out and aid bigshot earnings. These are what one might call CARTELIZATION REGULATIONS and are not to be wished for.

    We see that the idea is not to be desirous of masses of regulations. Rather one needs the right regulations, to stop the banks committing fraud, or otherwise putting themselves in a position wherein they may need to be bailed out.

    So the concept of unregulated versus over-regulated versus insufficiently regulated is a furphy of the type that has allowed a real dope like Cambria to get rich. None of these bibshot bankers could hope to have earned much money under lawful free enterprise conditions.

    You will note that Hank Paulson is a moron. Most of them are like that now. Such skills as they have are useless under conditions where creating wealth is a natural prerequisite to making money.

    Now consider that Cambria is not only a moron but a person of low character. He points out quite rightly that moral hazard has been created and yet he was the traitor who demanded an American bailout, which amounted to the systematic looting of Americans for the purpose of subsidising bankers and Wall Street types.

    13 Nov 09 at 1:14 pm
    Leave a Reply

  9. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “The problem faced by reforming regulators; how do they boost bank lending whilst decreasing bank gearing levels?”

    The answer to this is very simple rog. And I’ve gone over it a thousand times. Both before and after the GFC. The science of monetary economics is not the least bit ambiguousness on this matter.

    13 Nov 09 at 4:06 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “The Ergas piece is a little disingenuous.”

    Labour outsider has a point. Labour outsider. What you must realise is that Sinclair and all other economists in Australia, think they will turn into a pillar of salt if they mention the phrase “Reserve Asset Ratio.”

    13 Nov 09 at 4:12 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Rogs quote of the Bank Of England is about the most dishonest slimy low-down corrupt quote I’ve ever seen attributed to an organisation.

    13 Nov 09 at 4:13 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “Laboroutsider – please do not insult our intelligence. If you want to debate the adults you have to do better.”

    You cannot be serious. Heretofore labour outsider has had to discuss matters with Cambria. The key matter is to understand the PURPOSE of regulation. So that this story gets beyond the inanity of whether it is more or less regulation that is needed. And onto the more adult level of WHAT REGULATION.

    13 Nov 09 at 4:35 pm
    Leave a Reply

  10. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “The problem faced by reforming regulators; how do they boost bank lending whilst decreasing bank gearing levels?”

    Under normal circumstances, this would have to be considered a powerfully incisive summary of the core of the problem. But consider how effective three years of obstruction from Fyodor, Reynolds, Chucklehead Hill, Soon , and Cambria has been.

    The answer has been here all this time. It simply comes with recognising monetary economics. And somehow breaking out of the mental limitations that are strategically set for Australian economists.

  11. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Phil makes a relevant point here since opponents of 100% backing sometimes take a crude libertarian view of things. And they suggest that in a perfect world most of the harmful abuse of fractional reserve would resolve itself. This is actually true if taken literally. But its not relevant.

    This is a typical libertarian Judas Goat perspective precisely because the banks and the government are never two entirely separate entities.

    The relationship between the bankers and the government varies between being merely in cahoots and being virtually the one entity with financiers as senior partners.

    This back and forth arrangement goes at least as far back to the bankers of Venice and the Medicis in Florence. Now the bankers control Washington to a great degree thanks to Cambrias mobster homeboys. In Australia the government appears to be in control and yet the banks take the lions share of the gains from new money creation?????????

    Without living in a perfect society run by Saints, phasing out fractional reserve is the only way to bring the banks, then the government, to heel. And the bankers have to be considered the more virulent enemy even then the big spenders in government and the socialists. The bankers are the first cab off the rank when it comes to restoring social decorum.

    13 Nov 09 at 6:38 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Philomena makes a relevant comment and the crony welfare queen Cambria gets all upset.

    13 Nov 09 at 6:39 pm
    Leave a Reply

  12. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “Bird, running interference for Phil is pretty disappointing. You can’t triangulate your way into justifying that……”

    She’s a communist. With communists, expect them to act like communists. I’m not supporting her for President. But virtually everyone here supported a communist for President. Which is the ethically challenged position to take? Mine or Cambria’s.

    You even judged Ron Paul by a much harsher standard then a mainstream candidate. Yes its true he only had half the story on terrorism. But there was no need to write him off on one matter alone since he was clearly superior in every other way.

