13 Benghazis That Occurred on Bush's Watch Without a Peep from Fox News

The Republican inquisition over the attacks against Americans in Benghazi has never really gone away, but it appears as though in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing and the House Oversight Committee's Benghazi hearings this week there are renewed psycho-histrionics over Benghazi.

Lindsey Graham and Fox News Channel in particular are each crapping their cages over new allegations from an alleged whistleblower, while they continue to deal in previously debunked falsehoods about the sequence of events during and following the attacks. Fox News is predictably helming the biggest raft of hooey on the situation -- turning its attention to Hillary Clinton in an abundantly obvious early move to stymie her presidential run before it even begins.

So I thought I'd revisit some territory I covered back in October as a bit of a refresher -- especially since it appears as if no one, including and especially the traditional press, intends to ask any of these obnoxious, opportunistic liars about why they're so obsessed by this one attack yet they entirely ignored the dozen-plus consulate/embassy attacks that occurred when George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were allegedly "keeping us safe."

The Benghazi attacks (the consulate and the CIA compound) are absolutely not unprecedented even though they're being treated that way by Republicans who are deliberately ignoring anything that happened prior to Inauguration Day, January 20, 2009.

January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had beenmarried for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.

A few observations about this timeline. My initial list was quoted from an article on the Daily Kos which actually contained several errors and only 11 attacks (the above timeline contains all 13 attacks). Also, my list above doesn't include the numerous and fatal attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad during the Iraq war -- a war that was vocally supported by Lindsey Graham, John McCain and Fox News Channel.

Speaking of Graham, I ran a search on each attack along with the name "Lindsey Graham" in the hopes of discovering that Graham had perhaps commented about the attacks or raised some questions about why the administration didn't prevent the attacks or respond accordingly to prevent additional embassy attacks. No results. Of course. Now, this could mean the search wasn't exhaustive enough. But one thing's for sure: neither Graham nor any of his cohorts launched a crusade against the Bush administration and the State Department in any of those cases -- no one did, including the congressional Democrats, by the way.

This leads us to the ultimate point here. Not only have numerous sources previously debunked the Benghazi information being peddled by the Republicans and Fox News (for example, contrary to what the Republicans are saying, yes, reinforcements did in fact arrivebefore the attack on the CIA compound), but none of these people raised a single word of protest when, for example, American embassies in Yemen and Pakistan were attacked numerous times. Why didn't the Bush administration do something to secure the compounds after the first attacks? Why didn't he provide additional security?

Where was your inquest after the Karachi attacks, Mr. Graham? Where were you after the Sana'a attacks, Mr. Hannity? What about all of the embassy attacks in Iraq that I didn't even list here, Mr. McCain? Do you realize how many people died in attacks on U.S. embassies and consulates when Bush was supposedly keeping us safe, Mr. Ailes? Just once I'd like to hear David Gregory or George Stephanopoulos or Wolf Blitzer ask a Republican member of Congress about the above timeline and why they said nothing at the time of each attack. Just once.

Nearly every accusation being issued about Benghazi could've been raised about the Bush-era attacks, and yet these self-proclaimed truth-seekers refused to, in their words,undermine the commander-in-chief while troops were in harm's way (a line they repeatedover and over again during those years).

So we're only left to conclude the obvious. The investigations and accusations and conspiracy theories are entirely motivated by politics and a strategy to escalate this to an impeachment trial. In doing so, the Republicans have the opportunity not only to crush the president's second term, but also to sabotage the potential for a Hillary Clinton presidency.

Even if they never arrive at that goal, they have in their possession a cudgel formed of horseshit -- a means of flogging the current administration with the singularly effective Republican marketing/noise machine, including the conservative entertainment complex. Very seldom does this machine fail to revise history and distort the truth. Ultimately, they don't even need a full-blown impeachment proceeding when they have a population of way too many truthers and automatons who take all of these lies at face value -- not to mention dubiously sourced chunks of "truth" proffered by radio and cable news conspiracy theorists who, if nothing else, are masters at telling angry conservatives precisely what they want to hear: that the probably-Muslim president is weak on terrorism. And so they'll keep repeating "Benghazi-Gate, Benghazi-Gate, Benghazi-Gate!" without any regard for history or reality. Like always.

