What are the connection between Angkor Wat in the Jungle of Cambodia, the Pyramid in the desert of Egyptian desert, and monuments on Easter Island and in Micronesia? What is the under water mystery in Japan, the last time it above water was 10,000 years ago? Our ancestors are highly intelligent people, thousand years ago they precisely predicted the solar eclipse over Mexico in 1991.
In this set of three videotapes, writer Graham Hancock traverses the world and explains his controversial theory that an ancient civilization, highly intelligent people who sailed the planet as early as 10,500 B.C., spread advanced astronomical knowledge and built ancient observatories.
Get Graham’s new book:
Skeptics may scoff, but Hancock earnestly points out similarities in giant stone structures in the Egyptian desert and Cambodian jungles, and on Easter Island and in Micronesia, he points out what he considers evidence of an ancient society of seafarers. His ideas may seem utterly bizarre at first, but Hancock presents them in an understated and good-natured manner, and he also makes clever use of computer graphics and aerial photography to illustrate the startling similarities in ancient structures found from the North Atlantic to the South Pacific.
A powerful documentary produced and narrated by activist-actor Sean Penn, “The Human Experiment,” argues that there are dangers from the “chemical load” in seemingly innocuous household products like cosmetics, deodorant, cleaning fluids, shampoo and even toothpaste.
The film cites skyrocketing rates of autism, breast cancer and infertility and questions the role of some 80,000 chemicals used legally in the United States and the uphill battle against powerful interests of industry to curb the chemicals.
Co-directed by Dana Nachman and Don Hardy, a former Emmy-winning TV news team, it tells the stories of three women affected by chemicals and the activists calling for sensible, science-based research and greater regulation to protect public health.
“Most products we have in our homes are not tested for safety,” said Nachman, 41 and a Los Altos-based filmmaker. “Providing data that a product is safe and then putting it on the market is what happens in pharmaceuticals. That should be the burden of proof [in household and industrial chemicals] to avoid scientific catastrophe.”
The film follows a young woman diagnosed with breast cancer; another with polycystic ovary syndrome, struggling to get pregnant; and one with a nonverbal brother with autism.
They, too, wonder how chemical toxins may have played a role these health problems.
Get your copy today here
The film looks at several chemicals that have been linked to disease in humans and are still in legal use.
Bisphenol A or BPA, is an industrial chemical that has been present in many hard plastic bottles and metal-based food and beverage cans since the 1960s.
Toxicity studies have shown “some concern” about its effects on the brain, behavior and prostate gland in fetuses and young children, according to the Food and Drug Administration.
The EPA is currently investigating BPA, which has estrogen properties and is an endocrine disrupter, for human health risks.
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) is used in building materials as well as vinyl clothing, and has been linked to cancer and immune system damage. Several national companies have begun to transition to PVC-free packaging.
Since 2004, there has been a national phase-out of bromated flame retardants that are used in sofas and in electronics. The chemical can end up in breast milk and body fat, causing thyroid and reproductive damage. Particles can fall to the floor and leave dangerous dust.
The heart of the film is the Congressional debate over reform of the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, which requires that chemicals must be scientifically proven to be dangerous before they can be taken off the market.
“In Europe they use the precautionary principle that you take caution before putting things on the market,” said Nachman. “They test them. We err on the side of industry, putting things out there assuming they are safe–assuming they are innocent until proven guilty.”
In the United States, chemicals like lead, for example, in fuel, paint and other building materials, were on the market for years before they were found to cause neurological problems and were banned by the EPA under the Substances Control Act.
Andy Igrejas, executive director of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, a national coalition of parents, reproductive health professionals, environmentalists and businesses, praised the film.
“It looks at the fullness of the problem, not just one or two chemicals,” he said. “It looks at the big picture.”
“The whole system has broken down,” he said. “In the vast majority of chemicals, we just don’t know and they are still getting into products. If there is any major theme in science in the last 20 years — some chemicals are toxic at very low doses, not just when you are working in a factory, but they can be a problem for anyone.”