    Not only is Philomena a communist, whom you must trust in all cases to BE communist. But she’s combative. So once a fight starts she has a retaliatory overlay and it begins to be hard to find out the valid point underneath the retaliation.

    Before she ever gets to talk to you Cambria has abused her two or three times and so the fight is on.

    I was pretty shocked too at her point of view. I asked her about it. She told me that:

    She didn’t support killing except in defence but the fact was that some people do resort to violence because they feel it necessary to preserve their own identity and integrity, their own lives.

    She said that him being a member of the US military, having witnessed or heard hundreds of stories about the trauma and pain experienced over there …… well that this could drive many people nuts. She pointed out what I myself had said which is to say “what did they expect?”

    I’m only supporting the idea that people not be REPETITIVELY rude to women and particularly not aggressively rude. Only rude in the retaliatory sense and then leave it at that.

    “Now Bird, I’m not going to get into all of the subjects involved – the detritus of these endless clashes with others, I mean. Mostly, that’s because I’m not bright enough to comment authoritatively on monetary economics or physics or philosophy.”

    You are the second smartest person here. Fisk your only competitor. You cannot be serious. You are only saying that on the grounds that you don’t want to back me up against jerks like Cambria, Reynolds, Fyodor these crony-town economists. You’ve always let Cambria off the hook.

    I don’t understand why Philomena singles you out. Same with Wanda and Tillman. But my guess is you would at least not copped as much grief from Phil if you had not always let the quisling off the hook.

    I tell you straight. I’d drink with Phil. I would not vote for her. But everyone here almost, rubbished Ron Paul and backed a communist named Adolf Hussein Osama FOR THE FUCKING WHITE HOUSE.

    For the most part you gave these monstrous people a pass. I’d let Soetoro discuss his vile ideas here without picking on him. I never did back him for high office. But these blokes back all quislings.

    My hands are clean on these matters.

  13. Mr B

    Have you seen what NASA (National Abrahamic Science Agency) have said about finding water on the moon?

    No doubt will be an excuse to further devalue our Ponzi Money. Also expect. B. Hussein Obama-Soetoro, President-Usurper and Grand Mufti In Clandestino, to establish work camps on the moon now.

    This portends Bad Times on the Horizon. Must retreat to bunker until it blows over. Hope you and yours are hardened up and armed up, locked and loaded and ready to go. Very upset I had to sell all my gold to pay credit card bills.

    See you on the flipside.



    1. Valid environmental concerns. So therefore aquaculture needs to come out of the tax system.

    2. Where there is a crossover with security policy. Therefore Maglev track investment might come out of the tax system so as to get together the facilities to bring down space launch costs.;

    3. Where we need to compensate people for putting them through massive debilitating change. Hence truck drivers would come out for five years when we laid down the congestion charging.

    4. Where we desperately need to bring down prices via massive investment. Hence medical services, education, even legal services once the anti-crony reforms are in.

    But this idea of stealing money off us, and blowing up shit on the moon so you can check the fucking dust. Someone has to be flogged in public for such a fucking outrage.

  14. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “That was a nice piece you wrote earlier CL”

    Thats a pretty pointed criticism of me isn’t it tal. I also note that when you were drinking whisky you said that:

    “Ny advise LOS is to say you are a nice looking chick with long legs. You will have JC’s full attention.
    Thank me later”

    Aint that the truth. But forgetting Cambria, as we always should, I assure you that shorter women are sexy too. If you don’t believe me just find the youtube of Salma Hayek on “From Dusk Till Dawn.”

    14 Nov 09 at 3:10 pm

  15. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “The answer to this is very simple rog. And I’ve gone over it a thousand times.”

    You can say that again! (no don’t, only joking)”

    Rog you are free to email me if you want me to explain it all without interference. You have indeed found the nut of the problem. But don’t expect any help solving it by bankers themselves. Or economists who are at least mentally under their sway. By way of being made to feel embarassed by their colleagues.

    The ideal person to explain this stuff clearly to you is an ex-banker, with an economics degree, not currently intimidated by being one of the people who rely on being economists for their income.

    Its easy stuff. But to explain it the bankers have to be out of the picture. Anyone who wants to learn about this can talk to me and I’ll talk to you.

    But leave these banking house-niggers outside.