Read more »

'Alien Rain': Extraterrestrial Theories Explored On 'Unexplained Files'

A two-month rain storm in southern India may be the most compelling evidence yet that extraterrestrial lifeforms have visited Earth.

Between July 25 and Sept. 23, 2001, the Indian state of Kerala was drenched by bizarre red-colored rain unlike any seen previously, according to the latest episode of"The Unexplained Files," airing Sept. 25 on the Science Channel.

Godfrey Louis, a physicist based in Kerala, analyzed drops of the rain expecting the strange color would be a result of dust particles. But that didn't turn out to be the case.

"Dust particles do not have this irregular shape," Louis said in the program. "They are not transparent like this."

Louis noticed something else when he analyzed the crimson-colored water droplets under the microscope. In his opinion, the particles appeared to be alive, with some superficial similarities to blood cells -- although closer inspection revealed they were not blood cells.

At first, the official report from the Center for Earth Science Studies attributed the red rain to an exploding meteor that fell to Earth in the area a week before the first red rainstorm.

After working with the Tropical Botanic Garden and Research Institute, the official explanation was changed to spores, according to the Indian Express.

Researchers at Stintec, a lab in Sri Lanka, found something more shocking. Even though the so-called "spore cells" were replicating, not one trace of DNA could be found.

Louis believes that the spores were on the meteor that exploded over Kerala prior to the rainstorm.

He said research showed that the supposed space cells managed to continue replicating even under temperatures exceeding 572 degrees Fahrenheit.

"It was growing at temperatures that would kill other lifeforms," Louis said on the show.

British-based astrobiologist Chandra Wickramasinghe believes that the "alien rain" theory is not only plausible, but likely, especially since 100 tons of space rock hits Earth daily.

"The existence of life outside the Earth is amazingly regarded as an extraordinary hypothesis, but I would argue that the extraordinary hypothesis is that this tiny minute piece of dust we call the Earth is the center of life in the universe and that no life exists even next door to it," Wickramasinghe told the program.

Earlier this year, Wickramasinghe also announced he had discovered tiny fossils inside a meteorite found in Sri Lanka in December. He used this finding to promote "panspermia," a theory that life exists throughout the universe and is distributed by meteoroids and asteroids.

Louis and Wickramasinghe's red rain theories are inspiring a storm of controversy, but the possibility of actual proof that life on other planets is clouded with some chilling realizations.

Earlier this year, researcher Anil Samaranayake released a paper in the Journal of Cosmology suggesting that the cells found in red rain pose a possible risk to Earth.

"A high concentratrion of uranium was found in the outer crust of the unicellular organisms," Samaranayake said.

Read more »

Could Earth Defend Itself From An ET Invasion?

While it's true that Russia has a very sophisticated air defense system capable of engaging and taking down targets at near-space altitudes -- as reported by RIA Novosti, Russia's leading news agency -- there's one potential enemy that country isn't ready to confront: aliens from space.

During a recent conference at the Titov Main Test and Space Systems Control Center near Moscow, a journalist asked if Russia's vast array of security systems could protect the country from a possible extraterrestrial invasion, according to Russia Today.

"So far, we are not capable of that," center deputy chief Sergey Berezhnoy responded. "We are unfortunately not ready to fight extraterrestrial civilizations. Our center was not tasked with it. There are too many problems on Earth and near it."

OpenMinds.tv reports that the Titov space center, controlled by the Aerospace Defense Troops, monitors space objects and identifies potential threats to Russia in space and from space -- but there doesn't seem to be a clearly defined plan from which to defend against ruthless ETs.

Taking this to the next level includes asking if any single or group of nations on this planet could successfully fend off an alien invasion.

To be sure, no government has ever confirmed the existence of a spacecraft under ET control. Many countries over the years, however, have scrambled pilots to chase unidentified flying objects. While these objects could have been many things, if they were from a distant planet, we might assume that the technology needed to travel so far vastly exceeds our own capabilities.