The group lists 130 chemicals on its website that have been identified by “authoritative bodies” as hazardous to human health. “They are known chemicals we come into contact with that are widespread,” said Igrejas.
In June, the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., and Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana, with 22 sponsors introduced a bill to reform the toxic substances law — the Chemical Safety Improvement Act .
Since Lautenberg’s death last summer, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairs the committee that is handling the legislation.
But Safer Chemicals Healthy Families does not support the bill in its current form, saying that it needs “strengthening.” Igrejas said the bill is “flawed” and “not true reform.”
The measure, however, is supported by the advocacy group, the American Chemistry Council, which the film alleges “hijacks the science” by funding safety studies and pouring millions of dollars into the defense of industries, using slick public relations tactics and strong lobbying to fight stricter regulation.
In 2007 Peter Joseph produced and self-financed a live performance art piece which ran for six nights in lower Manhattan that he entitled “Zeitgeist”. According to Joseph in an interview in 2012, he was surprised after a version he made of this performance (Zeitgeist: The Movie), the first film in the Zeitgeist film series, went viral on social media with millions of views.
The Zeitgeist Movement was formed in 2008 by Joseph shortly after the late 2008 release of Zeitgeist: Addendum, the second film in the ‘Zeitgeist’ film series. The ideas were based on the Venus Project, a societal model created by social engineer Jacque Fresco. In the Venus Project, machines control government and industry and safeguard resources using an artificial intelligence “earthwide autonomic sensor system”, a super-brain connected to all human knowledge.
This incredibly detailed book reveals the hidden meanings behind occult signs and symbols from ancient times, found in what should be termed stellar theology, and then carried over into our modern world. Also reveals how Freemasonry is connected to Judaism, Christianity and the Bible. This book was one of the sources Peter Joseph drew inspiration from. Check it out.
The film’s introduction features animations, footage of war, explosions, and the September 11 attacks and audio quotes from Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche and George Carlin.
Part I claims that the Christian religion is mainly derived from other religions, astronomical assertions, astrological myths, and other traditions. In furtherance of the Jesus myth hypothesis, this part disputes the historicity of Jesus, who, it claims, is a literary and astrological hybrid, nurtured by political forces and opportunists.
The 9/11 attacks are the subject of part II of Zeitgeist: the Movie.
Part II alleges that the September 11 attacks were either orchestrated or allowed to happen by elements within the United States government in order to generate mass fear, justify the War on Terror, provide a pretext for the curtailment of civil liberties, and produce economic gain. It asserts that the U.S. government had advance knowledge of the attacks, that the military deliberately allowed the planes to reach their targets, and that World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, and 7 underwent a controlled demolition.
Part III states that the Federal Reserve System is controlled by a small cabal of international bankers who conspire to create global calamities to enrich themselves. Three wars involving the United States during the twentieth century are highlighted as part of this alleged agenda, started by specifically engineered events, including the sinking of the RMS Lusitania, the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. The film asserts that such wars serve to sustain conflict in general and force the U.S. government to borrow money, thereby increasing the profits of the international bankers. The film also claims that the Federal Income Tax is illegal.
Zeitgeist: the Movie claims that the U.S. Government’s income tax is unconstitutional.
Part III also alleges a secret agreement to merge the United States, Canada and Mexico into a North American Union as a step toward the creation of a single world government. The film speculates that under such a government, every human could be implanted with an RFID chip to monitor individual activity and suppress dissent.
The film begins and ends with excerpts from a speech by Jiddu Krishnamurti. The remainder of the film is narrated by Peter Joseph and divided into four parts, which are prefaced by on-screen quotations from Krishnamurti, John Adams, Bernard Lietaer, and Thomas Paine, respectively.
Part I covers the process of fractional-reserve banking as illustrated in Modern Money Mechanics, by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. The film suggests that society is manipulated into economic slavery through debt-based monetary policies by requiring individuals to submit for employment in order to pay off their debt.