  16. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    All she is doing is linking stuff that people ought to be concerned about. But if you get in a fight with her, by being reflexively abusive, she is going to start sounding like Genghis Khan. Then its just a matter of time before she gets in a slanging match with CL. So how about take an intellectual approach from here on in. She didn’t abuse you today. You are no mind-reader. Give her the benefit of the doubt.

    Here look. I’ll give you something to see if you can act intellectually.

    “It is believed the pyramid was built as a tomb for Fourth dynasty Egyptian Pharoah Khufu (Cheops in Greek) and constructed over a 20 year period concluding around 2540 BC.”

    That puts them in the third part of the early bronze age.

    Since when can you carve out thousands of perfectly planed GRANITE stones with bronze tools? Thats like trying to saw down a tree with a plastic Kentucky Fried Chicken knife.

    Does that not suggest Warwick, that there is something very wrong with our view of ancient history?

  17. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Right. That was great. But if you aren’t killing regime leadership its time to come home.

    15 Nov 09 at 3:55 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    See what you have done Warwick? Now we are into a pointless fight between CL and Phil thanks to you being pig. And now Cambria has weighed in with this insulting\moronic notion that Phil is a man.

    Phil is not a man Cambria you twat. Thats a bit like you. You are not a man either. You are dogs vomit.

  18. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Just to show you that Phil is a woman, I’ll upload a picture I took of her. She is wearing a mask to protect her identity. She has been worried about her cat lately as it has been sick. But the ill-health of the cat doesn’t quite come across in the photo I took.

  19. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Do you wish to make your pyramid able to screen out gamma ray bursts and some nuclear fallout? Here is your man.

    This is actually a very disturbing youtube in my view. Because he talks about a potential antigravity affect to do with planets and stars lining up. Any disturbance to gravity could set off supervolcanos one supposes, simply because the compression and gravity forces would be balanced and you don’t want any of that gravity to fail even the tiniest amount for the shortest time.

    Since then the balance would be maintained by inertial forces under acceleration. That youtube is the first thing I’ve seen that opens up the possibility of a disaster being set up by the alignment itself, rather than us being more vulnerable to a galactic centre explosion that hit us when we just happened to be in the wrong alignment.

    Mainstream views of gravity are fundamentally evasive and occultist. If you take a non-occult approach to gravity you are going to wind up thinking about these things.

  20. Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    Philomena take a look at these photos. Last time I showed this stuff not one of these blokes owned up to being able to see a human face. Notice this trickery where they bring out a cat from out of the human face. This may seem like a feeble trick. But its a repeating theme. This human/cat mystery comes up all over the place.

    I believe you will be able to see this. The contrary debate against my contention that the evidence leaned towards an ancient “lunar” outpost up there rested on these guys pretending to be blind. It rested on the Sargent Schultz impersonation, not of one of these guys, but of virtually all of them. Not one person admitted seeing any evidence at all.

  21. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    I can basically see and feel the inhibitions and the alarm bells in your heads. I can feel the fear. No-one wants to admit that they can see the face of a young Prince on Mars.

    We have raised generations of people who can be made to not visually see stuff if its too embarrassing for them to do so. If you can be socially controlled like this then there is not much hope for our fight against global elites continuing to enslave us further. Because you can be shown a survey of witness reports showing that overwhelmingly people witnessed bombs going off during the 9/11 demolitoin of three buildings. You can hear them on the tape. See the sqibs going up the building in non-random fashion and contrary direction.

    But then you cannot see any of it. If you cannot see the crowned prince or see the firemen and the mayor talking about molten iron well then you can be taught any story that our exploiters want to tell you.

  22. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Martians? I know of no such people. But you would expect at least some people of a high-tech society to have progressed as far as Prince Rogers Nelson in their musical-appreciation sophistication yes.

    I assumed that these guys were 3 million years ago following Van Flandern. Of course they could be 11-13 thousand years ago, bringing them in line with the hypothetical Velanovan culture.

    The very real problem is that no theory explains the ancient world Jason. Certainly not the mainstream theory which is utterly foolish. But its very hard to imagine a setup that does explain the pyramids, Baalbek and all that.

    Except the soft option theories where you say. “God did it” or “The Aliens Did It”.

    The only other way around the record is the Catallaxy route. The Reynolds route: If you don’t like implications of the evidence just try real hard and you can pretend it isn’t there.