To explore that issue, it helps to consider if there has ever been a single instance where a UFO encounter by military or civilian eyewitnesses could have been construed as a sample of earthlings confronting a superior, out-of-this world technology.

In 1969, the United States Air Force terminated its 20-year UFO study known asProject Blue Book. Of the 12,618 sightings reportedly studied by the military, 701 remained "unidentified."

Project Blue Book -- and, therefore, the military and government -- publicly concluded that 1) no UFO investigated by the Air Force indicated any national security threat; 2) no UFOs investigated represented "technological developments or principles beyond the range of present-day scientific knowledge"; and 3) there was no evidence "indicating that sightings categorized as 'unidentified' are extraterrestrial vehicles."

Despite those official pronouncements, other things happened that, when truly examined, appeared to contradict the government's stance on UFOs. Was the public lied to about UFOs for many decades and if so, why?

The following items are just the tip of what may be a very big iceberg. These haven't been fabricated -- all are true events.

1947: Amid reports of disc- or saucer-shaped objects outperforming any known aircraft, a top secret evaluation was performed by the Air Material Command, headed by Lt. Gen. Nathan Twining, which stated that the reported circular objects were "real, not imaginary, flat on the bottom, domed on top and capable of intelligent, evasive maneuvers."

1966: U.S. Treasury Agent Donald Flickenger and several Border Patrolmen in North Dakota witnessed an astounding display of maneuverability by a UFO which defied the known and accepted scientific principles of physics and gravity. "What I saw was a metallic object that appeared to be about 30 feet in diameter and was probably about 15 feet tall at its highest point -- disc-shaped, no sound to the object at all. It hovered in our area for about three minutes, about 20 to 30 feet off the ground. Suddenly it rose up, turned over on edge, and the only thing I could see at that point were three knob-like structures that were sticking out from the underside of the object. It started spinning very rapidly, and as it spun, it started lifting up in the air and picked up speed, and all of a sudden, with a real sharp burst of speed, shot straight up in the air and was gone in a matter of seconds!"

1973: A terrifying encounter took place between a four-man crew aboard an Army helicopter and a UFO over Ohio. The mid-air drama was witnessed by several ground observers and is considered one of the most impressive sightings in history. The helicopter commander, Maj. Larry Coyne, and his crew thought at first that the light on the horizon was a radio tower beacon: "The crew chief informed me that the light was closing on the helicopter -- coming at us on a collision course," Coyne told this reporter in 1975. "I observed that the object became bigger and the light became brighter, and I began to descend the helicopter toward the ground to get out of the collision course path. It was like a missile locked onto the helicopter. We braced for impact and I looked up and observed this craft stopped directly in front of us -- stopped -- it was hovering right over the helicopter!" Coyne and his crew described the craft as "cigar-shaped, no wings, no vertical or horizontal stabilizer, approximately 60 feet long and 20 feet in height."

Coyne went on to describe how a bright green light came out of the UFO and turned the whole cabin of the helicopter green. And then they realized that their helicopter was somehow being pulled up, "climbing 1,000 feet a minute, with no changes in the control. We went from 1,700 feet to 3,500 in a matter of seconds and never knew it!" The UFO eventually released the helicopter and the Army didn't attempt to prevent the crew from telling their story to the press. Several years later, Coyne was allowed -- through efforts from this reporter -- to recount the UFO incident in front of the Special Political Committee of the United Nations -- a presentation, incidentally, that the U.K. tried to prevent from happening.

Watch a television segment focusing on the Coyne UFO-Helicopter encounter:

http://www.youtube.com/embed/4uxF9tRPIhM

1980: Peruvian air force fighter pilot Col. Oscar Santa-Maria was ordered to takeoff and shoot down a sphere-shaped UFO that was in restricted airspace near an air base. Of the more than 20-minute encounter, Santa-Maria, an expert pilot, told a panel of former members of Congress earlier this year, "It was trying to avoid me while I was pursuing it and I was trying to fire. When I first fired, these were bursts of 30 millimeter shells -- a single one can destroy a truck. I shot 64 and nothing happened at all. The possibility of not hitting my target was practically impossible." The object Santa-Maria chased was 30 feet in diameter, with a dome on top, no visible engine, wings or windows. "Once I landed, I met with intelligence officers and we looked at all catalogues to see what possible spy object this might have been, but there was nothing similar to what I had observed, and we were unaware of any type of technology like this on Earth that existed."