Part II has an interview with John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hitman, who says he was involved in the subjugation of Latin American economies by multinational corporations and the United States government, including involvement in the overthrow of Latin American heads-of-state. Perkins sees the US as a corporatocracy, in which maximization of profits is the first priority.
Part III introduces futurist Jacque Fresco and The Venus Project and asserts a need to move away from current socioeconomic paradigms. Fresco states that capitalism perpetuates the conditions it claims to address, as problems are only solved if there is money to be made. The film looks at Fresco’s proposal of a resource-based economy, which puts environmental friendliness, sustainability and abundance as fundamental societal goals. He goes on to discuss technology which he sees as the primary driver of human advancement, and he describes politics as being unable to solve any problems.
Part IV suggests that the primary reason for what the film sees as society’s social values (“warfare, corruption, oppressive laws, social stratification, irrelevant superstitions, environmental destruction, and a despotic, socially indifferent, profit oriented ruling class”) is a collective ignorance of “the emergent and symbiotic aspects of natural law”. The film advocates the following actions for achieving social change: boycotting of the most powerful banks in the Federal Reserve System, the major news networks, the military, energy corporations, all political systems; and joining, and supporting The Zeitgeist Movement.
The film begins with an animated sequence narrated by Jacque Fresco. He describes his adolescent life and his discontinuation of public education at the age of 14 and describes his early life influences.
Part I: Human Nature
Human behavior and the nature vs. nurture debate is discussed, which Robert Sapolsky refers to as a “false dichotomy.” Disease, criminal activity, and addictions are also discussed. The overall conclusion of Part I is that social environment and cultural conditioning play a large part in shaping human behavior.
Part II: Social Pathology
John Locke and Adam Smith are discussed in regard to modern economics. The film critically questions the economic need for private property, money, and the inherent inequality between agents in the system. Also seen critically is the need for cyclical consumption in order to maintain market share, resulting in wasted resources and planned obsolescence. According to the movie, the current monetary system will result in default or hyperinflation at some future time.
Part III: Project Earth
As with Zeitgeist: Addendum, the film presents a “resource-based economy” as advocated by Jacque Fresco discussing how human civilization could start from a new beginning in relation to resource types, locations, quantities, to satisfy human demands; track the consumption and depletion of resources to regulate human demands and maintain the condition of the environment.
Part IV: Rise
The current worldwide situation is described as disastrous. A case is presented that pollution, deforestation, climate change, overpopulation, and warfare are all created and perpetuated by the socioeconomic system. Various poverty statistics are shown that suggest a progressive worsening of world culture.
The final scene of the film shows a partial view of earth from space, followed by a sequence of superimposed statements; “This is your world”, “This is our world”, and “The revolution is now”.
The Corbett report is one of the most informative blogs on the internet. James Corbett has a way to really research and present information in a very powerful way. This is our favorite piece by him that really helps to bring understanding to how the world ended up the way it did. It wasn’t by chance and James Corbett details the conspiracy.
“From farm to pharmaceutical, diesel truck to dinner plate, pipeline to plastic product, it is impossible to think of an area of our modern-day lives that is not affected by the oil industry. The story of oil is the story of the modern world. And this is the story of those who helped shape that world, and how the oil-igarchy they created is on the verge of monopolizing life itself.”
For more information and the transcript to this go Here.
One of the best most enlightening compilations put together by Red Pill Philosophy. Joe Rogan and Duncan Trussell talk about the possibility the nature of reality is best explained by the MATRIX trilogy. This mixed with NASA Physicist Tom Campbell makes this video next level material you don’t want to miss.
My Big TOE by Physicist Tom Campbell (Theory of Everything)
The My Big TOE trilogy develops a complete derivation (in outline) of consciousness. This derivation begins with two assumptions and then proceeds to logically derive all the attributes, limitations, properties, qualities, and mechanics of consciousness – what it is, where it comes from, and how it works. The two assumptions are 1) that consciousness exists as a self-changing information system capable of evolving and 2) that evolution exists as a process of natural selection. Neither assumption is particularly remarkable, and both fit comfortably within common experience and everyday scientific understanding.