  23. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Okay lets suppose no aliens. Lets suppose Velanovan culture. The same culture that built the Spinx, the pyramids and the big stones at Baalbek.

    We need to know one way or the other. We need to know and get it out there that the Supernova Vela destroyed this high-tech society, if indeed this is true. We need to prepare this time around. And we would need to find out just what it was about this society that could have produced such incredible technical ability during an ice age, without much in the way of middling technology finding its way inland.

    The only thing that could have done this is alien intervention or a Rothbardian setup.

  24. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Well yes CL. You are usually pretty good with this stuff. I’m not lumping you in with the rest of stupid-town here.

    15 Nov 09 at 10:29 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Okay lets suppose no aliens. Lets suppose Velanovan culture. The same culture that built the Spinx, the pyramids and the big stones at Baalbek.

    We need to know one way or the other. We need to know and get it out there that the Supernova Vela destroyed this high-tech society, if indeed this is true. We need to prepare this time around. And we would need to find out just what it was about this society that could have produced such incredible technical ability during an ice age, without much in the way of middling technology finding its way inland.

    The only thing that could have done this is alien intervention or a Rothbardian setup.

    15 Nov 09 at 10:32 pm
    Bird, the question of whether there was life on Mars billions of years ago is an open one. There is no evidence of a civilisation ever having existed on Mars. This type of thing is not evidence.

    15 Nov 09 at 10:33 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Yes it is evidence. Its just not terrific evidence on its own. You are atomising the evidence and then discarding each atom. I see it now that it fits better with the Velanovan culture then with the 3 million years ago thesis since it looks too familiar. Looks too “Egyptian” as it were. You see you didn’t atomise the evidence when it came to Saddam and 9/11 like everyone else did. But you are doing so now.

  25. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “If you scan enough surfaces you will find images a,b,c … . Happens all the time. ”

    Yes of course. But this could not be more irrelevant here. You are atomising the evidence just like CL is.

    You have to face up to the fact that atomising the evidence is a rare but revealing manifestation of irrationality in the both of you.

    15 Nov 09 at 10:45 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    We have to nail it down that atomisation of the evidence is without controversy irrational. When investigating matters to do with regime creation of terrorism. Or in archeology.

    This ought to be something that you both admit this time around. Or you will just be making the same mistakes.

  26. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Right. Google is a fantastic resource. Which allows for things simply not possible just a few short years ago.

    No we simply have to stop and get universal recognition of the wrongness of atomisation of evidence and the validity of the evidence that CL linked.

    It should be a very simple thing for everyone to recognise the wrongness of evidence-atomisation.

    15 Nov 09 at 11:04 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “He thinks we should all live in pyramids.”

    Cones, Domes and Pyramids are stronger and more cost-effective yes.

    See this CL. Once you and Leftie allow yourselves the luxury of even the smallest irrationalism, you have let me down. Because you have basically ushered in no holds barred shitrain of idiocy.

    Cambria is not up to commenting on this site. He’s constantly watering down the quality of this place. CL. You claiming wrongly that the picture you linked was not evidence. Its just not acceptable. Because thats leaving the door ajar for Reynolds and JC to bash down the door and go into a frenzy of utter stupidity and obstruction.

    The only solution is just to keep bashing Cambria and hope that he goes away.

  27. Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    You have to face up to the fact that a few isolated observations do not a theory make. Don’t even make a half decent idea. You need lots more evidence dude. You also have to face up to the fact that you failed a primary test of theory building: insufficient data. You are deducing too much from too little.”

    No no .None of this is relevant leftie. You were irrational. And you didn’t go back and fix it. Go back and fix it. The atmoisation of the evidence is irrational. So you are being irrational. The evidence is not isolated. You yourself are ISOLATING the evidence. The evidence is holistic. And you have chosen to atomise it.

    No-one has even negated CL on his mistakingly mixing up evidence with proof. Saying something isn’t evidence when clearly it is. Tossing out extremely valid evidence on the grounds that it isn’t proof.

    So you guys have completely screwed up right at step one in the process. And once you’ve done that, and are refusing to correct yourself, then any subsequent view you might have of the situation is rendered totally invalid.

    Its extremely disappointing. Its like your brains have shut down arbitrarily at this point as if you were saying “Don’t go there girl”..

    Its just like the people were with Saddam.