1997: Former Arizona Gov. Fife Symington mocked thousands of people who claimed to see mysterious lights over Phoenix. He even brought out one of his staffers dressed in a cheesy ET costume during a press conference. Ten years passed before Symington apologized and admitted that he, too, witnessed an extraordinary, boomerang-shaped unknown flying craft over Phoenix. "I was expecting to see something in the distance, but was awestruck when this thing went overhead, moving steadily and quietly," Symington told HuffPost, also admitting a taboo about elected officials and UFOs. "If you hold a high public office, then the minute you start talking about UFOs or extraterrestrials, the media immediately tees off and ridicules it. If you're an elected official, you really need to be careful about what you say, because the media can just totally destroy your credibility."

There are many more credible stories like the above UFO encounters. Yet, they seem to contradict the ongoing official Air Force contention that there's nothing of technological or scientific interest worth pursuing.

Someone is obviously not telling the truth.

It would probably be a good idea if the countries of the world were united as Earthlings in case some evil-doer extraterrestrials decide to stop by to check out our vulnerabilities as a species. Better to be friends instead of appetizers.

Read more »

Patent confirms that aspartame is the excrement of GM bacteria

In 1999, The Independent published an article entitled "World's top sweetener is made with GM bacteria," which revealed that Monsanto was knowingly adding aspartame to soft drinks in the United States - and that aspartame is made from GM bacteria. This report, which remains one of the earliest disclosures on aspartame in a mainstream newspaper, received little attention after its publication - possibly because its implications were underestimated at the time - and it has long been forgotten.

Since 1999, the world has become a little more attentive to Monsanto and aspartame, but ignorance still abounds about the latter's genesis. While more and more people are starting to awaken to aspartame's destructive effects on our health, do they know how it is actually made? Fortunately, a 1981 patent for aspartame production, once confined to the drawers of patent offices, is now available online for everyone to see - and it confirms everything that Monsanto was happy to tell us in 1999 before their meteoric growth necessitated greater prudence.

The production process

The patent, which is entitled Process for producing aspartame and is credited to Bahl, Rose, and White, summarizes the process as follows:

"The artificial sweetener aspartame, a dipeptide with the formula Asp-Phe-me, is produced using a cloned micrcorganism [sic]. A DNA which codes for a large stable peptide comprised of the repeating amino acid sequence (Asp-Phe)n is inserted into a cloning vehicle which in turn is introduced into a suitable host microorganism. The host microorganism is cultured and the large peptide containing the repeating Asp-Phe sequence is harvested therefrom. The free carboxyl group of the large peptide is benzylated and then hydrolysed to benzyl Asp-Phe dipeptides. This dipeptide is methylated and then debenzylated to form aspartame."

This scientific jargon obfuscates (perhaps deliberately) a truly disturbing process:

1.) 'Cloned microorganisms' (which the patent later reveals to be genetically modified E. coli) are cultivated in tanks whose environments are tailored to help them thrive.

2.) The well-fed E. coli cultures defecate the proteins that contain the aspartic acid-phenylalanine amino acid segment needed to make aspartame.

3.) The proteins containing the Asp-Phe segments are 'harvested' (i.e. lab assistants collect the bacteria's feces).

4.) The feces are then treated. This includes a process of methylation (adding an excess of the toxic alcohol, methanol, to the protected dipeptide).

While common sense dictates that this abomination doesn't belong anywhere near our bodies, the patent's authors made no secret about their belief that aspartame constitutes a safe and nutritious sweetener:

"Aspartame is not only sweeter than sucrose, but is preferable as a food to sucrose. While sucrose can provide the body with little more than energy, aspartame is composed of amino acids, the building blocks of body proteins, and like other proteins is broken down by the digestive enzymes in the stomach to its constituent amino acids thus providing nutritive value. [...] For these reasons, aspartame holds significant promise in replacing sugar as a sweetener."

So there we have it: An official document that not only reveals the shocking truth behind aspartame production, but also freely admits that it was intended for mass consumption as a sucrose substitute. Therefore, the next time someone claims that your reservations about this sweetener are unfounded, direct them to this patent - the truth behind aspartame is now in plain view.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.independent.co.uk

http://www.freepatentsonline.com

http://science.naturalnews.com

Read more »

TED aligns with Monsanto, halting any talks about GMOs, 'food as medicine' or natural healing

Allow me to be the first to announce that TED is dead. Why? Because the group that organizes so-called "TED talks" has been thoroughly hijacked by corporate junk science and now openly rejects any talks about GMOs, food as medicine, or even the subject of how food can help prevent behavioral disorders in children. All these areas of discussion are now red-flagged from being presented on any TED stage.

This is openly admitted by TEDx itself in a little-known letter publicly published on December 7, 2012. Click here to view the letter.

In that letter, TED says that people who talk about GMOs are engaged in "pseudoscience." Those who discuss the healing potential of foods are spreading "health hoaxes."

The letter also advises TEDx organizers to, "reject bad science, pseudoscience and health hoaxes," meaning anyone who talks about GMOs, "food as medicine" or similar topics.

The TED organization, incredibly, believes that food cannot be medicine and does not contain medicine. Perhaps someone should educate TED about resveratrol, curcumin, phycocyanins, polyphenols and ten thousand other chemicals created by plants that have medicinal functions in the human body. To deny this is to nearly admit you believe the Earth is flat and that the sun and stars revolve around our planet. It is a sure sign of a feeble mind that cannot grasp the very simple and readily evident idea that the human body evolved in an environment full of plants with beneficial physiological effects, including many medicinal effects.

Maybe someone should remind TED that nearly 25% of all prescription medicines are in some way derived from plants, including statin drugs. Drug companies expend enormous resources searching the world's botanical treasures for amazing molecules that they can pirate from nature and alter in some way to make them patentable as a drug. Even the World Resources Institutereadily admits this, while also reminding us that 80 percent of the world population still relies largely on plant-based medicine.

TED apparently thinks 80 percent of the world population is purely delusional, because obviously, as TED insists, real medicine can only come from pharmacological factories spewing out deadly chemicals, right?

TED falls in line with Monsanto: no talks that question GMOs will be allowed

It's a sure sign that you've jumped into a circle of dogma when the very act of asking intelligent questions is no longer allowed. Any speakers who might ask questions about genetically engineered foods are strictly forbidden by TED. This makes TED a source of pseudoscience because it censors and silences any dissenting views that don't align with Monsanto and the Frankenfoods biotech industry.

The TEDx letter mentioned above actually claims that anyone who questions the wisdom of genetically engineering food crops grown in open fields is a quack or a hoaxer.

Read the letter yourself. It reads as if it were written by someone with the intellectual capacity of an 8th grader -- someone who is so naive that they still haven't caught on to the fact that corporations routinely lie to the world by hijacking science to push their agenda of profit and domination. And it makes you wonder just how stupid TED thinks the public really is on the subject of GMOs. Even though 90% of the public believes GMOs should be labeled on foods, TED thinks anyone who dares talk about GMOs is spewing "pseudoscience."

Does TED also think that spraying the world with glyphosate is a boon to mankind? Does TED even know what glyphosate is and how glyphosate causes cancer at concentrations of parts per billion?

TED's letter filled with false information

The TEDx letter attacking "pseudoscience" is, itself, filled with factually false information. The letter says, "Andrew Wakefield's attempt to link autism and vaccines was exposed as a hoax last year."

That statement is blatantly false. For starters, Dr. Wakefield never conducted any studies whatsoever that linked autism and vaccines. That is a complete fabrication / delusion invented by the intellectually dishonest critics of Dr. Wakefield. TEDx obviously believes that if a lie is repeated often enough among critics of real science, that lie become a "truth."

Secondly, the actual hoax is on the medical journals and critics of Dr. Wakefield who were caught deliberately lying about his research and inventing wildly false claims in order to try to discredit him. They are currently being sued over their false allegations, by the way, and as the facts of this lawsuit come out, Dr. Wakefield will be completely vindicated.

For the real evidence that TED doesn't want you to see on Dr. Wakefield, check out these articles:

BMJ admits that fraud claim against Dr. Andrew Wakefield has no basis in fact

Documents emerge proving Dr Andrew Wakefield innocent; BMJ and Brian Deer caught misrepresenting the facts

Dr Wakefield demands retraction from BMJ after documents prove innocence from allegations of vaccine autism data fraud

Other areas of investigation banned by TED

It turns out that TED isn't only a proponent of GMOs, vaccines and whatever corporate-sponsored status quo science is currently being spouted -- it's also wholly aligned against a wide range of topics it considers "pseudoscience."

These so-called "pseudoscience" topics include:

• Consciousness, free will and the non-material "mind"

• "The fusion of science and spirituality" -- as if higher spiritual awareness is somehow not a valid pathway for the discovery of truth.

• Nearly all neuroscience.

• The placebo effect, something that has been experimentally proven to exist through tens of thousands of clinical trials.

• Any and all "healing," including Reiki or hands-on healing, healing touch, etc.

Yep, according to TED, these are all pure hokum and bunk. There is no placebo effect, they insist, even though it has been experimentally proven to be the strongest across-the-board form of medicine available today. The reason they cannot acknowledge the existence of the placebo effect is because it is contingent upon the interaction between the body and the mind. Because TEDx and its cabal of closed-minded junk scientists cannot admit to the existence of a non-material mind, they also cannot admit to the existence of the placebo effect even though their own experiments prove its existence beyond any rational doubt.

In fact, the placebo effect is so widely documented that in order to discard it, you would have to throw out all randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies altogether. Is TED saying that all such studies are bunk because, taken as a whole, they show the placebo effect to be statistically significant in its effectiveness?

See, this is how TED destroys its own argument (and credibility). If the placebo effect doesn't exist, then virtually all modern clinical trials must be deemed invalid, and that means TED doesn't believe in any real science at all.

TED is a cult of "scientism"

Like the Church that once suppressed scientific understanding long before the Age of Reason, TED is now part of the new Cult of Scientism, a dogmatic circle jerk of intellectual bullies who insist the only "science" that's true is their own selected brand of corporate-sponsored science. All legitimate science is excluded and attacked if it dares question the core beliefs of the Cult of Scientism. Those beliefs include some real whoppers, such as, "Corporate science is the only science that counts," and, "GMOs are automatically safe, even without long-term testing, because we say they are."

In this cult, there is no room for the simple, scientific act of questioning today's scientific beliefs. "Bad science," says TED, is anything that "has failed to convince many mainstream scientists of its truth."

This, of course, is nothing more than "mob science" which isn't really science at all. If new science were only recognized once all the existing scientists were convinced of its truth, then science would never have advanced.

According to TED, then, in 1616, then, the idea that the Earth was spherical would have been considered "bad science." TED would have agreed with the "Congregation of the Index" which cited holy scripture and decreed the Earth stood still and the Sun and stars revolved around it. Anyone who questioned this belief would have been attacked as a pusher of "pseudoscience" by TED.

The idea that invisible, microscopic bacteria spread disease would have been considered "bad science," too, because before the invention of the microscope, most "scientists" thought the idea of a microbiological world of invisible living organisms was sheer lunacy. When a now-famous doctor named Semmelweiss suggested that doctors should wash their hands between delivering babies, he was condemned by the "scientific" community and fired from his job. Meanwhile, an alarming number of women giving birth soon died from infections. This would have been completely acceptable to TED, as it was the "science" of the day, and "science" cannot be questioned.

(For historical references, see my article entitled, Why Doctors are Idiots: 150 Years of Disastrous Advice on Children's Health.)

Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity would have been considered "bad science," too. It was such a whacky theory that almost nobody believe it was true (at first).

In fact, throughout the history of scientific discovery -- microbiology, quantum physics, genetics and epigenetics, cosmology and chemistry -- any self-proclaimed scientist who declared "we now know everything and no new questions can be asked" is now seen in retrospect to be a complete fool.

Real science explained to TED

Science is not a static collection of knowledge, it is a process of exploring the nature of reality to discover and embrace new truths that very often displace old truths. Anyone who believes that science is "fixed" and that modern-day scientists have somehow stumbled upon the final answers to everything is nothing short of a complete fool. The great strength of the scientific method is that it is based on the asking of questions, even in the face of self-important, delusional "scientists" who have convinced themselves they are the final word on the subject at hand.

Through the process of asking questions and being willing to explore unexpected answers, science has made tremendous advances in understanding the material universe (although science has utterly failed to understand the non-material universe).

And yet, like any method of exploring the nature of reality, science is fallible. Science has made tremendous, horrifying mistakes such as giving pregnant women thalidomide as a morning sickness drug, or using African Americans for medical experiments in the Tuskegee affair. Science has created weapons of mass destruction and actually dropped them on civilian populations in Japan. Science invented DDT, Agent Orange and countless other toxic chemicals which now threaten the very survival of the human species.

See some of these failures of science in my related mini-documentary called "The Dark Side of Science"



Just this week, the CDC openly admitted that the era of antibiotics -- brought to you by pharmacological science -- is now coming to an end, and all of humanity is now threatened by superbugs for which chemical treatments are just about to run out. That's another little gift from the world of scientific pharmacology: deadly superbugs that could become the world's next deadly plague.

You won't hear TED talks about these subjects, because TED is dead. And by that, I mean TED's "mind" is utterly and completely closed to the really important ideas that we must discuss, explore and debate as a civilization if we hope to survive this "age of toxicity" that science has unleashed upon us. Instead of being open to "ideas worth spreading," TED simply declares all ideas it does not agree with as being pseudoscience. That approach requires no thought, no investigation and no real science. That's why it is also the same approach used by the status quo "scientific" community to push GMOs, mercury-laced vaccines and other deadly toxins on our world.

Why the "Berlin Wall" of closed-minded science will doom humanity to its own destruction

In a time when humanity desperately needs revolutionary, progressive ideas to survive its own destruction, TED is stuck in a 1950's mindset of "better living through chemistry." TED is like the 16th-century scientist who warns that if we sail our ships too far into the unknown, we will fall off the edge of the ocean and die.

Right now, humanity is suffering alarming rates of mysterious diseases such as autism, autoimmune disorders, infertility and cancer. Corporate-driven science has zero answers to these issues. The status quo "scientific" community exists in a total state of denial over the causes of these diseases, even absurdly insisting that injecting children with trace levels of mercury in vaccines is somehow "good" for children, as if mercury were a nutrient.

The biodiversity of our natural world is in a state of unprecedented collapse. The Earth biosphere is dying from toxicity, and that toxicity has been unleashed in the name of "science" via genetic pollution (GMOs), agricultural pollution (insecticides such as neonicotinoids), industrial pollution (which harms waterways and oceans), medical pollution (ionizing radiation and chemical medications) and food pollution (toxic heavy metals are now routinely being found in foods). This has all been done in the name of "science."

TED doesn't want you to hear about any of this. You are a "hoaxer" and a pusher of "pseudoscience" if you believe in any of this, apparently. And by God, don't you dare suggest that food is your medicine -- as Hippocrates wisely said -- or you will be called a "quack."

So thank you, TED, for showing you total insanity, your complete detachment from reality, your abandonment of humanity and your offensive, incestuous relationship with the Monsantos of the world. It is organizations like you, TED, that are destroying humanity by attacking the very people who possess the desperately-needed answers to saving humanity from its own destruction at the hands of closed-minded "science."

TED also aggressively attacks the very idea of consciousness, pretending that humans are nothing more than biological robots with no minds, no spirit, no soul, no consciousness and no free will. This is the position parroted by utterly misinformed "scientists" like Stephen Hawking, whose view of humanity is as dark and pessimistic as any we have ever witnessed.

For a full exploration of this issue covering Stephen Hawking's monumental mistake in failing to recognize the existence of consciousness, see my science documentary called "The God Within."

Learn the truth about science you're not supposed to know

Unlike today's corporate-driven scientists, I don't claim to have all the answers, but where I'm a quantum leap ahead of most modern-day status quo scientists is that I still believe in the scientific method of asking questions. Apparently, this act of asking questions is now utterly disallowed in today's dogmatic "science" cult.

I also have a strong scientific background, which terrifies GMO pushers and pro-vaccine child killers. I have a bachelor of science degree with a minor in mathematics and I'm fluent in the fundamental concepts of microbiology, chemistry, physics, anthropology, genetics, cosmology, nutrition science, environmental science, physiology and many other areas.

And what I've discovered from observing and writing about science for over a decade is that modern-day scientists suffer from a dangerous epidemic of arrogance that's actually standing in the way of real scientific advancement.

Sir Isaac Newton famously explored all sorts of bizarre ideas -- including delving heavily into the occult -- in his search for answers of how the universe works. If TED had been around in Newton's days, it would have banned Newton from speaking because his ideas "hadn't convinced the majority of other scientists" of their merits. Newton's laws of motion would have been called "quackery" because everybody knows that steel balls fall much faster than feathers, right? It's obvious, isn't it? How could they both possibly be accelerated at the same rate by gravity? TED would have banned such a talk.

So now, TED has become a re-hash of old, outdated ideas that brought us to these global problems in the first place. TED's answers to problems are apparently the same as Big Pharma's answers: more drugs, more vaccines, more chemicals, more corporate patents and more profiteering from human suffering.

Most of the world strongly disagrees with TED

For the record, most of the population of our world agrees with the fundamentals of what I'm saying here. Most of the world disagrees with TED's minority opinion on science and pseudoscience.

Specifically:

• Most of the world believes in the existence of mind and spirit
• Most of the world uses medicinal plants, not prescription drugs, as their primary source of medicine
• Most of the world agrees food contains medicinal properties and can be used medicinally to prevent disease
• Most of the world agrees the mind influences body physiology
• Most of the world agrees that GMOs should be questioned, relying on the precautionary principle rather than risking the entire genetic future of global agriculture with an unwise roll of the dice (open-air GMO experiments)

TED's disagreement with the majority of the world population on these issues puts TED in a desperate minority of monopoly-minded intellectual bullies who cannot win any intelligent discussion on the issues so they resort to censorship, bullying, intimidation and sheer arrogance to try to limit the public discussion of ideas they don't like.

That's not science. That's dogma.

Beyond TED - a new forum for leading thinkers

Despite its intellectual failings, we must thank TED for exposing itself as a backwards, intellectually-dead circle jerk of corporate-backed poison pushers who offer nothing but suffering and destruction to humanity. Because that creates an opportunity for the rest of us to get together and create our own public forum of truly progressive, groundbreaking ideas that can move humanity forward.

What I'm envisioning is a "New Science" forum where we invite Dr. Bruce Lipton, Dr. Rupert Sheldrake, Graham Hancock, Dr. Andrew Wakefield and all the other brilliant people who are no longer welcome at TED conference because their ideas are simply too revolutionary to be stomached by the old school apologists for corporate-backed anti-science.

I don't personally have time to start such an event this year because, ironically, I'm working in the Natural News Forensic Food Lab and conducting real science in the realm of food investigations, but if someone else doesn't start a new science speaking event within the next few years, I may take up the task myself.

In this event, we would openly welcome talks on consciousness, hands-on healing, neuroscience, environmental science, spirituality, meditation and all the other areas that are too advanced to be tolerated or even understood by the ignorant TED organizers.

TED could have been something great by doing precisely this, but instead it chose to silence the truly brilliant minds of our time and force-feed people a total line of corporate-backed bunk that pushes GMOs, brain-dead materialism and synthetic chemicals as the answer to everything.

TED is dead. But real science moves forward, with or without the TED bullies who desperately try to stop it.


Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/042112_TED_conferences_pseudoscience_GMO.html#ixzz2qtxlF6BT

Read more »