Since its publication, My Big Toe has garnered an international following with Campbell’s videos, as of December 31, 2015 having had more than 2 million views on YouTube and 309 videos of his lectures, public appearances, interviews, and fireside chats explaining fundamentals, nuances, implications, and applications of his theory. He continues to lecture around the world, holding workshops on M.B.T., teaching workshops on the principles of simulation theory and speaking at conferences on the topic of consciousness.
The story of the relationship between Sigmund Freud and his American nephew, Edward Bernays. Bernays invented the public relations profession in the 1920s and was the first person to take Freud’s ideas to manipulate the masses. He showed American corporations how they could make people want things they didn’t need by systematically linking mass-produced goods to their unconscious desires. Bernays was one of the main architects of the modern techniques of mass-consumer persuasion, using every trick in the book, from celebrity endorsement and outrageous PR stunts, to eroticising the motorcar. His most notorious coup was breaking the taboo on women smoking by persuading them that cigarettes were a symbol of independence and freedom. But Bernays was convinced that this was more than just a way of selling consumer goods. It was a new political idea of how to control the masses. By satisfying the inner irrational desires that his uncle had identified, people could be made happy and thus docile. It was the start of the all-consuming self which has come to dominate today’s world.
Purchase Propaganda by Edward Bernays Here:
Part Two – The Engineering of Consent
This episode explores how those in power in post-war America used Freud’s ideas about the unconscious mind to try and control the masses. Politicians and planners came to believe Freud’s underlying premise – that deep within all human beings were dangerous and irrational desires and fears. They were convinced that it was the unleashing of these instincts that had led to the barbarism of Nazi Germany. To stop it ever happening again they set out to find ways to control this hidden enemy within the human mind. Sigmund Freud’s daughter, Anna, and his nephew, Edward Bernays, provided the centrepiece philosophy. The US government, big business, and the CIA used their ideas to develop techniques to manage and control the minds of the American people. But this was not a cynical exercise in manipulation. Those in power believed that the only way to make democracy work and create a stable society was to repress the savage barbarism that lurked just under the surface of normal American life. Includes copyrighted material from Zodiak Entertainment.
Part Three – There is a Policeman Inside All Our Heads; He Must Be Destroyed
In the 1960s, a radical group of psychotherapists challenged the influence of Freudian ideas in America. They were inspired by the ideas of Wilhelm Reich, a pupil of, who had turned against him and was hated by the Freud family. He believed that the inner self did not need to be repressed and controlled. It should be encouraged to express itself. Out of this came a political movement that sought to create new beings free of the psychological conformity that had been implanted in people’s minds by business and politics. This programme shows how this rapidly developed in America through self-help movements like Werber Erhard’s Erhard Seminar Training – into the irresistible rise of the expressive self: the Me Generation. But the American corporations soon realised that this new self was not a threat but their greatest opportunity. It was in their interest to encourage people to feel they were unique individuals and then sell them ways to express that individuality. To do this they turned to techniques developed by Freudian psychoanalysts to read the inner desires of the new self. Originally broadcast on 2nd May 2002.
Part Four – Eight People Sipping Wine in Kettering
This episode explains how politicians on the left, in both Britain and America, turned to the techniques developed by business to read and fulfil the inner desires of the self. Both New Labour, under Tony Blair, and the Democrats, led by Bill Clinton, used the focus group, which had been invented by psychoanalysts, in order to regain power. They set out to mould their policies to people’s inner desires and feelings, just as capitalism had learnt to do with products. Out of this grew a new culture of public relations and marketing in politics, business and journalism. One of its stars in Britain was Matthew Freud who followed in the footsteps of his relation, Edward Bernays, the inventor of public relations in the 1920s. The politicians believed they were creating a new and better form of democracy, one that truly responded to the inner feelings of individual. But what they didn’t realise was that the aim of those who had originally created these techniques had not been to liberate the people but to develop a new way of controlling them. Originally broadcast on 3rd May 2002