    1. He’s got terrorist training camps THATS NOT EVIDENCE
    2. there is a Jumbo at Salman Park THATS NOT EVIDENCE.
    3. Atta went to Prague 3 times but thats not evidence.
    4. The third time he met Al Ani but you cannot prove anything.
    5. Atta pulled out heaps of cash and went travelling at that time…. this proves that Atta stayed in the US

    You see how the person who doesn’t want to grasp the big picture is systematically ignoring the evidence in the case above. So nothing but a confession from Saddam, with pictures and video of him driving the plane and parachuting out of it, and then getting into a getaway car is going to satisfy him. An even that won’t help.

    Or take Reynolds. Faced with the overwhelming fact of molten iron in the three basements his response is that he hasn’t seen anything to do with that. The squibs going up the building don’t count. The explosions never happened. Doesn’t matter what the witnesses said at the time.

    So we have brazen irrationality in every case.

    16 Nov 09 at 3:31 am
    Leave a Reply

  28. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    If you have evidence of molten iron I would be interested to see it. So far I have seen some allegations of it being there, but no actual evidence.”

    “Allegations” Andrew? Allegations from the demolition workers that cleared away all the rubble?

    See how evidence becomes no evidence. Merely allegations.


    Seriously, there has to be websites where people think the same as you do about this crap. why wouldn’t go there and discuss it with them as you’d get a lot more input.”

    For starters Cambria, despite your own mental lameness, this is incredibly interesting stuff.

    Secondly now that the bulwark nation of our civilisation is being systematically looted and scuttled by your homeboys and the fellow you backed for President (great work), we need to know more than ever if it is the case, that the human race was high-tech before and lost it all. Because your incompetence when it comes to interpreting labour productivity will not save us. No-one has shown us authentic signs of recovery in the US. There is no bottom limit to where there economy can collapse to if they do not change their ways.

    Thirdly we have to get it going on any blog that simply ignoring evidence or argument that you don’t like can never be acceptable. So we have to have material that people are unfamiliar with, where they do not have skin invested. And yet where the social pressure runs against them recognising the evidence. Its critical that we wake the zombies up. And get rid of idiots like you Cambria, who simply cannot be woken up. Then we must circle back to the economics and politics and practice the same commitment to analysis.

    Fourthly there is likely to be a truly massive series of disasters sometime in the next few hundred years. Its almost certain. And I see no reason to rule out some sort of pretty bad effect from merely crossing the galactic centre. It won’t be apriori and extinction event or we’d have everything being wiped out every 25 600 years. But it could be reasonably bad nonetheless. Obviously we ought to take this into account. And it works in well with the necessity of being able to withstand extended nuclear war.

    Fifthly sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. We have on the table a brazenly fraudulent doomsday theory that is being used by global elites to further enslave us. Its far better to replace this rubbish with something that has a lot more validity to it.

    16 Nov 09 at 10:25 am

  29. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    I’ve found a fellow who appears to agree with me about likely Russian involvement in 9/11.

    Once you decide that you are not ethically allowed to simply ignore evidence, in the catallaxy fashion …… once you decide that this is unethical and unmanly, its hard to come to any other conclusion. Its hard to imagine anyone else who had the capacity to get all aspects of the job done.

    His name is J R Nyquist.

    • is he a jew?

  30. Apparently the Ancient Egyptians were quite fond of Marx and Engels.

  31. Well obviously not.

  32. “We’ve got to get away from this idea that the Pharaonic Egyptians built the pyramids. These communists had no such capacity.”

    Hmmm. It seems as though you’re wrong about that as well:

    “The Pharaohs of the Twenty-first Dynasty transported all the old Ramesside temples, obelisks, stelas, statues and sphinxes from Pi-Ramesses to the new site. The obelisks and statues, the largest weighing over 200 tons, were transported in one piece while major buildings were dismantled into sections and reassembled at Tanis. ”


  33. It wasn’t just an obelisk Graeme. It was an entire fucking city – temples, palaces, statues, the lot. If they can move an entire city and reassemble it you’re suggesting they can’t build a pyramid?


  34. If these were the pyramid-builders they would have effortlessly made a new city. Rather by your own testimony they didn’t do that. They moved the old city. Presumably because it was too hard an ask to build another.

    Sort of fits perfectly with what I was saying. We lack the evidence of these guys building a great many new stone blocks it seems.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: